Primarily for TBSs: The KFD

[_Coggins7]

With some substantive portions of the KFD, including the doctrine of God having once been a mortal man, now published in an official Church religious instruction manual, what is the doctrinal status of this concept and the KFD itself?

[_Coggins7]

Sorry, that was "Primarily fro TBMs".

[_Coggins7]

Let's just call it "True Believing Saints" and leave it at that.

[_Gazelam]

I thought TBM meant "True Blue Mormon"..... anyway.....

The King Follet Discource is one of those things that shows that Joseph lived his life in crecendo. He got better and better at beign a prophet, and at wearing the mantle.

It was in that address that Joseph did what he did best, he brought heaven to earth and made the entire plan of salvation simple and easy to understand. I wish I could just pick out a single highlight, but the entire discource is an unfolding masterpiece.

God himself is an exalted man. Christ is his son who followed perfectly in his footsteps, laying down his life and taking it up again, as his Father had done. And we can do the same by following their example.

Pefect, and Biblically accurate.

[_Mercury]

How can something be true but not binding? I don't get it.

[_KimberlyAnn]

I voted, and there ain't nothin' anyone can do about it! HA!

Former TBM's know what they were taught as members, and I was always taught that the plan of Eternal Progression was doctrinal and binding and the core of LDS belief. I believed God was once a man, and that his male children had the opportunity to become a God, just like their father. The KFD was doctrinal, to me, and to most Mormons I knew, as well.

KA

[Dr. Sunstoned]

How can something be true but not binding? I don't get it.

The nature of the Church, revelation, and each individual's relation to God. As Joseph taught, we will be given light and knowledge just as fast as we are able to receive and comprehend it. There is no limit to this acquisition of knowledge through the principle of revelation relative to the capacity and worthiness of one to receives it. One may receive great revelations upon any number of subjects, even upon some of the deepest mysteries of the universe and Kingdom of God in this life. One may not, in accordance with the laws of Priesthood governance, teach them openly, unless and until the one who holds those keys on the earth at that time openly teaches them to the Saints and they become public knowledge, but one may know them for oneself.

I've long been convinced that a number of the theological "speculations", counsel, and implications embedded in doctrinal explanations that have come to the Saints over the generations involve true principles, to intimate them, even thought the full understanding of such concepts is yet future in the Church. Something can be true, yet unofficial and not binding on the general membership, and yet be official and binding, upon one who has had a doctrine or concept revealed to him by the Holy Spirit. The rule here would be: that which we know is that to which we are accountable.

The members of the Church are at many levels of spiritual maturity, milk, meat, and any number of gradations in between. But each of the Saints progresses in light, knowledge, and intelligence as quickly as he is prepared and capacitated to do so.

[_Coggins7]

I voted, and there ain't nothin' anyone can do about it! HA!

Former TBM's know what they were taught as members, and I was always taught that the plan of Eternal Progression was doctrinal and binding and the core of LDS belief. I believed God was once a man, and that his male children had the opportunity to become a God, just like their father. The KFD was doctrinal, to me, and to most Mormons I knew, as well.

KA

Excuse me but, you weren't taught that all female children of our Father could become goddesses, perfect and exalted in the same manner?

[_Mercury]

How can something be true but not binding? I don't get it.

The nature of the Church, revelation, and each individual's relation to God. As Joseph taught, we will be given light and knowledge just as fast as we are able to receive and comprehend it. There is no limit to this acquisition of knowledge through the principle of revelation relative to the capacity and worthiness of one to receives it. One may receive great revelations upon any number of subjects, even upon some of the deepest mysteries of the universe and Kingdom of God in this life. One may not, in accordance with the laws of Priesthood governance, teach them openly, unless and until the one who holds those keys on the earth at that time openly teaches them to the Saints and they become public knowledge, but one may know them for oneself.

I've long been convinced that a number of the theological "speculations", counsel, and implications embedded in doctrinal explanations that have come to the Saints over the generations involve true principles, to intimate them, even thought the full understanding of such concepts is yet future in the Church. Something can be true, yet unofficial and not binding on the general membership, and yet be official and binding, upon one who has had a doctrine or concept revealed to him by the Holy Spirit. The rule here would be: that which we know is that to which we are accountable.

The members of the Church are at many levels of spiritual maturity, milk, meat, and any number of gradations in between. But each of the Saints progresses in light, knowledge, and intelligence as quickly as he is prepared and capacitated to do so.

Sorry but as soon as you said the church you lost me. See, this is the thing coggins, you put the church over logical methods of determining what is accurate.

Until you learn how to properly view reality I am sorry to say that your outlook will be severely limited and confusing.

[_moksha]

Que es la KFD?