Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evolution

[_bcspace]

Oh yeah, I forget, Mormons just have opinions not doctrine.

Nope, we have official doctrine and even the hardcore Sunstone types on the MDD have been forced to admit that.

[_bcspace]

[taps the sign] Published by the Church.

This doesn't answer the CFR.
Where does the Church say that everything published by the Church is doctrine?

Siggy.

[_Molok]

BcSpace is doing a fine job of making his religion appear to be run by the most mindless collection of cluster "F"s ever. Keep it up Spacey, you're doing God's work. LOL

[_J Green]

[taps the sign] Published by the Church.

This doesn't answer the CFR.
Where does the Church say that everything published by the Church is doctrine?

Siggy.

It doesn't say that in the siggy either.
CFR.

[_Equality]

But the IRI is another corporation owned by the Church, so logically, if IRI stamp of means doctrine, then KSL means doctrine too.

I don't think you know what "logic" means. The IRI is owned by the church, 'tis true. For a purpose entirely different from the purpose the church owns KSL. It is not the ownership of IRI, per se, that is important here--it's the purpose of the company so owned. IRI is owned by the church to hold all of the church's intellectual property, including all copyrighted publications. Whenever the church publishes anything official, it will bear the IRI copyright. And anything published with the IRI copyright has been through correlation. Show me something published by the church today that does not bear the IRI copyright. Or answer Runtu's challenge: show us something published by IRI that is not church-owned.

[_Ludd]

Only they [the prophets and apostles] can establish doctrine for the Church.

Therefore, as per Russell Nelson's general conference talk, evolution is against the doctrine of the church. And we could sit here all day and provide quotations from "the prophets and apostles" that teach against evolution and support Adam and Eve as the first humans, and a global flood of Noah, etc.

Anyone who has studied church doctrine knows that this is what the church has taught and currently teaches. Nelson's talk is just the most recent "official" statement concerning these things.

[_Runtu]

This doesn't answer the CFR.
Where does the Church say that everything published by the Church is doctrine?

It doesn't. Never has.

[_bcspace]

BcSpace is doing a fine job of making his religion appear to be run by the most mindless collection of cluster "F"s ever. Keep it up Spacey, you're doing God's work. LOL

There's a perfect little section of a Simpson's episode for this. Homer is ringing the bell of the Church he just built on a tropical island and he says something like "Hear that Lord? Homer Simpson is doing your work!"

Wish I could find a youtube clip of that so you'll have to use your imagination.

[_Ludd]

BcSpace is doing a fine job of making his religion appear to be run by the most mindless collection of cluster f***s ever. Keep it up Spacey, you're doing God's work. LOL

bcspace is an anti-Mormon. No doubt about it in my mind.

[_Darth J]

Speech by Rob Garrett at BYU-Idaho:

http://www2.byui.edu/Presentations/Tran ... arrett.htm

This talk ends with: "I am also grateful for a loving Heavenly Father. I know that I am His son. I know that He is real and lives. I know that I have a divine heritage and destiny. I know that there is glory in me that cannot be compared to the challenges I face. That glory exists in all of us because we are His Children. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen."

Copyright© 2012 BYU–Idaho

Speech by L. Tom Perry:

http://www2.byui.edu/Presentations/Tran ... _Perry.htm

This talk ends with: "This is not any other church, but the Restored Church of Jesus Christ. Of this, I testify in His holy name, even the name of Jesus Christ, amen."

Copyright© 2012 BYU–Idaho

I can't wait for bcspace to explain why there are some talks given at BYU campuses that are not owned by IRI, yet are given "in the name of Jesus Christ," but for some mysterious reason, IRI does own the "Seven Deadly Heresies" talk, yet the Church allegedly does not adopt what was said in that talk.

Who decided to have IRI claim ownership of the "Seven Deadly Heresies" talk instead of BYU owning the copyright to it?

Who in this thread wants to start a betting pool as to whether bcspace will get out of his self-referential loop?

"It's not official doctrine unless it's published by the Church, but it's IRI that said that, but merely being copyrighted by IRI doesn't make it official doctrine, but the statement about 'publication' I'm relying on was made by IRI, but....."