So, the Deseret News was doctrine? Or is it doctrine now?
Certainly the parts of it that pertain to religion and God must be (or have been) doctrine, according to your paradigm?
Being published by an entity owned or controlled by the Church does not mean officially published in any doctrinal sense. At best you I think you could say semi-official.
It wasn't published by "an entity owned or controlled by the Church." The site says it was published by the Church itself.
So, the Deseret News was doctrine? Or is it doctrine now?
Certainly the parts of it that pertain to religion and God must be (or have been) doctrine, according to your paradigm?
Being published by an entity owned or controlled by the Church does not mean officially published in any doctrinal sense. At best you I think you could say semi-official.
You mean like Deseret Book which is "owned wholly by Deseret Management Corporation," just like the Deseret News?
Being published by an entity owned or controlled by the Church does not mean officially published in any doctrinal sense. At best you I think you could say semi-official.
You mean like Deseret Book which is "owned wholly by Deseret Management Corporation," just like the Deseret News?
Sure. Of course that means to be sure of doctrine, you still have to consult an official publication.
The D-news does not meet the official publication standard for the Church. It even differentiates between itself and actual official Church publications such as ldsnews.
bcspace wrote:Sure. Of course that means to be sure of doctrine, you still have to consult an official publication.
The D-news does not meet the official publication standard for the Church. It even differentiates between itself and actual official Church publications such as ldsnews.
So, it's doctrine?
No.
So, being published by the Church is not enough? The Church has to state that said content is doctrine?
There is also context and qualification which I have always referred to as well. That is why I asked you the first question about being published for the Church or for the State of Deseret.
I don't think you have much of a case for the original publications of the D-News being doctrine. Currently, the D-news is not published by the Church and has not been for many decades so it simply does not meet the standard for doctrine.
There is also context and qualification which I have always referred to as well. That is why I asked you the first question about being published for the Church or for the State of Deseret.
I don't think you have much of a case for the original publications of the D-News being doctrine. Currently, the D-news is not published by the Church and has not been for many decades so it simply does not meet the standard for doctrine.
There is also context and qualification which I have always referred to as well. That is why I asked you the first question about being published for the Church or for the State of Deseret.
I don't think you have much of a case for the original publications of the D-News being doctrine. Currently, the D-news is not published by the Church and has not been for many decades so it simply does not meet the standard for doctrine.
You side-stepped the other half of the question:
The Church has to state that said content is doctrine?