MormonHandbook.com

[_bcspace]

]Systematically moving like the MX missile system would have been. The US Defense Dept also had a method for identifying the current location of the MX missiles at any given point in time, but kept that method almost as secret as COTPOTCOJCOLDS keeps its financial records.

That fact that you cannot provide any examples at all, much less examples within the context of what the LDS Church has said about doctrine, pretty much ends the debate in my favor. Contact me when you come up with something.

[_Dwight Frye]

Any discussion of what constitutes doctrine is incomplete without considering the doctrinal 'Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet' by President Ezra Taft Benson of the Quorum of the Twelve, which informs us of things like,

The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time...

The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture...

“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.” (D&C 21:4.)...

The Prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning...

There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelation of God and reasoning of men—between the prophet and the professor [article proceeds to encourage you to not choose the reasoning of men]...

The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual...

[_beefcalf]

I think this is a good resource for covering many of the problems with Mormonism, without the use of overly incendiary language. Although it is presenting the critical perspective, it does so without undue rhetoric.

One thing I noticed: The glyph-protraits they use for the prominent leaders are nice, but they are using the same portrait for Joseph Fielding Smith and Joseph F. Smith (I don't know enough to say which one is properly depicted and which one is not):

compare:
http://www.mormonhandbook.com/canon/
-vs-
http://www.mormonhandbook.com/racism/

Other than that, it looks great, and will likely become one of my permanent bookmarks...

[_sock puppet]

Any discussion of what constitutes doctrine is incomplete without considering the doctrinal 'Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet' by President Ezra Taft Benson of the Quorum of the Twelve, which informs us of things like,

The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time...

The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture...

“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.” (D&C 21:4.)...

The Prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning...

There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelation of God and reasoning of men—between the prophet and the professor [article proceeds to encourage you to not choose the reasoning of men]...

The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual...

Dwight,

ETB is yesterday's news. He's dead. He's no longer a tithing collector. All of what ETB said is now irrelevant. If you want to know what doctrine is, just ask the current, living tithing collectors. Now there's the definitive source of doctrine.

[_sock puppet]

I think this is a good resource for covering many of the problems with Mormonism, without the use of overly incendiary language. Although it is presenting the critical perspective, it does so without undue rhetoric.

One thing I noticed: The glyph-protraits they use for the prominent leaders are nice, but they are using the same portrait for Joseph Fielding Smith and Joseph F. Smith (I don't know enough to say which one is properly depicted and which one is not):

compare:
http://www.mormonhandbook.com/canon/
-vs-
http://www.mormonhandbook.com/racism/

Other than that, it looks great, and will likely become one of my permanent bookmarks...

You're right. Joseph F. is bearded, and the man in both pictures. Joseph Fielding had a shaven chin which was quite narrow.

[Guest]

Any discussion of what constitutes doctrine is incomplete without considering the doctrinal 'Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet' by President Ezra Taft Benson of the Quorum of the Twelve, which informs us of things like,

The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time...

The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture...

“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.” (D&C 21:4.)...

The Prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning...

There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelation of God and reasoning of men—between the prophet and the professor [article proceeds to encourage you to not choose the reasoning of men]...

The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual...

Hey creempuff.... The Title is "14 Fundamentals in following the PROPHET"....!!!
It doesn't say, "14 Fundamentals of determining Doctrine of the Church or Doctrines of God".

"Prophets" have ALWAYS only been PART of the equation of determining Doctrine and Truths of God.
Again, I repeat..... Scriptures, Prophets, Holy Ghost, and Common Consent is how "doctrine" is determined in the Church.

Further....

1. The Prophet receives revelation and inspiration from God to lead his Church, that doesn't require a college degree.

2. Prophets teach the Gospel, thus no reason to say "thus sayeth the Lord". The early Apostles letters to the Church, and are scripture. Scripture isn't only simply direct revelation. Further, scripture is not doctrine..... Doctrine is contained in scripture, but it never has been doctrine.
Also, the scripture says to "give heed", it doesn't say blindly follow.

3. Prophets obviously would not be simply limited by mans reasoning, that doesn't mean there "isn't" reasoning that can be known, it simply means they aren't limited to it. I rejoined the Church because I eventually understood the full facts of things and God's reasoning in certain issue. It's not saying man "can't" know and have good reasoning. One mans reasoning is not as good as another's.

4. Key word is "revelation" from God.... over the precepts of men. It doesn't say we can't have any reasoning ability. Take for example, good and right AND GOD says to not have pre-marital sex, but the reasoning of men loves it, and think it's perfectly "reasonable". Which is really the TRUE reasoning, and which is the false reasoning to follow?

5. Prophets can obviously receive revelation on all kinds of subjects, still doesn't eliminate reasoning and common sense.

Anyway, the problem as usual is anti-mormon and critics false judgments and strawmen of things they simply do not understand. You wish to pervert words into something foolish and sinister, while the actual truth is otherwise.

[_Beavis Christ]

Any discussion of what constitutes doctrine is incomplete without considering the doctrinal 'Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet' by President Ezra Taft Benson of the Quorum of the Twelve, which informs us of things like,

"The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time...

The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture...

“Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you.” (D&C 21:4.)...

The Prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning...

There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelation of God and reasoning of men—between the prophet and the professor [article proceeds to encourage you to not choose the reasoning of men]...

The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual...

Hey creempuff.... The Title is "14 Fundamentals in following the PROPHET"....!!!
It doesn't say, "14 Fundamentals of determining Doctrine of the Church or Doctrines of God".

"Prophets" have ALWAYS only been PART of the equation of determining Doctrine and Truths of God.
Again, I repeat..... Scriptures, Prophets, Holy Ghost, and Common Consent is how "doctrine" is determined in the Church.

Unfortunately the definition of what constitutes doctrine has itself been fungible over time. I'll bet that you can't find any quotes from John Taylor, Brigham Young or Joe Smith stating that they had to do the committee hokey pokey.

You are forgetting also the #2 point of the Benson speech: "Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works."

I will repost it here for you since you did not follow the prophet in reading it after Dwight Frye posted it:

I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living oracles and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: "You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them."

When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, "Brother Brigham, I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God." Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: "There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now," said he, "when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books." That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: "Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth." [In Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18­19]

[_Obiwan]

It says the "Prophet is more vital".... It doesn't say the Prophet is alone and we are to ignore everything else.
Common Sense people.... Obviously all things of the Gospel save the Holy Ghost comes through Prophets, including the scriptures, thus obviously they would be more "vital". It doesn't say they are the "only thing important" as you falsely try to portray and lie about as to our teachings.

See how you people pervert things into something foolish and negative when the actual words are saying something else?

[_Dwight Frye]

Hey creempuff....

Is this you being butthurt over me quoting you and calling you a nutjob in my sig? If so, ROFLMAO.

The Title is "14 Fundamentals in following the PROPHET"....!!!
It doesn't say, "14 Fundamentals of determining Doctrine of the Church or Doctrines of God".

ETB's talk is itself doctrinal - that was my point. I'm tempted to think that you probably realized this, but I've overestimated you before...

"Prophets" have ALWAYS only been PART of the equation of determining Doctrine and Truths of God.
Again, I repeat..... Scriptures, Prophets, Holy Ghost, and Common Consent is how "doctrine" is determined in the Church.

That's got a good beat and you can dance to it, but that's about it, I'm afraid.

The rest of your post is you arguing with or otherwise taking the piss out of the plain meaning of the doctrinal teachings of ETB, which I certainly won't begrudge you. The man was a nutjob, after all.

Best wishes,
Mr. D. Frye

[_sock puppet]

It says the "Prophet is more vital".... It doesn't say the Prophet is alone and we are to ignore everything else.
Common Sense people.... Obviously all things of the Gospel save the Holy Ghost comes through Prophets, including the scriptures, thus obviously they would be more "vital". It doesn't say they are the "only thing important" as you falsely try to portray and lie about as to our teachings.

See how you people pervert things into something foolish and negative when the actual words are saying something else?

Common sense people ... ? Indeed, Obiwan. Try some. It beats the hell out of the myths that the COTPOTCOJCOLDS shills. Common sense is the apologists' worst friend.