The Confounding World of LDS Doctrinal Pronouncements...

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

The Nehor wrote:Okay, are you expecting him to bring them to Conference?


Nope, but the "seer" bit seems to be more of a potential role than an actual one. At least I've never heard of LDS prophets claiming to use them, at least not since the very earliest days of the translation of the Book of Mormon. The last honest-to-goodness claimed revelation I can think of is Joseph F. Smith's vision of the redemption of the dead. Based on the accounts from people like LeGrand Richards, I don't consider the 1978 policy change to be an actual revelation.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
Top
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

Runtu wrote:
The Nehor wrote:Okay, are you expecting him to bring them to Conference?


Nope, but the "seer" bit seems to be more of a potential role than an actual one. At least I've never heard of LDS prophets claiming to use them, at least not since the very earliest days of the translation of the Book of Mormon. The last honest-to-goodness claimed revelation I can think of is Joseph F. Smith's vision of the redemption of the dead. Based on the accounts from people like LeGrand Richards, I don't consider the 1978 policy change to be an actual revelation.


When I'm Prophet I promise I'll use them.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Top
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

The Nehor wrote:When I'm Prophet I promise I'll use them.


It might be kind of refreshing to have a prophet who actually believed in prophecy. ;-)
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
Top
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

Runtu wrote:
The Nehor wrote:When I'm Prophet I promise I'll use them.


It might be kind of refreshing to have a prophet who actually believed in prophecy. ;-)


I've never heard the current Prophet speak on it but I've had many Apostles teach me about it.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Top
_SatanWasSetUp
_Emeritus
Posts: 1183
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:40 pm

Post by _SatanWasSetUp »

Is there any doctrine the church teaches that members must believe? From what I read on this thread, the church isn't about systematic theology, but simply offering a way to follow Christ and become Christ-like. How is that different than mainstream Christianity?

I believe that the there is only one doctrine that members must obey, and that is follow the living prophet. Whoever is in charge today, whatever he says is what the church believes. That is why when you look at the church over the course of its 177 year history it appears to have no systematic theology, but that is simply because over time the prophets have altered and contradicted their predecessors. When the prophet changes course, it's as if that is the way it has always been. If Hinckley were to announce the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction, the members would accept it and move on, no big deal other than the church would have to create a bunch of new lesson manuals. If critics offered up quotes from leaders saying the Book of Mormon is literal history, those quotes would be dismissed as mere opinion. There is very little "doctrine" within the church that can't be changed, in fact I would argue that anything, even the nature of God and Jesus, could be changed by the living prophet.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley

"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Top
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

SatanWasSetUp wrote:Is there any doctrine the church teaches that members must believe? From what I read on this thread, the church isn't about systematic theology, but simply offering a way to follow Christ and become Christ-like. How is that different than mainstream Christianity?

I believe that the there is only one doctrine that members must obey, and that is follow the living prophet. Whoever is in charge today, whatever he says is what the church believes. That is why when you look at the church over the course of its 177 year history it appears to have no systematic theology, but that is simply because over time the prophets have altered and contradicted their predecessors. When the prophet changes course, it's as if that is the way it has always been. If Hinckley were to announce the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction, the members would accept it and move on, no big deal other than the church would have to create a bunch of new lesson manuals. If critics offered up quotes from leaders saying the Book of Mormon is literal history, those quotes would be dismissed as mere opinion. There is very little "doctrine" within the church that can't be changed, in fact I would argue that anything, even the nature of God and Jesus, could be changed by the living prophet.


Yes, I think you have it exactly right. The only source of "doctrine" is the current prophet. Whatever he says is right, at least according to Joseph Smith. That's one of ETB's 14 fundamentals, and I think it really encapsulates LDS belief. As I've said before, it's perfectly fine to say Brigham Young was way off in left field in describing the nature of God, but it's not OK to say that GBH is wrong to decry multiple earrings. Why? Because Young is dead, and Hinckley is not.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
Top
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

Things members must believe to be in good standing:

Believe in the Godhead.

Believe that the Prophet is only one that has all Priesthood Keys (and believe in Priesthood)

Accept the canon

Actions they must take:

Keep their covenants
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Top
_SatanWasSetUp
_Emeritus
Posts: 1183
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:40 pm

Post by _SatanWasSetUp »

The Nehor wrote:Things members must believe to be in good standing:

Believe in the Godhead.

Believe that the Prophet is only one that has all Priesthood Keys (and believe in Priesthood)

Accept the canon

Actions they must take:

Keep their covenants


That's a good list, for now. But the list can change if the prophet changes it.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley

"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Top
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Hi Nehor...

Things members must believe to be in good standing:

Believe in the Godhead.

Believe that the Prophet is only one that has all Priesthood Keys (and believe in Priesthood)

Accept the canon

Actions they must take:

Keep their covenants


I disagree... (smile)

No one has to believe in the "Godhead." And, they can interpret this to mean whatever they wish.

Accepting the canon means absolutly nothing. Seriously... anyone can believe whatever they wish, interpret it as suits their fancy, and delete, add, remove, or dismiss whatever they wish. The canon can be fictional, historical, mythological, or just plain man made and it just doesn't matter one iota.

Keeping their covenants means what exactly?

One certainly does not need to do this, whatever it means, to remain in good standing in the church.

Yes, there are a few rules (pay tithing, wear garments, etc), one must say they adhere to in order to go into the temple but these have nothing to do with covenants (think WoW here). There are plenty of folks in good standing in the church who are not living very honorable lives.

I think the only thing one has to do to be in good standing (aside from being temple "worthy") in the church is say they believe it is the true church.

Actually, even this is not necessary. I know some great folks who are TR holding members who say they think the church MIGHT be true, or they hold the possibility of the church being true, or they see the church as a way some might come to truth, or something along these lines.

:-)

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
Top
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

The Nehor wrote:Things members must believe to be in good standing:

Believe in the Godhead.

Believe that the Prophet is only one that has all Priesthood Keys (and believe in Priesthood)

Accept the canon

Actions they must take:

Keep their covenants


I suspect that David Wright would disagree with you.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Terrestrial Forum”