That's Not Doctrine!

[_stemelbow]

I kinda see the whole determining what is "official doctrine" and what is not as a way to refine our understanding of truth. I do not hold that the Church adequately explains or understands all truth. Thus, I'm happy there is some room within the Church to talk about these things. To try and develop some personal assessments about what to accept and what not to accept. Its quite a freeing thing for me. In time, teachings/ideas go the way of the wind if they don't seem to hold up. In this I see this balance between the conservative and the liberal. Also, with this, I very much enjoy Joseph Smith's thought about accepting truth from wherever it comes and being free enough to accept and reject some things. I don't think we've added much to the concept of what is truth since Joseph Smith' day, but there has been some amount of refinement.

[_Black Moclips]

What concerns me about the BRM response regarding limited light and knowledge statement is the fact that for years and years the prophets and apostles didn't know they were working under this limitation. Which then causes me to wonder about other topics and issues where we could also be operating under the same limitation and not know it.

[_lostindc]

What concerns me about the BRM response regarding limited light and knowledge statement is the fact that for years and years the prophets and apostles didn't know they were working under this limitation. Which then causes me to wonder about other topics and issues where we could also be operating under the same limitation and not know it.

I am sure wearing masonry underwear is not one of them.

[_stemelbow]

What concerns me about the BRM response regarding limited light and knowledge statement is the fact that for years and years the prophets and apostles didn't know they were working under this limitation. Which then causes me to wonder about other topics and issues where we could also be operating under the same limitation and not know it.

I don't see why these is such a concern. We will always be working under limitation. we are limited by nature.

[_Buffalo]

What concerns me about the BRM response regarding limited light and knowledge statement is the fact that for years and years the prophets and apostles didn't know they were working under this limitation. Which then causes me to wonder about other topics and issues where we could also be operating under the same limitation and not know it.

I don't see why these is such a concern. We will always be working under limitation. we are limited by nature.

Perhaps it's the great extent of that limitation that is disturbing. The more you study the historical statements of the GAs, the more apparent it is that their light and knowledge is about on the same level as your typical High Priest quorum member.

[_Joseph]

Nothing is doctrine unless it fills the need of the moment. After the current need has been takcn care of anything can be denied.

[_stemelbow]

Perhaps it's the great extent of that limitation that is disturbing. The more you study the historical statements of the GAs, the more apparent it is that their light and knowledge is about on the same level as your typical High Priest quorum member.

Ahh...that's too subjective a determination to make, if you ask me. So with that, I'll just disagree.

[_stemelbow]

Nothing is doctrine unless it fills the need of the moment. After the current need has been takcn care of anything can be denied.

I don't know if anyone hs told you this before, Joseph, but you are cute as a button. I'm sure that comes off as condescending but I just can't help but think it when I read your over-the-top exaggerated posts. They're just cute.

[_Themis]

What concerns me about the BRM response regarding limited light and knowledge statement is the fact that for years and years the prophets and apostles didn't know they were working under this limitation. Which then causes me to wonder about other topics and issues where we could also be operating under the same limitation and not know it.

I don't see why these is such a concern. We will always be working under limitation. we are limited by nature.

I think it would be an obvious concern. If they cannot get it right on important issues like this one, how does one know they are right about the others. You can bring up personal revelation, but it suffers from the same problem. How many members recieved revelation indicating certain things were true in the past that are not consideed true today. If God were really communicating to the leaders of the LDS church it would not be hard to aviod getting things wrong. How hard would it be to tell Joseph or BY not to restrict the pristhood from black males. So when will the apologists argue that the restriction of the priesthood to just males 12 years old and up was not doctrine? :)

[_stemelbow]

I think it would be an obvious concern. If they cannot get it right on important issues like this one, how does one know they are right about the others. You can bring up personal revelation, but it suffers from the same problem. How many members recieved revelation indicating certain things were true in the past that are not consideed true today. If God were really communicating to the leaders of the LDS church it would not be hard to aviod getting things wrong. How hard would it be to tell Joseph or BY not to restrict the pristhood from black males. So when will the apologists argue that the restriction of the priesthood to just males 12 years old and up was not doctrine? :)

Nobody is right on everything. That's just how it is. While you demand perfection from people who run a church and claim to speak for God I think that demand is unreasonable considering people and the world as we know it. I just have a different paradigm than you, it appears, that's why I take courage and am happy to note that there is some refinement in LDS belief and practice over the years. And in 50 years from now I'll most likely happily accept that things change.