Mormon Worldview

[huckelberry]

The polygamy ban was just such a revelation. Smith taught that it was the new and everlasting covenant, and was necessary to enter the highest level of heaven.

I can’t think of any doctrine more important than one which is a requirement for eternal salvation.

And another prophet reversed that with one proclamation. I think there’s a good argument to be made that if you believe Joseph was a real prophet, that polygamy may still be necessary and the current church is in apostasy. They chose preserving the church in the face of a governmental conflict over the truth of doctrine.

D&C 132 is quite clear that the new and everlasting covenant is temple marriage, a covenant for time and eternity by a person having the appropriate authority. Polygamy is an extension. My memory, which could be incorrect, says it is Brigham Young who made polygamy a requirement or close to it. In any case, the change illustrates that the head of the church has authority to change things. On the other hand, the divisions and slowness of people accepting the change illustrates that there are practical limits to that authority.

I do not believe that the Bible or a man or woman in a special chair or with a special position can be a final or primary authority. They at best can only be guides. People need coherent beliefs, harmonious beliefs that fit their morality that are workable and testable. People cannot avoid the fact that beliefs do not fit anything perfectly but there has to be sufficient fit for people to follow or believe. A church president cannot create too much change and conflict without losing his authority in the eyes of people. What he teaches must have some tolerable relationship with past scriptures, tradition, and people's hopes. If not, the authority will be sitting in an empty room pronouncing for the walls.

[drumdude]

D&C 132 is quite clear that the new and everlasting covenant is temple marriage, a covenant for time and eternity by a person having the appropriate authority. Polygamy is an extension.

Many disagree with this given the context of the revelation and the fact that only polygamous sealings were performed for the first 2 years of the covenant.

https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful_ ... -polygamy/

[pgm1985]

Since he seems to be asking where the ultimate authority lies, I was telling him that in Mormonism it’s an easy answer. The brethren are the church. Everything else is secondary, including whatever the scriptures, articles of faith, past prophets, or even Jesus Christ said. The brethren can and do override all of it.

Initially, I was asking for what the basic tenants and beliefs of Mormonism are. It appears these can be summarized in the Mormon Articles of Faith, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible. But now you state “The brethren can and do override all of it.” Where do the brethren receive their authority to change the basic doctrines and core beliefs of the Mormon Church? Don’t the brethren having this much authority remove the importance of the Bible and Book of Mormon from the Mormon church, despite the church claims they are the word of God?

Christians believe the Bible is the written word of God and is the divine inspiration of God. There are four characteristics of the Bible that show it is God’s Word: authority, clarity, necessity, and sufficiency. The Bible is God’s revealed truth and to disbelieve or disobey the Bible is to sin against God. Because the Bible is God’s Word, it has been preserved throughout history through precise copying. It is not just a compilation of a bunch of old documents which have some tidbits of wisdom strewn about. The Bible claims it is God’s Word throughout the Old and New Testaments, the Holy Spirit convicts us to the fact the Bible is God’s Word, fulfilled prophecies validates the Bible as God’s Word, and the Bible is self-attesting to the fact it is the Word of God. Jesus, the Son of God, also confirmed the Old Testament as the written Word of God, used it as such in His teachings, and confirmed its authority. There are many resources documenting the historical reliability of the Bible. All of this shows the Bible is the sole authority for our lives and is just as relevant today as it was when it was written.

My question to you regarding the Mormon church is what do you do when the brethren change a core doctrine to be against what is taught in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or any other Mormon prophet? An example would be the changing article of faith #3, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel”, to remove the obedience to the laws and ordinances aspect so that belief through the atonement of Christ is all that is required.

[Fence Sitter]

Initially, I was asking for what the basic tenants and beliefs of Mormonism are. It appears these can be summarized in the Mormon Articles of Faith, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible. But now you state “The brethren can and do override all of it.” Where do the brethren receive their authority to change the basic doctrines and core beliefs of the Mormon Church? Don’t the brethren having this much authority remove the importance of the Bible and Book of Mormon from the Mormon church, despite the church claims they are the word of God?

Orthodox Mormons believe that the prophet of the church talks directly to God. They also believe that the Bible isn't inerrant. So anything the prophet says in his capacity as the prophet, and to a lesser extent what the other 14 apostles say, would be the current interpretation of Mormon beliefs. Since they do not believe in the inerrancy of scripture or even prophets and apostles, a changing doctrine and core beliefs is not a problem for them.

Christians believe the Bible is the written word of God and is the divine inspiration of God. There are four characteristics of the Bible that show it is God’s Word: authority, clarity, necessity, and sufficiency. The Bible is God’s revealed truth and to disbelieve or disobey the Bible is to sin against God. Because the Bible is God’s Word, it has been preserved throughout history through precise copying. It is not just a compilation of a bunch of old documents which have some tidbits of wisdom strewn about. The Bible claims it is God’s Word throughout the Old and New Testaments, the Holy Spirit convicts us to the fact the Bible is God’s Word, fulfilled prophecies validates the Bible as God’s Word, and the Bible is self-attesting to the fact it is the Word of God. Jesus, the Son of God, also confirmed the Old Testament as the written Word of God, used it as such in His teachings, and confirmed its authority. There are many resources documenting the historical reliability of the Bible. All of this shows the Bible is the sole authority for our lives and is just as relevant today as it was when it was written.

Which Bible, in which language, from which year, is the historically reliable one and why?

Requiring Mormons to accept your view of Biblical interpretation would be akin to them asking you to accept whatever the Mormon prophet says as the word of God.

My question to you regarding the Mormon church is what do you do when the brethren change a core doctrine to be against what is taught in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or any other Mormon prophet? An example would be the changing article of faith #3, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel”, to remove the obedience to the laws and ordinances aspect so that belief through the atonement of Christ is all that is required.

A common mantra in the Mormon church is:

"Follow the prophet he will never lead you astray."

By the way I am not a believer in Mormonism though I have been associated with it my entire life.

[pgm1985]

As pgm1985 may not know, not everyone here is or ever was Mormon, and I'm one of the never-Mos. I've never considered myself Reformed, either, but I have good memories of Bible studies at a Reformed chaplaincy when I was an undergrad, around 1985. There was enough honesty to conclude, for example, that there really just wasn't any positive, uplifting message in the Book of Ecclesiastes, and that the Book of Judges is just a catalog of horrors to show bad things are without strong enough government.

So I don't mean to be hostile to pgm1985. I'm genuinely curious, though, about the reason to conclude that the Bible is so reliable. I mean, it's this really old book that coalesced from poorly known sources a long time ago.

Finding some wisdom in ancient Scriptures like the Bible, maybe even profound revelation, doesn't seem crazy to me. Ancient humans were as smart as we are, and they mostly lived in times harder than ours, so they may well have had things to say to which we should still listen.

But taking such an old collection of writings, many of which really just seem like weird or even disgusting old stories, to be the sole and authoritative source of answers to all the most important questions of life? Apart from the sheer mental inertia of accepting old traditions as unquestioned assumptions, why would anyone ever even think of attributing that much authority to the Bible?

See my response to drumdude regarding why the Bible is authoritative.

[huckelberry]

D&C 132 is quite clear that the new and everlasting covenant is temple marriage, a covenant for time and eternity by a person having the appropriate authority. Polygamy is an extension.

Many disagree with this given the context of the revelation and the fact that only polygamous sealings were performed for the first 2 years of the covenant.

https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful_ ... -polygamy/

Hi Drumdude. I think you are correct pointing to the change with polygamy as an important and substantial change. It illustrates your point that the head of the LDS church has the authority to change something important and people will accept that on his authority.

Well it was not entirely easy. Some people resisted, some people rejected the change seeing previous scripture and teaching as more important. Some people today continue that rejection in their own separate groups.

[huckelberry]

Since he seems to be asking where the ultimate authority lies, I was telling him that in Mormonism it’s an easy answer. The brethren are the church. Everything else is secondary, including whatever the scriptures, articles of faith, past prophets, or even Jesus Christ said. The brethren can and do override all of it.

Initially, I was asking for what the basic tenants and beliefs of Mormonism are. It appears these can be summarized in the Mormon Articles of Faith, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible. But now you state “The brethren can and do override all of it.” Where do the brethren receive their authority to change the basic doctrines and core beliefs of the Mormon Church? Don’t the brethren having this much authority remove the importance of the Bible and Book of Mormon from the Mormon church, despite the church claims they are the word of God?

Change a core doctrine to be against what is taught in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or any other Mormon prophet? An example would be the changing article of faith #3, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel”, to remove the obedience to the laws and ordinances aspect so that belief through the atonement of Christ is all that is required.

Hi Pgm1985, perhaps it should be pointed out that Mormons believe the authority of the brethren and any important message comes directly from God just like you think of writers of the Bible get their authority. Mormons would not think of their statements as detracting from the authority of the Bible any more than you think the folks who added first and second Peter to the Bible detracted from the value of Romans.

[IWMP]

The articles of faith might help OP?

[huckelberry]

The articles of faith might help OP?

I thought so too, so I posted them on this thread, page four.

[drumdude]

Initially, I was asking for what the basic tenants and beliefs of Mormonism are. It appears these can be summarized in the Mormon Articles of Faith, the Book of Mormon, and the Bible. But now you state “The brethren can and do override all of it.” Where do the brethren receive their authority to change the basic doctrines and core beliefs of the Mormon Church? Don’t the brethren having this much authority remove the importance of the Bible and Book of Mormon from the Mormon church, despite the church claims they are the word of God?

change a core doctrine to be against what is taught in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, or any other Mormon prophet? An example would be the changing article of faith #3, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel”, to remove the obedience to the laws and ordinances aspect so that belief through the atonement of Christ is all that is required.

Hi Pgm1985, perhaps it should be pointed out that Mormons believe the authority of the brethren and any important message comes directly from God just like you think of writers of the Bible get their authority. Mormons would not think of their statements as detracting from the authority of the Bible any more than you think the folks who added first and second Peter to the Bible detracted from the value of Romans.

I think the main point of contention between Mormons and other Christians is if the Bible and faith alone is sufficient for salvation.

Mormonism tells you that it is not sufficient, and that following the brethren is both necessary and sufficient for salvation.

In my mind, that is not just a different of opinion, it’s a sign of a cult. Not even the pope claims that following him is necessary for salvation.