The LDS Church preaches of Christ

[Gordon]

First who is the author?

Absolutely irrelevant.

If it is clear, articulate what doctrine is?

Are you purposely trying to be obtuse?

"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."

 

[Gordon]

Gordon you get upset because I don't agree with your post?

Trying to bait me, Markk? ?

Christians believe that the LDS church worships and believe in another Jesus.

That's nice. ?‍

And you coming here wanting to just ignore that

Strawman.

In Mormonism "the church" comes before Jesus. Joseph comes before Jesus, the BoM comes before Jesus, and even the family unit comes before Jesus in many ways. It is just the way it is.

Definitely false...and part of the reason for this thread. Your claims are baseless.

 

[Markk]

That's what you're doing. You claimed it was "most likely" that the number of apostates/critics among the membership are "maybe double" than active members. Such a claim is absolutely baseless, and absurd. You then link one site that claims the number of active members have "dropped" by "5-19 percent"....then another, that states members no longer make up the majority of population in Utah. So? Many of the inactives I know are neither "apostate" nor a "critic".

It's not baseless at all. It is based on all available data by both LDS and non-LDS sources. Did you watch the Mormon Stories episode I provided?

I'll be very generous here, and lets say there are 5 million members that attend at least once a month of so. That leave 12 million folks that are what?

One thing for sure is that the church knows the statistics and one thing for sure they are silent about it, and leave the members guessing.

 

[Markk]

Absolutely irrelevant.

LOL...it is very relevant.

"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."

That's a lot of data to go through...it says it resides there, it is no where specially defined or settled. Just read The different LDS forums, and Aarons views, BoJ views, Ralf's views which often disagree. I was a JFS Mormon, which disagrees with a lot of current views.

What are these publications? In one breath y say it is defined by 15 men, and tell me the article that states it author is irrelevant to know?

 

[Markk]

Trying to bait me, Markk? ?

How, you got upset when I disagree with you....read what you wrote.

Definitely false...and part of the reason for this thread. Your claims are baseless.

It is very true...."the church" and it's survival comes before everything. Read what you pasted in 221, your faith and what you believe is based on those 15 men and there interpretations. As they die off, new interpretations come forward. The nature of God can and has changed so long as the church survives.

 

[Richard7]

I’m telling you what he said because you were too lazy to pay attention yourself, but you went ahead and criticized him anyway.

“He said he was not a member, but he was still mormon. He said he left because the church talked too much about taking drugs for depression. But he still believes and argues for mormonism.”

I see, a new category we will that to establish in our membership files.... Not a member, but still a Mormon...are you present today? chuckle.

 

[Richard7]

Either pay attention to the discussions or go back and read them so you’ll be informed. Otherwise stop making edited accusations.

Edited, wow!

 

[Richard7]

You keep making this false claim.
And by doing so, you continue to reject Scripture:

Matt. 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders;​

Even your own prophet "Hinckley" agreed that the Mormon Jesus is not the same as the Biblical Jesus.

Where did he say that? chuckle... President Hinckley stated very plainly that the Jesus Christ whom Mormons believe in and teach about, is not the same as the “traditional” Jesus whom Christians believe in.

You see folks, EDIT teach half truths mixed in with a little truth... chuckle.

 

[Richard7]

How, you got upset when I disagree with you....read what you wrote.


It is very true...."the church" and it's survival comes before everything. Read what you pasted in 221, your faith and what you believe is based on those 15 men and there interpretations. As they die off, new interpretations come forward. The nature of God can and has changed so long as the church survives.

Cry me a river... yes changes are made as circumstances require changes....

Here it is in full context Markk... read and learn:

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.

 

[Magdalena]

Edited, wow!

Oh gee, like you’ve never been edited.

 

[Janice Bower]

Where did he say that?

In Utah.

 

[Magdalena]

Where did he say that? chuckle... President Hinckley stated very plainly that the Jesus Christ whom Mormons believe in and teach about, is not the same as the “traditional” Jesus whom Christians believe in.

You see folks, EDIT teach half truths mixed in with a little truth... chuckle.

Edited… wow.

 

[Markk]

Cry me a river... yes changes are made as circumstances require changes....

Here it is in full context Markk... read and learn:

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.

LOL, yes Ralf, so you agree with both Aaron and I....that the church leaves people guessing. What leaders say is often subjective, and may just very well be opinion.

If the church leaders position can't really be trusted as binding doctrine as you quote reads, and that the standard works, declarations, proclamations, the AoF, are often taken out of context, then what is the member to do other than guess?

As an example the below quote was in a Melk. Teaching Manual, and endorsed in the forward by at least five prophets, seers, and revelators....is this opinion or doctrine?

HOW HE (HF) BECAME GOD Yet, if we accept the great law of eternal progression, we must accept the fact that there was a time when Deity was much less powerful than He is today. Then how did He become glorified and exalted and attain His present status of Godhood? In the first place, aeons ago God undoubtedly took advantage of every opportunity to learn the laws of truth and as He became acquainted with each new verity He righteously obeyed it. From day to day He exerted His will vigorously, and as a result became thoroughly acquainted with the forces lying about Him. As he gained more knowledge through persistent effort and continuous industry, as well as through absolute obedience, His understanding of the universal laws continued to become more complete. Thus He grew in experience and continued to grow until He attained the status of Godhood. In other words, He became God by absolute obedience to all the eternal laws of the Gospel—by conforming His actions to all truth, and thereby became the author of eternal truth. Therefore, the road that the Eternal Father followed to Godhood was one of living at all times a dynamic, industrious, and completely righteous life. There is no other way to exaltation.

Hunter, Milton R.. Gospel Through the Ages . Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition.

 

[Richard7]

Oh gee, like you’ve never been edited.

Edited, maybe,, but mostly vacations time.... chuckle.

 

[Richard7]

LOL, yes Ralf, so you agree with both Aaron and I....that the church leaves people guessing. What leaders say is often subjective, and may just very well be opinion.

When did I ever say they were infallible, you must have grown up believing that and were disappointed when the church grew and continued to get new light and knowledge....

If the church leaders position can't really be trusted as binding doctrine as you quote reads, and that the standard works, declarations, proclamations, the AoF, are often taken out of context, then what is the member to do other than guess?

What specifically beside blacks in the Priesthood and plural marriage you would consider doctrine that changed .... oh my!

As an example the below quote was in a Melk. Teaching Manual, and endorsed in the forward by at least five prophets, seers, and revelators....is this opinion or doctrine?

So what is the doctrine we preach about the Godhead and especially God the Father.... we have only a few solid truths, He was from everlasting to everlasting and has a Body of Flesh and bone..... what else Markk?

 

[Janice Bower]

That's what you're doing. You claimed it was "most likely" that the number of apostates/critics among the membership are "maybe double" than active members. Such a claim is absolutely baseless, and absurd. You then link one site that claims the number of active members have "dropped" by "5-19 percent"....then another, that states members no longer make up the majority of population in Utah. So? Many of the inactives I know are neither "apostate" nor a "critic".

My mother and brother were definitely inactive and definitely did not have a bit of faith in Mormonism. They weren't interested in having their names removed. The Mormons didn't have their addresses.

 

[brotherofJared]

My mother and brother were definitely inactive and definitely did not have a bit of faith in Mormonism.

There are a lot of people who are inactive but still can't find truth in any other religion. So they sit and take pot shots at the one they can't participate in because they like the darkness better.

They weren't interested in having their names removed.

I wonder why that is. Since you definitely know what they didn't have faith in, maybe you can tell us what their interests are. I assume they aren't going to tell us.

The Mormons didn't have their addresses.

Wow. Your God powers are impressive.

So, what was the point of this drivel?

 

[Gordon]

My mother and brother were definitely inactive and definitely did not have a bit of faith in Mormonism. They weren't interested in having their names removed. The Mormons didn't have their addresses.

So they were active critics of the Church?

 

[Gordon]

It's not baseless at all. It is based on all available data by both LDS and non-LDS sources. Did you watch the Mormon Stories episode I provided?

I'll be very generous here, and lets say there are 5 million members that attend at least once a month of so. That leave 12 million folks that are what?

One thing for sure is that the church knows the statistics and one thing for sure they are silent about it, and leave the members guessing.

And they are all "apostates" and "critics"?

 

[Gordon]

LOL...it is very relevant.

How so, if it's been approved by the FP? Do you require knowledge of the author when a company puts out a press release?

That's a lot of data to go through...it says it resides there, it is no where specially defined or settled.

What, exactly, are you looking for? A line-by-line outline of all doctrines, with the appropriate page numbers? You asked what is considered doctrine...and I provided it.

Just read The different LDS forums, and Aarons views, BoJ views, Ralf's views which often disagree.

Then they aren't paying attention...or you aren't listening to what they are saying.

I was a JFS Mormon

Whatever that is...

What are these publications?

The Ensign, for one.

and tell me the article that states it author is irrelevant to know?

Yes, because they approved the article.