bcspace wrote:Drifting of course is more accurate.
Nope. He had it bassackwards.
LOL!
I guess I was taking the words literally whereas you're more of a figurative fan.
bcspace wrote:Drifting of course is more accurate.
Nope. He had it bassackwards.
Nope. He had it bassackwards.LOL!
I guess I was taking the words literally whereas you're more of a figurative fan.
The Dude wrote:When Jesus comes back to earth, he won't be too happy seeing so many crosses around this country. He might just high-tail it out of here and let the place burn.
Drifting wrote:LOL!
I guess I was taking the words literally whereas you're more of a figurative fan.
With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.
bcspace wrote:What is and is not official LDS doctrine has been long established and is summarized recently here:
http://newsroom.LDS.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine
Everything published by the Church is official doctrine. What's not published by the Church may contain doctrine but one can only be certain if the same is found in a work published by the Church. So yes, the manuals are official doctrine.
In keeping with the concept of continuing revelation/inspiration, if there is a conflict, latest date Trump's.
In addition, common sense prevails. If there is a qualification (rare but they do exist such as the preface to the Bible Dictionary) such as "this is not doctrine" or "in my opinion" etc., then the doctrine is that such is not doctrine.
Buffalo wrote:bcspace wrote:What is and is not official LDS doctrine has been long established and is summarized recently here:
http://newsroom.LDS.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine
Everything published by the Church is official doctrine. What's not published by the Church may contain doctrine but one can only be certain if the same is found in a work published by the Church. So yes, the manuals are official doctrine.
In keeping with the concept of continuing revelation/inspiration, if there is a conflict, latest date Trump's.
In addition, common sense prevails. If there is a qualification (rare but they do exist such as the preface to the Bible Dictionary) such as "this is not doctrine" or "in my opinion" etc., then the doctrine is that such is not doctrine.
You're the only mopoligist I've heard argue this position. Why do you think all your fellow mopologists are in apostasy regarding this issue?
brade wrote:Will you please quote the sentences from any official Church source you like that imply that everything published by the Church is official doctrine? Thanks. Looking forward to your answer.
With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.Bcspace - where does it say doctrine 'resides in official Church publications'?
brade wrote:
Hey, bcspace, nice to see you att it again. Will you please quote the sentences from any official Church source you like that imply that everything published by the Church is official doctrine? Thanks. Looking forward to your answer.
Because they recognize a difference between saying that X is in Y and saying that everything in Y is X.