Further confusion? Encyclopedia of Mormonism on LDS.ORG

[Guest]

LDS Inc announced the Encyclopedia of Mormonism on their website,

The Encyclopedia of Mormonism, now available online in searchable text format, can be an excellent source of information on a wide variety of subjects dealing with the beliefs, teachings, and practices of the Church.

BUT then they added a disclaimer:

(Note: This encyclopedia is a joint product of Brigham Young University and Macmillan Publishing Company and does not necessarily represent the official position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.)

WTF? Ferchristsakes, they announce the Encyclopedia of Mormonism on their website, which in most ventures would indicate an official endorsement of support, but then they say it is not the Encyclopedia of Mormonism?

I guess we know where Mitt got is flip-floppedniss from...

Perhaps it was due to entries like the following that contradict their recent PR attempts to make the FLDS seem as different from them as Buddhism:

http://eom.BYU.edu/index.php/"Fundamentalists"

[_Boaz & Lidia]

Ouch and this one that contradicts the nay sayers from Farms/Fair and MA&D concerning Smith not having sex with his brides:

The main article on this subject is Plural Marriage. Under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith, some members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints began to practice plural marriage, also referred to as "celestial marriage." This was viewed as a divine commandment to "raise up seed unto" God (Jacob 2:30)

This article also links clean sounding celestial marriage to the ugly POLYGAMOUS marriage.

[_truth dancer]

It is really funny to me that the church thinks "celestial marriage" or "plural marriage" sounds better than polygamy.

Maybe it does to some but to me, polygamy brings up images of ancient archaic practices embraced by the wealthy powerful males during Old Testament times, while "plural marriage" reminds me of the FLDS weirdness.

Knowing that more primitive people engaged in the domination and degradation of women is a lot less problematic than viewing modern day people who believe GOD is commanding grown married men to screw girls and women.

I just think it is weird that the LDS church thinks "plural marriage" sounds nice. It is revolting term to me.

~dancer~

[_Jersey Girl]

When does anything represent the official position of the LDS Church? Sheesh. This disclaimer is bandied around so frequently, I doubt that even LDS know what the official position of their church is on most things.

You can line up 10 Mormons ask them the same question regarding doctrine and get 10 different answers.

[_Jersey Girl]

Ouch and this one that contradicts the nay sayers from Farms/Fair and MA&D concerning Smith not having sex with his brides:

The main article on this subject is Plural Marriage. Under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith, some members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints began to practice plural marriage, also referred to as "celestial marriage." This was viewed as a divine commandment to "raise up seed unto" God (Jacob 2:30)

This article also links clean sounding celestial marriage to the ugly POLYGAMOUS marriage.

Plural marriage, Celestial marriage....these are glorified names for adultery.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Jersey Girl...

EXACTLY!

There really is no official doctrine, no official answers, no official statements.

Pretty much everything today is opinion.

Members can believe what they want so long as they don't say anything not in line with the current leaders; once a leader passes on you can disregard their teachings and opinion.

There is nothing official written down, no one to answer questions, no place to go for answers. No one in the church seems to have answers (with the exception of various apologists who all THINK they know but who disagree with each other).

:-(

It made me dizzy until I realized there is no official doctrine, and "doctrine" means nothing more than what is currently taught.

~dancer~

[_Inconceivable]

There really is no official doctrine, no official answers, no official statements.

~dancer~

What strikes me as odd is that when I was a nazi Mormon, there was doctrine - whether the it was accepted by the membership or not. They could take it or leave it:

Pine box doctrine
Lamanites are certainly the ancestors of the North/South American Indian, the Isles of the sea.
The New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, Plural, celestial marriage, Polygamy (Mormon adultery)
Mormon adultery was commanded to increase seed production
Book of Abraham a "translated" book
Joseph never drank alcohol
My new name was unique and inspired
I would "suffer my life to be taken" if I divulged my tokens
Children are to come "naturally"
Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book about a real people
We must become as a child (not an apologist)
The Ensun is scripture
Conference talks are scripture
No shopping or recreating on Sunday
We must be truthful

Did all of this "doctrine" vanish? If you log off and ask the average Mormon, don't they still consider most of this (if not all) doctrine?

[_bcspace]

BUT then they added a disclaimer:

The same web site includes an official statement by the Church on what is and is not doctrine. See my siggy.

There really is no official doctrine, no official answers, no official statements.

Only in your mind.

[_ludwigm]

BUT then they added a disclaimer:

The same web site includes an official statement by the Church on what is and is not doctrine. See my siggy.

There really is no official doctrine, no official answers, no official statements.

Only in your mind.

That website doesn't say a word about what is doctrine.
It says, where to found parts of it.

People must read thousands of pages then fast then pray to HG and they may have some fancy about something looks like doctrine.
(by the way, that website - and every apologist - can talk about many things which are not doctrine.)


The DOCTRINE were as follows:

---------------------------------------------------------
The Doctrine of The Church ... etc:
1. First item (for example the attributes of God)
2. Next item (for example the attributes of Jesus)
3. Third item (for example the attributes of the satan who seems to be a VIP in Mormonism)
4.
....
N. Last item (less important thing)
Disclaimer:
- other said or written statements are not part of the doctrine
- this list is valid from <date> to <another date> or until recalled.
----------------------------------------------------------

Please show me anything look like this list (numbering is not necessary).

Printed paper? Web page? Oral declaration? Anything?

[_beastie]

Only in your mind.

Also in the minds of lots of believers, like Nehor:

neworder:

I finally just came to the conclusion that NOTHING is doctrine in the LDS Church.

Nehor:

Took you long enough. Now you can begin to understand our Faith if you'd just get the Holy Ghost in there.

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... t=doctrine

And in the minds of respected apologists:
http://pacumenispages.yuku.com/topic/8935?page=9