Meaningless -- Atheists? God?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_John Larsen
_Emeritus
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:16 pm

Post by _John Larsen »

ludwigm wrote:
truth dancer wrote:...
Again, as a believer I held to the "doctrine" that God the Father was the God of our world and had gone through similar experiences as us with a Heavenly Father of His own, and on and on and on.
But, maybe this is no longer taught? Not sure what the current belief is on this. ;-) As you know, things change.
~dancer~

In fact, I don't care if the "doctrine" changes. The "continuing revelation" would work. Or should, in a working system.
The science is working this way.
For example, the "geocentric model" worked on the necessary level. Astronomers could compute the position of planets, the date of Easter and many astronomic thing. They have true answers to "how", but have false ones to "why".
For example Paracelsus was a good physician, without computer tomography.

The problem with "doctrine" is that it doesn't exist.
There should be a script, document, site, pamphlet, anything, called "Mormon Doctrine". (Forget the McConkie's one!)
Mormon Doctrine, TODAY/NOW/2008.07.04 09:47 GMT+2.
And some comment, for example "changes from the 1977 version" or "see previous (1835) version at ...".

What we do have instead?
Smart definitions from smart apologists, like "the Doctrine can be found in The Library of Congress and in Church's vaults - but not everything is doctrine - and beware of the definition of the word 'is' ".


Exactly.
Post Reply