Page 1 of 1
The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication"
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:10 pm
by _Buffalo
Here it is. bcspace's private doctrine of "official doctrine by official publication" has been officially repudiated by the Church.
http://www.LDS.org/general-conference/2 ... t?lang=engAt the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.”5 President Clark, quoted earlier, observed:
“To this point runs a simple story my father told me as a boy, I do not know on what authority, but it illustrates the point. His story was that during the excitement incident to the coming of [Johnston’s] Army, Brother Brigham preached to the people in a morning meeting a sermon vibrant with defiance to the approaching army, and declaring an intention to oppose and drive them back. In the afternoon meeting he arose and said that Brigham Young had been talking in the morning, but the Lord was going to talk now. He then delivered an address, the tempo of which was the opposite from the morning talk. …
“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”6
Doctrine is whatever the Holy Ghost tells you is doctrine. It doesn't matter where it was delivered or published. It's right if it feels right.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:15 pm
by _Tobin
Buffalo wrote:Doctrine is whatever the Holy Ghost tells you is doctrine. It doesn't matter where it was delivered or published. It's right if it feels right.
Feelings have nothing to do with it (and shouldn't be trusted). The doctrine of God is true because it makes sense, is reasonable, is supportable, is consistent with other statements from God, and God tells you it is correct.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:18 pm
by _Buffalo
Tobin wrote:Feelings have nothing to do with it (and shouldn't be trusted). The doctrine of God is true because it makes sense, is reasonable, is supportable, is consistent with other statements from God,
In Mormonspeak, feelings = the Holy Ghost. But if we're bringing logic and consistency into it, then none of the doctrine can be true.
Tobin wrote:and God tells you it is correct.
Not everyone has taken sufficient hallucinogens to start having visions without the need for additional doses.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:22 pm
by _Fifth Columnist
Buff, the talk you cite isn't doctrine. Since it is a singular statement by one church authority, it does not overrule the almighty newsroom.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:23 pm
by _DarkHelmet
Buffalo wrote:
“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”6
This is the real key to doctrine - time. Prophets and apostles say crap over the pulpit all the time. Only after the passage of time do we know whether or not it was doctrine. After 30 or 40 years it is easy to know because the embarassing and wrong stuff was obviously not doctrine, and the stuff that ended up being right was doctrine. It's a doctrinal circle. It is doctrine because it is true, and it is true because it is doctrine. This can only be determined decades after the prophet or apostle speaks.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:26 pm
by _Drifting
Tobin wrote:Buffalo wrote:Doctrine is whatever the Holy Ghost tells you is doctrine. It doesn't matter where it was delivered or published. It's right if it feels right.
Feelings have nothing to do with it (and shouldn't be trusted). The doctrine of God is true because it makes sense, is reasonable, is supportable, is consistent with other statements from God, and God tells you it is correct.
How does the doctrine of Blacks not having the Priesthood:
A. Make sense?
B. Seem reasonable?
3. Have support?
IV. Have other consistent statements from God?
Lastly. How, exactly, did God tell you it was correct:
1. Voices in your head?
2. Feelings in your insides?
C. In person?
D. Via the telephone?
Last. Via some other bloke claiming god spoke to him?
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:33 pm
by _Buffalo
DarkHelmet wrote:
This is the real key to doctrine - time. Prophets and apostles say crap over the pulpit all the time. Only after the passage of time do we know whether or not it was doctrine. After 30 or 40 years it is easy to know because the embarassing and wrong stuff was obviously not doctrine, and the stuff that ended up being right was doctrine. It's a doctrinal circle. It is doctrine because it is true, and it is true because it is doctrine. This can only be determined decades after the prophet or apostle speaks.
I think this is an excellent observation. Or summarizing it even further, the key to understanding Mormon doctrine lies in the principle of
post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:28 am
by _ludwigm
Follow the brethren, they will never lead you astray.
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:47 am
by _Drifting
bcspace, I am sorry for your loss, please accept my condolences...
Re: The Death of bcspace's "official doctrine by publication
Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:11 am
by _Spurven Ten Sing
On more time.....
DOCTRINE IS IRRELEVANT!!
If a person claiming that god talks to him and he says something that god told him to say and that thing is crazy or proven wrong, how is asserting his claim lacks a "doctrinal" smell change the fact that the prophet lied?
The prophet claimed god told him blacks can't have the priesthood because Negroes were less valiant. Whether this claim is then published or taught has NOTHING to do with whether the prophet claimed that god told him that blacks can't have the priesthood because Negroes were less valiant.