the road to hana wrote: I'd put my knowledge and experience of Mormonism up against yours any day. Any day.
Such claims only persuade an idiot. Why don't you just let your posts speak for themselves instead of resort to personal insult?
KFD is not Church doctrine, although it continues to be published at times in lesson manuals.
Did I not say as much?
Yes, but then you made the idiotic claim about being king of the world. You and Scratch ought to get together and tell each other that, to fuel your self-confidence. I see those claims, I think "fool."
So here we have Coggins that says what was taught in the KFD is LDS Doctrine and states that this position is bolstered by its use in the current preisthood manual. ANd here we have Crockett who says it is not doctrine even though it is used in LDS manuals.
Anyone confused?
But I agree with Coggins on this one. Through its frequent use in LDS manuals, sermons by GAs, and so on it is LDS doctrine and is as much LDS doctrine as anything else. That there are nuances about it as can be seen by some of Blake Ostler's arguments about the Father having a father is true. But it core of it all, God was once a man and we can be Gods, is most certainly LDS Doctrine.
Jason Bourne wrote:So here we have Coggins that says what was taught in the KFD is LDS Doctrine and states that this position is bolstered by its use in the current preisthood manual. ANd here we have Crockett who says it is not doctrine even though it is used in LDS manuals.
Anyone confused?
But I agree with Coggins on this one. Through its frequent use in LDS manuals, sermons by GAs, and so on it is LDS doctrine and is as much LDS doctrine as anything else. That there are nuances about it as can be seen by some of Blake Ostler's arguments about the Father having a father is true. But it core of it all, God was once a man and we can be Gods, is most certainly LDS Doctrine.
Not only that, we got a "yes" out of Bob and a "no" out of Loran to my question.
Foolish anonymous posters unite!
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
Jason Bourne wrote:So here we have Coggins that says what was taught in the KFD is LDS Doctrine and states that this position is bolstered by its use in the current preisthood manual. ANd here we have Crockett who says it is not doctrine even though it is used in LDS manuals.
Anyone confused?
Yep! Until Mormons can agree on how to determine what is official doctrine, they will never agree on what is official doctrine.
does this make any sense: he is all over the place. and that's from someone as scattered as I:
"I shall comment on the very first Hebrew word in the Bible, Berosheit. I want to analyze the word; baith--in, by, through, and everything else. Rosh--the head. Sheit--grammatical termination. When the inspired man wrote it, he did not put the baith there. A man, a Jew without any authority, thought it too bad to begin to talk about the head. It read first, "The head one of the Gods brought forth the Gods"; that is the true meaning of the words. Baurau signifies to bring forth. If you do not believe it, you do not believe the learned man of God. No man can teach you more than what I have told you. Thus the head God brought forth the Gods in the grand council. I will simplify it in the English language. Oh, ye lawyers and ye doctors who have persecuted me, I want to let you know that the Holy Ghost knows something as well as you do. The head God called together the Gods, and they sat in grand council. The grand councilors sat in yonder heavens and contemplated the creation of the worlds that were created at that time. When I say doctors and lawyers, I mean the doctors and lawyers of the scripture. I have done so hitherto to let the lawyers flutter and everybody laugh at them. Some learned doctor might take a notion to say, "The scriptures say thus and so and are not to be altered." But I am going to show you an error. I have an old book of the New Testament in the Hebrew, Latin, German, and Greek. I have been reading the German and find it to be the most [nearly] correct, and to correspond nearest to the revelations I have given for the last fourteen years. It tells about Jachobod the son of Zebedee. It means Jacob. In the English New Testament it is translated James. Now if Jacob had the keys, you might talk about James through all eternity and never get the keys. In the 21st verse of the fourth chapter of Matthew, the German edition gives the word Jacob instead of James. How can we escape the damnation of hell except God reveal to us? Men bind us with chains. Latin says Jachobod means Jacob; Hebrew says it means Jacob; Greek says Jacob; German says Jacob. I thank God I have got this book, and I thank him more for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I have the oldest book in the world, but I have the oldest book in my heart. I have all the four testaments. Come here, ye learned men, and read if you can. I should not have introduced this testimony were it not to back up the word Rosh, the head, Father of the Gods. I should not have brought it up except to show that I am right. "