Creeds and the LDS Church in Transition

[_moksha]

My thought is that religion is here to provide something to the adherent of that religion. At least that is important to me. Determining the merit of any faith tradition by a checklist of creeds is a non-starter in my book. What refreshments are served at the meet and greet afterward makes more sense. The comfort, support and love we provide for one another is paramount, for in that action, we fulfill the request of Jesus, as well as the overarching goal of almost all faiths. The ability to worship God together is the icing on the cake.

I view the LDS Church as a faith in transition. Our last President stated several times that he was unsure whether we actually taught or believed many past claims by other LDS leaders. Even before that, a number of other past claims have been downgraded as non-doctrinal or just plain wrong. Our own LDS publications downplay that which is both controversial and uncertain. Polygamy? You would need to dig long and deep to find it. We do have our meat of peculiarity, but our strength can be found in the milk of Christianity. The shelf life of the milk is much longer.

Even Bible-belters with a sense of history would know that current mainstream Christian thinking had not fully itself evolved during the length of time the LDS Church has existed. One of our religious cousins, the Community of Christ has experienced great revision in their church doctrine, yet they sprang from the same root. The Community desired to be honest with itself and that same desire for honesty exists in the LDS Church as well. You might want to recheck LDS.org in 100 years and see what has taken place. The trend seems to be toward a more mainstream approach.

We might see the acceptance of homosexuals and welcome women into our ecclesiastical ranks. Who knows? The only constant is change itself.

.

[_Tobin]

That is pretty accurate.

Once the old guard has died off, I think the Mormon Church will probably go through a reformation. The old policies of the past don't work. Many of the doctrines don't work either. And I agree that many in the LDS Church are interested in being honest and acknowledging the truth. To do that, bad practices and doctrines will have to be removed. And the organization itself will have to change (in some cases radically).

[_Drifting]

The issue being that the Church doesn't lead...it follows...societal trends.
So I think it is inaccurate to portray the changes as something proactive when they are reactive.

[_subgenius]

I believe the point has been consistently addressed through the Doctrine of continuing Revelation. One of the more unique aspects of the LDS church is its consistent adherence to that Doctrine as it is based on the truth that God has not stopped communicating to his children.
So, while i agree that certain administrative functions and subtle doctrine may be viewed as "transitory" i would note that it is by design and with intent.
This i believe contradicts the over-simplified view that the church is "reactionary" or that it is necessarily "proactive". It seems that it is more in pace with the timing of God and not the timing of man.

[_Fence Sitter]

I believe the point has been consistently addressed through the Doctrine of continuing Revelation. One of the more unique aspects of the LDS church is its consistent adherence to that Doctrine as it is based on the truth that God has not stopped communicating to his children.
So, while i agree that certain administrative functions and subtle doctrine may be viewed as "transitory" i would note that it is by design and with intent.
This i believe contradicts the over-simplified view that the church is "reactionary" or that it is necessarily "proactive". It seems that it is more in pace with the timing of God and not the timing of man.

Except there does not seem to be any actual recent revelations that are making these changes, at least not in the sense a written document worthy of being canonized. We don't even have a copy of the revelation (if there even is one) that President Kimball had regarding the blacks and the priesthood. Maybe this is part of the transition. Instead of revelation by prophetic proclamation or first presidency statement we now get it through news room bulletins, church public affairs spokesmen & TV commercials. The only example I can think of in recent memory where the Church has stated the Lord wants us to do something is in the letter to the local leadership in Provo regarding the new MTC building.

[_subgenius]

I believe the point has been consistently addressed through the Doctrine of continuing Revelation. One of the more unique aspects of the LDS church is its consistent adherence to that Doctrine as it is based on the truth that God has not stopped communicating to his children.
So, while i agree that certain administrative functions and subtle doctrine may be viewed as "transitory" i would note that it is by design and with intent.
This i believe contradicts the over-simplified view that the church is "reactionary" or that it is necessarily "proactive". It seems that it is more in pace with the timing of God and not the timing of man.

Except there does not seem to be any actual recent revelations that are making these changes, at least not in the sense a written document worthy of being canonized. We don't even have a copy of the revelation (if there even is one) that President Kimball had regarding the blacks and the priesthood. Maybe this is part of the transition. Instead of revelation by prophetic proclamation or first presidency statement we now get it through news room bulletins, church public affairs spokesmen & TV commercials. The only example I can think of in recent memory where the Church has stated the Lord wants us to do something is in the letter to the local leadership in Provo regarding the new MTC building.

so, you consider validity to be a consequence of pomp/circumstance or some sort of elaborate ritual?
Would a revelation accompanied by a spirit band me more palatable?

What about FHE or HT?
and exactly what pace of "new doctrine" is appropriate against your criticism?

[_Fence Sitter]

so, you consider validity to be a consequence of pomp/circumstance or some sort of elaborate ritual?
Would a revelation accompanied by a spirit band me more palatable?

I'd settle for a Prophet who declares he has had a revelation from God. If he thinks a band would help, that is up to him I suppose.

What about FHE or HT?

What about them?

and exactly what pace of "new doctrine" is appropriate against your criticism?

It is tough to measure pace of something that is not moving at all, but I guess 1 additional section to D&C and a few proclamations over the last 160 years might be considered something.

[_moksha]

We don't even have a copy of the revelation (if there even is one) that President Kimball had regarding the blacks and the priesthood.

Perhaps the revelation was in the form of slowly realizing this is what God intended all along. It would be hard to put this in writing and it would tend to be unflattering for those who ignored this realization for so long. Better to leave it unwritten to save face for all concerned.

When change occurs in the LDS Church is it usually not of an overnight nature. None of the Quorum will be around in 100 years. Everyone on the 2112 Quorum will be products of the 21st Century and they will bring with them updated values and thoughts. Through the updates of Western Civilization, the Church will change. This is slower watercourse way of continuous revelation.

[_bcspace]

No doctrine has changed in many many decades. The only transition going on is how we present ourselves; finding the best way to do it in an ever changing world.

[_Mittens]

Mormon Creed is " The Articles of Faith"

teachings of Mormons not found in Book of Mormon, The Articles of Faith “ Mormon Creed” or Bible.

1. The plurality of Gods (Mormon Doctrine pp. 576, 577)
2. The baptism for the dead done in holy temples (Mormon Doctrine pp. 72,73)
3. Celestial marriage which no unworthy member or outsider can attend (Mormon Doctrine pp. 117, 118)
4. Polygamy needed to become a God (Journal of Discourse, Vol. II p. 269)
5. Blacks were cursed with a dark skin (Mormon Doctrine p. 109)
6. You can become a God if you are worthy; celestial marriage required (Mormon Doctrine p. 118)
7. We were all pre-existent spirits (Mormon Doctrine p. 589)
8. God has a body of flesh and bones (Mormon Doctrine p. 289)
9. We have a Heavenly Mother as well as a Heavenly Father (Mormon Doctrine p. 516)
10. There are three levels of heaven. To go to the highest kingdom, you must be a Mormon. Honorable persons go to the Terrestrial kingdom. The dishonest, liars, sorcerers, adulterers and whoremongers go to the Telestial kingdom. (Mormon Doctrine pp. 420, 421)
11. God and his wife achieved a celestial marriage (Celestial Marriage Manual p. 1)
12. Heavenly Father died just like Jesus (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith p. 346)
13. God was once just like us and progressed to godhood (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith p. 345)
14. God has a father and His Father has a Father, etc. (Mormon Doctrine p. 322)
15. Jesus and Lucifer are spirit brothers (Mormon Doctrine p. 192)
16. Jesus and Lucifer each had a plan to people the earth. Jesus' plan was chosen and caused Lucifer to rebel and he and the angels that followed him were cast out of heaven. (Mormon Doctrine p. 193)
17. God lives near a star called Kolob (Mormon Doctrine p. 428)
18. Temple endowments are so sacred that you must be worthy to enter (Mormon Doctrine pp. 619, 620)
19. Jesus was not able to keep his church together (History of the Church Vol. 6 pp. 408, 409)
20. In the future, you will need Joseph Smith's consent in order to enter the celestial kingdom (Journal of Discourse Vol. 7 p.289)
21. Not everything you'll need to know concerning salvation will be recorded in the Bible but there will be additional scriptures (Mormon Doctrine p. 83)"