Approaching Mormon Doctrine...a must read for..

  • Thread starter Thread starter why_me
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

why_me

Guest
Approaching Mormon Doctrine is a must read for those who are engaged in debating what is mormon doctrine. It is short but sweet:

newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/approaching-mormon-doctrine

Approaching Mormon Doctrine

Print Email Article

SALT LAKE CITY 4 May 2007 Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine. The news media is increasingly asking what distinguishes the Church from other faiths, and reporters like to contrast one set of beliefs with another.

The Church welcomes inquisitiveness, but the challenge of understanding Mormon doctrine is not merely a matter of accessing the abundant information available. Rather, it is a matter of how this information is approached and examined.

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context (see here and here), and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them. News reporters pressed by daily deadlines often find that problematic. Therefore, as the Church continues to grow throughout the world and receive increasing media attention, a few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding may be helpful:

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.
Based on the scriptures, Joseph Smith declared: “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

Because different times present different challenges, modern-day prophets receive revelation relevant to the circumstances of their day. This follows the biblical pattern (Amos 3:7), in which God communicated messages and warnings to His people through prophets in order to secure their well-being. In our day, President Gordon B. Hinckley has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the family in our increasingly fractional society. In addition, the Church does not preclude future additions or changes to its teachings or practices. This living, dynamic aspect of the Church provides flexibility in meeting those challenges. According to the Articles of Faith, “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.”
Latter-day Saints place heavy emphasis on the application of their faith in daily life. For example, the active participation of Latter-day Saints in their community and worldwide humanitarian programs reflects concern for other people. As Jesus Christ declared, “By their fruits ye shall know them.”
Individual members are encouraged to independently strive to receive their own spiritual confirmation of the truthfulness of Church doctrine. Moreover, the Church exhorts all people to approach the gospel not only intellectually but with the intellect and the spirit, a process in which reason and faith work together.
Those writing or commenting on Latter-day Saint doctrine also need to understand that certain words in the Mormon vocabulary have slightly different meanings and connotations than those same words have in other religions. For example, Latter-day Saints generally view being born again as a process of conversion, whereas many other Christian denominations often view it as a conversion that happens in one defining moment. Sometimes what some may consider an argument or dispute over doctrine is really a misunderstanding of simple differences in terminology.
Journalists, academics and laymen alike are encouraged to pursue their inquiries into the Church by recognizing the broad and complex context within which its doctrines have been declared, in a spirit of reason and good will.
 
Why is this a must read? It is just another LDS PR puff piece meant to put us off our guard and to assist the LDS leadership in the plausible deniability of teachings that were formerly considered prophetic truths.

Which of the current great prophetic truths of Mormonism will be later relegated to the scrap heap of personal opinion?

Paul
 
Why is this a must read? It is just another LDS PR puff piece meant to put us off our guard and to assist the LDS leadership in the plausible deniability of teachings that were formerly considered prophetic truths.

Which of the current great prophetic truths of Mormonism will be later relegated to the scrap heap of personal opinion?

Paul
one earring per ear. About 20 years from now, mormons will say it was the opinion of Hinckley, and those that follow that opinion are doing so because they misunderstand what “prophecy” means.

though ,if more people become internet mormons like those we see here, soon mormonism will be no different than universal unitarianism.
 
Approaching Mormon Doctrine is a must read for those who are engaged in debating what is mormon doctrine.
Dude, why did you post that? It’s just a lame (WAY lame), overly verbose assembly of weasel words and it only emphasizes, by LDS recognition, the doctrinal quagmire that you’re always trying to mitigate. It does not help your case. So they’re admitting that maybe Quakers don’t really live on the moon; cool, I can understand why they might want to emphasize that some of that stuff is not doctrinal. I don’t understand why statements from prophets of god would not be considered doctrine, but I’ll buy it anyway. They do, however, emphasize that Mormon doctrine does indeed reside in the four standard works; they didn’t leave themselves any weasel room there and that was a big mistake if they’re trying to gain recognition as a Christian faith. Three of those four books are pure heresy and some of that stuff is pretty far out there too.

And that stuff about some doctrine being more doctrinal than other doctrine is ridiculous and I won’t even go there.
 
Mormons are trying to mainstream their doctrines to be acceptable to other Christian churches. This article is simply more proof of that. They know they have to get rid of the nutty teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. The FLDS raid isn’t helping them any in this regard as it is a reminder of nutty Mormon history. They can no longer defend the Book of Mormon because of scientific discoveries which prove it is false. The same with the Book of Abraham. Before long, to survive, they will have to renounce their nuttier doctrines. They can’t defend them with a straight face.
 
I think that the piece was to make the position clear: that general authorities have opinions and opinions are not necessarily doctrine. I think that it is an attempt to reign in the rumor mongering that is occuring and to address issues that are arising on the internet with the pasting and posting of quotations from past leaders.

And I think that this clarification needed to be done. For example:

Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine Well this is certainly true. It seems that many people have opinions about mormon doctrine, regardless from where they got their information.
 
Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine Well this is certainly true. It seems that many people have opinions about mormon doctrine, regardless from where they got their information.
Your favorite board once had a statement on its banner, so very true, admitting (in essence) that there is no such thing as a consistent set of Mormon doctrines. 😃 What is the exact quote, do your remember?
 
I think that the piece was to make the position clear: that general authorities have opinions and opinions are not necessarily doctrine. I think that it is an attempt to reign in the rumor mongering that is occuring and to address issues that are arising on the internet with the pasting and posting of quotations from past leaders.

And I think that this clarification needed to be done. For example:

Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine Well this is certainly true. It seems that many people have opinions about mormon doctrine, regardless from where they got their information.
I don’t think there is that much misunderstanding about Mormon doctrine. Usually, such statements are meant to obfuscate some of Mormonism’s more unusual doctrines. There are Mormons for example who will deny that Mormons believe that God the Father was once a man who had his own Father. There are Mormons who will deny that Mormons believe God has a wife (or wives). They will deny everything taught in the King Follet discourse even though Mormons have accepted this discourse as doctrine since the time of Brigham Young. Modern Mormons are either really ashamed of these doctrines or simply trying to fool people – I suspect the latter. 30 years ago all of these doctrines were openly taught until President Hinckley began equivocating to reporters a few years ago. He was one of the most dishonest men I have ever seen in action.
 
Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine Well this is certainly true. It seems that many people have opinions about mormon doctrine, regardless from where they got their information.
whyme, if there is confusion about mormon doctrine, it is the mormon church itself that has caused the confusion.

They would be more honest in just saying that they don’t have any doctrines, at all, as anything can change at any time, and different interpretations applied by different members.
 
i suggest whyme discuss this matter with the nuns and priests he knows, after he reads at Mass some day, show them the article and get a n opinion on it from them.
 
i suggest whyme discuss this matter with the nuns and priests he knows, after he reads at Mass some day, show them the article and get a n opinion on it from them.
The quote does not exactly give confidence that Mormonism is built upon a rock. Sounds a lot more like shifting sand to me. I’d rather have my church built on the Rock than on a sand dune.
 
i suggest whyme discuss this matter with the nuns and priests he knows, after he reads at Mass some day, show them the article and get a n opinion on it from them.
Good idea. But I don’t think that they are interested. But I have mentioned that I post on this forum defending the lds church. 🙂
 
Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine Well this is certainly true. It seems that many people have opinions about mormon doctrine, regardless from where they got their information.
Now here’s a real newsflash. There is confusion about Mormon doctrine? The way it changes, with additions and deletions, it’s no wonder. Maybe it should be written in pencil and distributed in a loose leaf binder to save on reprinting it all the time. Just change the necessary pages.

I have to agree with Rebecca. Most, if not all of the misunderstandings are created by the mormons themselves.
 
Now here’s a real newsflash. There is confusion about Mormon doctrine? The way it changes, with additions and deletions, it’s no wonder. Maybe it should be written in pencil and distributed in a loose leaf binder to save on reprinting it all the time. Just change the necessary pages.

I have to agree with Rebecca. Most, if not all of the misunderstandings are created by the mormons themselves.
I would go so far as to say they do it on purpose. They want to be able to deny their doctrine when pushed to the wall on it. For example, the idea there never was a God who didn’t have a Father is so nonsensical they wouldn’t want to own up to it in public. They are unwilling to write something akin to a catechism about their beliefs.
 
I would go so far as to say they do it on purpose. They want to be able to deny their doctrine when pushed to the wall on it. For example, the idea there never was a God who didn’t have a Father is so nonsensical they wouldn’t want to own up to it in public. They are unwilling to write something akin to a catechism about their beliefs.
McConkie tried, with “Mormon Doctrine”. The book didn’t last long before being pronounced as “opinion”.

For the same reasons that no once could write a catechism today, there is no official interpretation of anything Mormon. And there is no one person or group that is accepted as having the authority from God to make an authoritative interpretation that lasts past the life of their current prophet.

As J_C has said before, thank God for the Catholic Church.
 
I am really starting to think that this mormon propaganda is simply evidence that mormons have a sense of humor.

I thought that “article” was quite funny and a pretty decent practical joke. Im starting to believe that Smith started this all as a practical joke and it got a little out of hand, although they seem to have kept his sense of humour as part of their traditions.

Some of it looks like it came out of a Monty Python Flying Circus sketch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top