Who Determines LDS doctrine?

Markk

Super Member
In determining doctrine for the church, here is a very general synopsis of how doctrine is produced and distributed to the members of the LDS church.


Aaron, per your thread, you seemed to be confused about what correlation is and what it provides. This will hopefully help us get on the same page when I use the word correlation. I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure there is a correlation director, who is a 70 (GA)...that reports directly to the 1st presidency and the 12.

I'll check it out later, I have to run.
 
In determining doctrine for the church, here is a very general synopsis of how doctrine is produced and distributed to the members of the LDS church.


Aaron, per your thread, you seemed to be confused about what correlation is and what it provides. This will hopefully help us get on the same page when I use the word correlation. I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure there is a correlation director, who is a 70 (GA)...that reports directly to the 1st presidency and the 12.

I'll check it out later, I have to run.
Why not? Joseph F. Smith...... "that focused on simplifying and centralizing work across Church organizations."
 
Why not? Joseph F. Smith...... "that focused on simplifying and centralizing work across Church organizations."
That is a question for Aaron. Basically what correlation does, is that paid employees put together doctrines in teaching manuals…etc, under GA supervision and/or guidelines, most likely a 70, and I would assume someone from the 12 or 1st presidency reviews it at some compacity…but who knows, that would be a lot of work with all the manuals the church produce.
 
That is a question for Aaron.
Fine, when Aaron gets around to answering it then he can. but until then, enjoy the discussion with others.
Basically what correlation does, is that paid employees put together doctrines in teaching manuals…etc, under GA supervision and/or guidelines, most likely a 70, and I would assume someone from the 12 or 1st presidency reviews it at some compacity…but who knows, that would be a lot of work with all the manuals the church produce.
Basically, what correlation does is correlate. It is an evolving process with the intent to streamline teaching doctrines. There are many offices in the church and many scholars. Correlation gives them a chance to correlate priesthood and relief society lessons (among other areas, this isn't intended to be an exhaustive list) with Sunday school lessons. That's what it does. End of story.
 
In determining doctrine for the church, here is a very general synopsis of how doctrine is produced and distributed to the members of the LDS church.


Aaron, per your thread, you seemed to be confused about what correlation is and what it provides. This will hopefully help us get on the same page when I use the word correlation. I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure there is a correlation director, who is a 70 (GA)...that reports directly to the 1st presidency and the 12.

I'll check it out later, I have to run.
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to state here, or what you think I'm confused about. Your cited source says "the Correlation Department is responsible for ensuring that all work aligns with the doctrine of Jesus Christ and inspired policies of the Church. "
While in contrast your implying the Correlation Department itself determines the doctrine of the Church.

And yet, you've still yet to prove or define what "doctrine" is. Apparently, the correlation department seems to be way ahead of the curve.
Maybe this can help you:

I believe you will find that the given sources found in the link about will agree with me.
 
That is a question for Aaron. Basically what correlation does, is that paid employees put together doctrines in teaching manuals…etc, under GA supervision and/or guidelines, most likely a 70, and I would assume someone from the 12 or 1st presidency reviews it at some compacity…but who knows, that would be a lot of work with all the manuals the church produce.
So that is how doctrine is produced? chuckle.
 
So that is how doctrine is produced? chuckle.
Ralf, it is how LDS doctrine is produced in regards to distribution to the folks…yes. Doctrine according to the LDS church is God’s teaches as revealed by the prophets, wether official canonized or direct teachings. There are 15 prophets in the LDS church with the one head prophet or president who is “the” prophet. These prophets and apostles, are sustained by the folks to interpret the the official canonized doctrines of the church, and whether you want to accept the current process of not, they chose some time ago to do this through correlation, which is a group of paid employees, putting together teaching manuals under the supervision of the GA. The church also is clear that God speaks to the folks by these 15 prophets.

The problem with this is that no member really knows what is truth coming it of these folks mouths…What one of these men say might be a long standing agreed upon doctrine, or a temporary doctrine later discarded as just an opinion. In a strict sense a doctrine is nothing more than a fundamental teaching. The reality in the LDS church is, a doctrine is more or less whatever someone wants it to be according to their personal interpretation of what a prophet teaches or what the standard works read To then through the HG. Aaron‘s interpretation of doctrine is different than yours as an example…and your way around it for you is to just throw him under the bus and claim you are not really sure he is a Mormon because he does not interpret the same way as you.
 
Ralf, it is how LDS doctrine is produced in regards to distribution to the folks…yes. Doctrine according to the LDS church is God’s teaches as revealed by the prophets, wether official canonized or direct teachings. There are 15 prophets in the LDS church with the one head prophet or president who is “the” prophet. These prophets and apostles, are sustained by the folks to interpret the the official canonized doctrines of the church, and whether you want to accept the current process of not, they chose some time ago to do this through correlation, which is a group of paid employees, putting together teaching manuals under the supervision of the GA. The church also is clear that God speaks to the folks by these 15 prophets.

Could you explain for us what difference there is in your claim--and the Biblical NT testimony?

Acts 16:4-5---King James Version
4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.
 
Could you explain for us what difference there is in your claim--and the Biblical NT testimony?

Acts 16:4-5---King James Version
4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.
What does that have to do with establishing doctrine within the LDS church in regards to the self proclaimed modern “prophets, seers and revelators?

Again this is just another troll on your part in order to enforce the concept of man becoming Gods…which is of course the plan of salvation, which in turn supports your God complex, messiah complex, and the teaching that you can have multiple wives for alll eternity and make your planets and for your own spirit children.

If you want to join the conversation in context, please explain how correlation decides what is doctrine and what is not, in LDS teaching manuals?
 
dberrie2020 said:---Could you explain for us what difference there is in your claim--and the Biblical NT testimony?

Acts 16:4-5---King James Version
4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

What does that have to do with establishing doctrine within the LDS church in regards to the self proclaimed modern “prophets, seers and revelators?

Markk--if the NT church doctrines were established through the living, mortal apostles and elders--and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do the same, through their living, mortal apostles--how are you seeing that as being different? Is it because you can create straw men and publicly disembowel them? Sorry, but not my idea of the foundations of truth.

Please do explain that for us.

You, nor any other Christian church today--can, or will even dare to--make that claim. That's because there is no other Christian church which has the living, mortal apostles and prophets--with the heavenly authority through Heavenly Beings, with witnesses--being part of their historic history, as recorded scripture--the same as the NT church did.

The living, mortal apostles are a part of the NT church--and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They both have the goods to show it.

And that has been my point in all this, IE--it's those who have nothing to represent those truths which claim they are the true, living church of God--pointing to those who do have that history of heavenly revelations from heavenly beings, and the living, mortal apostles and prophets--as being false.

Yeah, right. I get it.

Ephesians 2:20---King James Version
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
 
Ralf, it is how LDS doctrine is produced in regards to distribution to the folks…yes. Doctrine according to the LDS church is God’s teaches as revealed by the prophets, wether official canonized or direct teachings. There are 15 prophets in the LDS church with the one head prophet or president who is “the” prophet. These prophets and apostles, are sustained by the folks to interpret the the official canonized doctrines of the church, and whether you want to accept the current process of not, they chose some time ago to do this through correlation, which is a group of paid employees, putting together teaching manuals under the supervision of the GA. The church also is clear that God speaks to the folks by these 15 prophets.

The problem with this is that no member really knows what is truth coming it of these folks mouths…What one of these men say might be a long standing agreed upon doctrine, or a temporary doctrine later discarded as just an opinion. In a strict sense a doctrine is nothing more than a fundamental teaching. The reality in the LDS church is, a doctrine is more or less whatever someone wants it to be according to their personal interpretation of what a prophet teaches or what the standard works read To then through the HG. Aaron‘s interpretation of doctrine is different than yours as an example…and your way around it for you is to just throw him under the bus and claim you are not really sure he is a Mormon because he does not interpret the same way as you.
Well said good buddy, well said. So if my prophet says something wrong and I do it... who is responsible if I have a testimony that he is chosen of God to speak to the world? which by the way I do have a testimony of. I guess I will have to wait to find out who is right, you or me...
 
Acts 16:4-5---King James Version
4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.
What is your point and what are/do all the different colors and print in bold, mean to you…state what you believe the snippets mean, in a LDS context, and I promise you I will opine.

Markk--if the NT church doctrines were established through the living, mortal apostles and elders--and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do the same, through their living, mortal apostles--how are you seeing that as being different? Is it because you can create straw men and publicly disembowel them? Sorry, but not my idea of the foundations of truth.
Focus…so does the FLDS, and Warren Jeffs, they claim all authority and use the same arguments that you just did DB…, as do the Manti Mormons, the CoC, the Temple Lot Mormons, and other fringe groups, which in the whole of it, the Utah branch is just a fringe group with an over exaggerated membership, compared to world religions. Th eOnly thing that keeps them some what relevant in that the have a very high membership fee that supports their corporation. White man after White man sustained as prophet seer and revelator in Utah, is hardly comparable with the early Christian Church. Believe me when I say it is different, especially when the Plan of Salvation, and Creeds, of the LDS church, is a means to an end, for worthy LDS to become a God!

Double focus, and think hard about this…The Utah LDS church uses the Bible and Christianity for credibility…and then wants to force their strange and doctrinally perverted doctrines on others as somehow being Christian, when they are far from it.

If you want to talk about foundations of truth…let’s discuss the conception of the LDS church and the Joseph Smith story. You duck any discussion on him…why? Because you know there is a grave difference…let’s discuss Joseph Glass looking, his money digging, entering into polygamy years before there was a revelation of it. Marrying a 14 year old girl without telling his wife while he was 37 years old…inviting poor impoverished teen age girls into his home and secretly marrying them…while they lived in his home, with Emma, and not telling Emma about it, and then when she found out , he made her attend a second marriage with them, then she ran them out of her house, hating them?

DB, you want to somehow justify that with a few verses from the Bible, crayon colored with no context, and the claim that Jesus’ church is some how the same as Joseph’s church…? No, but if yours is, so is Warren Jeffs church, in that it is closer to early Mormonism than what th eUtah church is today.

You are over and over again, painfully and ignorantly, trying to use Christianity, and Christ, for credibility and support for a perverted gospel that promotes that men can become Gods!
 
Ralf, it is how LDS doctrine is produced in regards to distribution to the folks…
distribution doesn't make doctrine. If that were true, every book would be considered doctrine.
Doctrine according to the LDS church is God’s teaches as revealed by the prophets, wether official canonized or direct teachings.
Doctrine, according to our church, is that which is accepted by common consent and canonized. All other communication is an elaboration on the scriptures and, even the prophet has opinions. That doesn't mean they are right. We can trust that they have been well thought out and they do carry a lot of weight, but that doesn't make it doctrine.
There are 15 prophets in the LDS church with the one head prophet or president who is “the” prophet. These prophets and apostles, are sustained by the folks to interpret the the official canonized doctrines of the church, and whether you want to accept the current process of not, they chose some time ago to do this through correlation,
correlation is not doctrine. It is simply aligning the teachings amongst different groups. That's it.
The church also is clear that God speaks to the folks by these 15 prophets.
The church is quite clear that the only person on the earth able to receive revelation for the church is one person, not 15. The other 14 come and go and never generate doctrine. They expound on the doctrine but they are entitled to their opinions and could be wrong. Elder McConkie found that out - and they may not be wrong but it's not up to them to generate doctrine.
The problem with this is that no member really knows what is truth coming it of these folks mouths…What one of these men say might be a long standing agreed upon doctrine, or a temporary doctrine later discarded as just an opinion.
Let's get something straight here. I'm not aware of any opinion offered by any GA that has been discarded. We may not teach it, but most of their teachings remain. Yes, the mother church of all you critics is the Catholic church which is clearly represented in the Book of Revelation. We don't teach it, but that doesn't mean it's not true. Some things that are true are not very helpful and that is one of them. It's not your fault that the Catholic church led you all astray. Besides, it's not very helpful to bash other Christians because all of us are only doing the best we can with what we've been given. Our doctrine opens the door to all people regardless of religion or what god they happen to believe in because salvation depends on works. Thankfully, we know that the opportunity to receive the ordinances of salvation can be performed at any time. The gospel will be taught well after the grave. The only thing we can't undo is the way we lived. There are good people in every walk of life, in every country, in every religion. There are also bad people. It doesn't matter what church you belong to, if you're evil, you're going to pay a heavy price.
The reality in the LDS church is, a doctrine is more or less whatever someone wants it to be according to their personal interpretation
That's certainly the course you're taking. It seems that if you pen it, it must be our doctrine.
Aaron‘s interpretation of doctrine is different than yours as an example…
And what Aaron believes doesn't make it doctrine either. There are a lot of people in every religion that believe they are in the right place even though they disagree with some of the tenets. I haven't met a woman who is happily married that believes that God will separate her from her husband yet, but that's what you all teach as doctrine. Certainly, Aaron is entitled to his opinion even if he's wrong. The thing that I press upon him and you is that one's opinion doesn't make it true or church doctrine. Without substantiation, it is just smoke and mirrors. I asked the same question of Aaron over and over and never got an answer. He refused and dodged rather than addressing the elephant in the room. That's the same tactic we see here with our critics, but you can't tell me what I believe. You can't tell me what my church teaches. I know better than you because I live it. You fight it and that creates a problem. You have a vested interest in finding fault because if it's not wrong, then you are wrong and that's a bad place to be.

If you want to move me from my perch, you need to have a lot more than your opinion about what we believe to move me. I have been moved by discussions on these boards, but never assume that just because you got one thing right, it means that you're right about everything else.
and your way around it for you is to just throw him under the bus and claim you are not really sure he is a Mormon because he does not interpret the same way as you.
He's not working around the arguments with you using that excuse. He just disagrees with Aaron and rightly so. Aaron, and you know this, has some off-the-wall ideas. We clearly teach deification through Christ. He rejects that in an effort to display humility and complete fealty to God. To me, that's just an effort to downplay our doctrine in order to make it more palatable to our critics. He accuses me of chasing potential investigators off because of my rigid doctrines. He's not fooling anyone though. His approach will only disappoint anyone who investigates the church and finds that Aaron was wrong.

You, OTH, don't fit any of that. If you're telling me what I believe, you're wrong from the top. it's going to take some considerable evidence to change that and so far, all you've done is bloviate. I've caught you twice trying to explain your beliefs. I was impressed, but the problem was, you're still using your opinion to explain them, no evidence, no support, just offering what you think is right and that's simply not good enough.
 
distribution doesn't make doctrine. If that were true, every book would be considered doctrine.

Doctrine, according to our church, is that which is accepted by common consent and canonized. All other communication is an elaboration on the scriptures and, even the prophet has opinions. That doesn't mean they are right. We can trust that they have been well thought out and they do carry a lot of weight, but that doesn't make it doctrine.

correlation is not doctrine. It is simply aligning the teachings amongst different groups. That's it.

The church is quite clear that the only person on the earth able to receive revelation for the church is one person, not 15. The other 14 come and go and never generate doctrine. They expound on the doctrine but they are entitled to their opinions and could be wrong. Elder McConkie found that out - and they may not be wrong but it's not up to them to generate doctrine.

Let's get something straight here. I'm not aware of any opinion offered by any GA that has been discarded. We may not teach it, but most of their teachings remain. Yes, the mother church of all you critics is the Catholic church which is clearly represented in the Book of Revelation. We don't teach it, but that doesn't mean it's not true. Some things that are true are not very helpful and that is one of them. It's not your fault that the Catholic church led you all astray. Besides, it's not very helpful to bash other Christians because all of us are only doing the best we can with what we've been given. Our doctrine opens the door to all people regardless of religion or what god they happen to believe in because salvation depends on works. Thankfully, we know that the opportunity to receive the ordinances of salvation can be performed at any time. The gospel will be taught well after the grave. The only thing we can't undo is the way we lived. There are good people in every walk of life, in every country, in every religion. There are also bad people. It doesn't matter what church you belong to, if you're evil, you're going to pay a heavy price.

That's certainly the course you're taking. It seems that if you pen it, it must be our doctrine.

And what Aaron believes doesn't make it doctrine either. There are a lot of people in every religion that believe they are in the right place even though they disagree with some of the tenets. I haven't met a woman who is happily married that believes that God will separate her from her husband yet, but that's what you all teach as doctrine. Certainly, Aaron is entitled to his opinion even if he's wrong. The thing that I press upon him and you is that one's opinion doesn't make it true or church doctrine. Without substantiation, it is just smoke and mirrors. I asked the same question of Aaron over and over and never got an answer. He refused and dodged rather than addressing the elephant in the room. That's the same tactic we see here with our critics, but you can't tell me what I believe. You can't tell me what my church teaches. I know better than you because I live it. You fight it and that creates a problem. You have a vested interest in finding fault because if it's not wrong, then you are wrong and that's a bad place to be.

If you want to move me from my perch, you need to have a lot more than your opinion about what we believe to move me. I have been moved by discussions on these boards, but never assume that just because you got one thing right, it means that you're right about everything else.

He's not working around the arguments with you using that excuse. He just disagrees with Aaron and rightly so. Aaron, and you know this, has some off-the-wall ideas. We clearly teach deification through Christ. He rejects that in an effort to display humility and complete fealty to God. To me, that's just an effort to downplay our doctrine in order to make it more palatable to our critics. He accuses me of chasing potential investigators off because of my rigid doctrines. He's not fooling anyone though. His approach will only disappoint anyone who investigates the church and finds that Aaron was wrong.

You, OTH, don't fit any of that. If you're telling me what I believe, you're wrong from the top. it's going to take some considerable evidence to change that and so far, all you've done is bloviate. I've caught you twice trying to explain your beliefs. I was impressed, but the problem was, you're still using your opinion to explain them, no evidence, no support, just offering what you think is right and that's simply not good enough.
You have no idea what you are talking about. do you really believe that “the prophet” …reads and approves everything that is uploaded to LDS . org, or printed by CES…let along write it? No correlation does. Plain and simply doctrine is what is taught by the church, and what is taught to the church is distributed through correlation.

To you believe this? Correlation distributed it for you learning pleasure?

Elder Neil L. Andersen of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles has given us a good rule of thumb on this: “The doctrine [of the Church] is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find” (Oct. 2012 general conference).


All 15,the first presidency and the 12 are prophets, seers, and revelator’s ….and sustained as such, again you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
What is your point and what are/do all the different colors and print in bold, mean to you…

It means there is special attention brought to the highlighted area. Such as:

Acts 16:4-5---King James Version
4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

state what you believe the snippets mean, in a LDS context, and I promise you I will opine.

I did--post #14:


"Markk--if the NT church doctrines were established through the living, mortal apostles and elders--and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do the same, through their living, mortal apostles--how are you seeing that as being different? Is it because you can create straw men and publicly disembowel them? Sorry, but not my idea of the foundations of truth.


Please do explain that for us.


You, nor any other Christian church today--can, or will even dare to--make that claim. That's because there is no other Christian church which has the living, mortal apostles and prophets--with the heavenly authority through Heavenly Beings, with witnesses--being part of their historic history, as recorded scripture--the same as the NT church did.

The living, mortal apostles are a part of the NT church--and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They both have the goods to show it.

And that has been my point in all this, IE--it's those who have nothing to represent those truths which claim they are the true, living church of God--pointing to those who do have that history of heavenly revelations from heavenly beings, and the living, mortal apostles and prophets--as being false.

Yeah, right. I get it.

Ephesians 2:20---King James Version
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;"
 
You have no idea what you are talking about. do you really believe that “the prophet” …reads and approves everything that is uploaded to LDS . org, or printed by CES…let along write it? No correlation does. Plain and simply doctrine is what is taught by the church, and what is taught to the church is distributed through correlation.
We agree, but the don't approve doctrine....and of course they do not have time to read and approve everything being taught or correlated.
No its not taught by the Church, approved doctrine comes from Jesus Christ.




To you believe this? Correlation distributed it for you learning pleasure?

Key word... distributed ...


Elder Neil L. Andersen of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles has given us a good rule of thumb on this: “The doctrine [of the Church] is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find” (Oct. 2012 general conference).

Yep, taught by after received it by revelation from Christ the Chief Cornerstone of the Church...



All 15,the first presidency and the 12 are prophets, seers, and revelator’s ….and sustained as such, again you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Back
Top