Was or was not BRM's "Mormon Doctrine" just that?

[_Infymus]

However, what you say Infymus, anybody who had any kind of knowledge of general authority publications would have instantly seen the significance of a Bookcraft publication. Not official, and possibly questionable.

When MD was handed to me by the Stake President and Bishop, there was no disclaimer, there never was. Not in the entire time I was a member teaching from it did one single solitary person tell me otherwise. But lo and behold, here we are in Shady Acres, and to excuse the racist, homophobic and otherwise atrocious teachings of BRM - and to protect the current "brethren", you and your ilk apologists excuse away years of incorrect teachings and doctrinal "accpetances" on the pretense that it was published by a bookstore other than the Lord's bookstore.

Blow it out your ass Yahoo, you smug creature of Mormonism. How does it smell when you kiss the ass of your Prophet?

[_Jason Bourne]

However, what you say Infymus, anybody who had any kind of knowledge of general authority publications would have instantly seen the significance of a Bookcraft publication. Not official, and possibly questionable. Some of my more favorite questionable books were those published for Hyrum Andrus. MY least favorite are those published by Cleon Skousen. Since Andrus was excommunicated for his views, I think that says it all.

Let's see, I was about 14 when I first picked up Mormon Doctrine. I was supposed to understand that Bookcraft meant something less than best? How many members knew about this ever really? Come on bot. This is pretty lame.

[_sock puppet]

Well, let's apply the bcspace test for doctrine.

From 1958 to 1999, MD was published by Bookcraft, then a publishing company owned and operated separate from the LDS Church. In 1999, however, Bookcraft was acquired by Deseret Management Company, the parent company of the LDS Church's for-profit businesses.

MD then became a publication of the LDS Church, via Deseret Management Corporation, until MD's publication was discontinued eleven years later, in 2010.

So it appears that MD was published by the LDS Church. Did it then and thereby become LDS doctrine?

[_Yahoo Bot]

Well, let's apply the bcspace test for doctrine.

From 1958 to 1999, MD was published by Bookcraft, then a publishing company owned and operated separate from the LDS Church. In 1999, however, Bookcraft was acquired by Deseret Management Company, the parent company of the LDS Church's for-profit businesses.

MD then became a publication of the LDS Church, via Deseret Management Corporation, until MD's publication was discontinued eleven years later, in 2010.

So it appears that MD was published by the LDS Church. Did it then and thereby become LDS doctrine?

I would hope so. I'm a big believer in it.

[_Yahoo Bot]

Let's see, I was about 14 when I first picked up Mormon Doctrine. I was supposed to understand that Bookcraft meant something less than best? How many members knew about this ever really? Come on bot. This is pretty lame.

Yet another ill-read naïve critic.

And anonymous to boot. How courageous.

[_sock puppet]

Let's see, I was about 14 when I first picked up Mormon Doctrine. I was supposed to understand that Bookcraft meant something less than best? How many members knew about this ever really? Come on bot. This is pretty lame.

Yet another ill-read naïve critic.

And anonymous to boot. How courageous.

Actually I think you are complaining that 14 year old active Mormons that, circa 1972, didn't realize that Bookcraft was not as official a publisher as Deseret Book for the Mormon Church were "ill-read" and "naïve".

You've been a bishop, have you not, Bot? How many of the active 14 year olds in your ward would have been "ill-read" and "naïve" by that standard? All of them?

[_Nightlion]

However, what you say Infymus, anybody who had any kind of knowledge of general authority publications would have instantly seen the significance of a Bookcraft publication. Not official, and possibly questionable. Some of my more favorite questionable books were those published for Hyrum Andrus. MY least favorite are those published by Cleon Skousen. Since Andrus was excommunicated for his views, I think that says it all.

When, where, by whom, and what came of it. Unbelievable. Please, I would really like to know.

[_Yahoo Bot]

However, what you say Infymus, anybody who had any kind of knowledge of general authority publications would have instantly seen the significance of a Bookcraft publication. Not official, and possibly questionable. Some of my more favorite questionable books were those published for Hyrum Andrus. MY least favorite are those published by Cleon Skousen. Since Andrus was excommunicated for his views, I think that says it all.

When, where, by whom, and what came of it. Unbelievable. Please, I would really like to know.

I err. I meant Max Skousen.

[_Nightlion]

Since Andrus was excommunicated for his views, I think that says it all.

When, where, by whom, and what came of it. Unbelievable. Please, I would really like to know.

I err. I meant Max Skousen.

Google comes up with hits that say that Hyrum was excommunicated. But I cannot find the story.

[_Willy Law]

I would hope so. I'm a big believer in it.

Well at least we now know how you feel about those pesky "negroes" getting the priesthood.

"Those who were less less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed upon them during mortality are known to us as the negroes....Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty."
Mormon Doctrine Page 527