Obiwan wrote:Taking it beyond that, such as applying it to the Father, is simply not LDS doctrine.
Sorry Obiwan, you have been trumped officially by the Ensign:
“This is a doctrine which delighted President Snow, as it does all of us. Early in his ministry he received by direct, personal revelation the knowledge that (in the Prophet Joseph Smith’s language), ‘God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens,’ and that men ‘have got to learn how to be Gods … the same as all Gods have done before.’
“After this doctrine had been taught by the Prophet, President Snow felt free to teach it also, and he summarized it in one of the best known couplets in the Church. …
“This same doctrine has of course been known to the prophets of all the ages, and President Snow wrote an excellent poetic summary of it.” (Address on Snow Day, given at Snow College, 14 May 1971, pp. 1, 3–4; italics added.)
It is clear that the teaching of President Lorenzo Snow is both acceptable and accepted doctrine in the Church today.
I count four times it was deemed as doctrine in there. How many do you count Obiwan?
Sorry, but the scriptures "Trump" the Ensign for me....
Simply because some LDS in history have incorrectly wanted to classify the Father being once a man as "doctrine", doesn't mean it is.
Doctrine has always been a 4-fold process PERIOD. Anti-mormon stuborness wishing to make every comment of history "doctrine" doesn't doctrine make. Sorry.
Obiwan wrote:People.... Just because the Church today for the last 30 some years is trying to be more "doctrinally accurate" doesn't mean something that was taught was/is taught was/is doctrine.
The idea of the Father being once a man is meant to be understood by revelation. There is no scripture, and no official revelation to the Church that the Father was once a man. Thus, it's not doctrine, and it never was.
Is it true, is it believed, yes. But not doctrine. Why are you people so offended about better "accuracy" and clarity of things???
This is just like the blacks and the priesthood. There is no such thing as a blacks and the priesthood ban. There was an African Decent ban, not blacks. Many many blacks all over the world were given the Priesthood, ones just as black as any African black, as well as all other colors.
I believe in being absolutely accurate with things. Don't blaim us for your lack of understandings of LDS theology.
Nobody is blaming you for anything except making things up and insisting that your say-so is authoritative.
You also have presented absolutely nothing to support your idea about what "official doctrine" is.
There have already been many citations in this thread showing it to be the official doctrine of the LDS Church that Elohim was once a mortal man.
As Buffalo has said on a couple of threads, whom should everyone believe: Obiwan, or our lying eyes?
Obiwan wrote:Sorry, but the scriptures "Trump" the Ensign for me....
Simply because some LDS in history have incorrectly wanted to classify the Father being once a man as "doctrine", doesn't mean it is.
Doctrine has always been a 4-fold process PERIOD. Anti-mormon stuborness wishing to make every comment of history "doctrine" doesn't doctrine make. Sorry.
"It is clear that the teaching of President Lorenzo Snow is both acceptable and accepted doctrine in the Church today." - Gerald N. Lund
I guess Obiwan knows more about doctrine than the general authorities do. I guess Gerald N. Lund was just a stubborn anti-mormon.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Obiwan wrote:Sorry, but the scriptures "Trump" the Ensign for me....
And modern day prophets speaking through official channels "Trump" the scriptures, like Plural marriage as found in "The new and everlasting covenant".
Simply because some LDS in history have incorrectly wanted to classify the Father being once a man as "doctrine", doesn't mean it is.
Some? You mean the prophet of the dispensation of the fullness of times; Joseph Smith?
Doctrine has always been a 4-fold process PERIOD. Anti-mormon stuborness wishing to make every comment of history "doctrine" doesn't doctrine make. Sorry.
Runtu, can you explain how the church establishes doctrine based on your experience establishing doctrine for the church?
Obiwan wrote: Sorry, but the scriptures "Trump" the Ensign for me....
Simply because some LDS in history have incorrectly wanted to classify the Father being once a man as "doctrine", doesn't mean it is.
Doctrine has always been a 4-fold process PERIOD. Anti-mormon stuborness wishing to make every comment of history "doctrine" doesn't doctrine make. Sorry.
Sorry, Obiwan, but the official doctrine of the Church Trump's what you think official doctrine is.
In addition to these four books of scripture, [the Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, and Pearl of Great Price] the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, Church publications, and instructions to local priesthood leaders. "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" (Articles of Faith 1:9).
Discussion
* Read Doctrine and Covenants 68:4. What is scripture? * Name the standard works of the Church. Have four people each tell about what is in one of the standard works and how we received it. * Ask a class member to read or quote the ninth article of faith. * Show a copy of a Church publication. Have someone read some inspired words of the prophet found there.
God’s revelation to Adam did not instruct Noah how to build the Ark. Noah needed his own revelation. Therefore the most important prophet so far as you and I are concerned is the one living in our day and age to whom the Lord is currently revealing His will for us. Therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines. Our instructions about what we should do for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Church magazine.
Beware of those who would set up the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.
The Lord has made it clear that we are to receive the words of the living prophet as if from the Lord’s own mouth (see D&C 21:5 ).
President Ezra Taft Benson said that the “living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works” (“Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,” in Speeches of the Year, 1980 [Provo: Brigham Young University, 1981], p. 26). That is because he is alive in our day and speaks for the Lord on the problems we face.
“The most important prophet, so far as we are concerned, is the one who is living in our day and age. This is the prophet who has today’s instructions from God to us today. God’s revelation to Adam did not instruct Noah how to build the ark. Every generation has need of the ancient scripture plus the current scripture from the living prophet. Therefore, the most crucial reading and pondering which you should do is of the latest inspired words from the Lord’s mouthpiece. That is why it is essential that you have access to and carefully read his words in current Church publications.” (Ezra Taft Benson, in Conference Report, Seoul Korea Area Conference 1975, p. 52.)
This statement is in harmony with the words of President Henry D. Moyle, who said:
“The older I get and the closer the contact I have with the President of the Church, the more I realize that the greatest of all scriptures which we have in the world today is current scripture. What the mouthpiece of God says to His children is scripture. It is intended for all the children of God upon the earth. It is His word and His will and His law made manifest through His ordained and anointed servant to the world. What the President says is scripture, and I love it more than all other. It applies to me today specifically, and to you all.” (“Beware of Temptation,” Brigham Young University tri-stake fireside address, [Provo, January 1963], pp. 7–8.)
President Harold B. Lee gave the following explanation of the relationship between the written scriptures of the past and the words of living prophets:
“Sometimes we get the notion that if it is written in a book, it makes it more true than if it is spoken in the last General Conference. Just because it is written in a book does not make it more of an authority to guide us. President Taylor goes on with this same idea and explains why the scriptures of the past are not sufficient for us today:
“‘The Bible is good; and Paul told Timothy to study it, that he might be a workman that need not be ashamed, and that he might be able to conduct himself aright before the living church [there is that word living again], the pillar and ground of truth. The church-mark, with Paul, was the foundation, the pillar, the ground of truth, the living church, not the dead letter. The Book of Mormon is good and the Doctrine and Covenants, as landmarks. But a mariner who launches into the ocean requires a more certain criterion. He must be acquainted with heavenly bodies, and take his observations from them, in order to steer his barque aright. Those books are good for example, precedent, and investigation, and for developing certain laws and principles. But they do not, they cannot, touch every case required to be adjudicated and set in order.
“‘We require a living tree—a living fountain—living intelligence, proceeding from the living priesthood in heaven, through the living priesthood on earth. . . . And from the time that Adam first received a communication from God, to the time that John, on the Isle of Patmos, received his communication, or Joseph Smith had the heavens opened to him, it always required new revelations, adapted to the peculiar circumstances in which the churches or individuals were placed. Adam’s revelations did not instruct Noah to build his ark; nor did Noah’s revelation tell Lot to forsake Sodom: nor did either of these speak of the departure of the children of Israel from Egypt. These all have revelations for themselves, and so had Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and Joseph. And so must we, or we shall make a shipwreck.’ ( The Gospel Kingdom, p. 34.)
“Lesson 42: Follow the Brethren,” Aaronic Priesthood Manual 2 Show the New Era, the Church News, and the conference issues of the Ensign to the young men, and refer again to the poster or chalkboard. Emphasize that they can know the mind and will of the Lord today by reading, studying, and listening to the words of the Lord’s chosen leaders, including their local leaders, who receive direction from the General Authorities. Bear your testimony that guidance and counsel for today’s problems are available, sharing personal experiences if appropriate.
President Harold B. Lee taught: “The only safety we have as members of this church is to do exactly what the Lord said to the Church in that day when the Church was organized [see D&C 21:4–5]. … There will be some things that take patience and faith. You may not like what comes from the authority of the Church. It may contradict your political views. It may contradict your social views. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you listen to these things, as if from the mouth of the Lord himself, with patience and faith, the promise is that ‘the gates of hell shall not prevail against you’ [D&C 21:6]” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1970, 152; or Improvement Era, Dec. 1970, 126).
• How can we learn of the prophet’s inspired counsel? (By studying general conference talks, First Presidency Messages, and other articles in the Church magazines and by listening to letters from the First Presidency that are read in Church meetings.)
At the close of a general conference, President Ezra Taft Benson said, “For the next six months, your conference edition of the Ensign should stand next to your standard works and be referred to frequently” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1988, 97; or Ensign, May 1988, 84).
While serving in the Quorum of the Twelve, Elder Harold B. Lee made a similar statement during general conference. He said that the report of the conference should “be the guide to [our] walk and talk during the next six months” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1946, 68).
You know what is funny, if I showed my TBM family and friends this thread they would think that Obiwan is the anti-mormon. If you take out the part where the critics are saying GBH is lying then they would think the critics are defending what LDS believe. The irony of it all is just too good!
Obiwan, why do you have a problem with God being a man and us having the chance to become a god. Do you not believe it? If you do then be proud of your beliefs.
Rambo wrote:You know what is funny, if I showed my TBM family and friends this thread they would think that Obiwan is the anti-mormon. If you take out the part where the critics are saying GBH is lying then they would think the critics are defending what LDS believe. The irony of it all is just too good!
Obiwan, why do you have a problem with God being a man and us having the chance to become a god. Do you not believe it? If you do then be proud of your beliefs.
The even funnier thing is that Obiwan thinks he is talking to people whose only knowledge of Mormonism is from reading pamphlets by counter-cult ministries, rather than lifelong members who are taking issue with his BS characterization of what the LDS Church teaches.