[Rameumptom]

You claim to know intimately LDS doctrines and practices and have a long history of trying to pass youself off as an authority here on FR on what I believe. That you miss this point about what I consider canon and what I do not is telling. Your average Mormon teenager can tell you the difference.

Funny you should mention Paul. Most Christians consider him telling women they have to pray with their head covered as him offering his personal counsel according to the culture of the time. And at another point he specificially states he is not speaking by way of commandment (ie he is not using the usual "thus saith the Lord".)

1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

2 Corinthians 8:8 I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the bsincerity of your love.

When a prophet speaks the will of the Lord we listen. When the prophet extols whether he eats Cheerios or Wheaties for breakfast I assume he is not speaking the will of the Lord. Moses, Jonah, Nathan, Gideon and Jonah all have instances in the Bible where they do not speak the will of the Lord. (see the article for references)

Here is a quick primer on the matter...

Fair wiki - General authorities' statements as scripture

Criticism - Critics are fond of imposing their absolutist assumptions on the Church. Many critics hold inerrantist beliefs about scriptures or prophets, and assume that the LDS have similar views.

Critics therefore insist—without reason—that any statement by any LDS Church leader represents LDS doctrine, and something believed by a given member.

Response -[edit]

2.1 Prophets in the LDS tradition are not "infallible" 2.2 Standard of doctrine in the Church 2.3 Prophets and new scripture 2.4 Establishing new doctrine 2.5 Biblical standard? 2.6 Protection against error 2.7 Biblical comparison 3 Conclusion 4 Endnotes 5 Further reading

[Colofornian]

You claim to know intimately LDS doctrines and practices and have a long history of trying to pass youself off as an authority here on FR on what I believe. That you miss this point about what I consider canon and what I do not is telling. Your average Mormon teenager can tell you the difference...When a prophet speaks the will of the Lord we listen. When the prophet extols whether he eats Cheerios or Wheaties for breakfast I assume he is not speaking the will of the Lord.

OH, excuse me. I wasn't aware that after the Mormon Apostle (capital "A") originally published his initial manuscript known as "Mormon Doctrine," that all subsequent revised versions that were then "approved" by the First Presidency were re-titled, "Mormon Cheerios." (I assume the sub-title was: "And other lowly apostolic opinions and venture-guesses and top-of-the-head responses to matters pertinent to appetizing LDS cereal-eaters")

[I apologize profusely. We "non-LDS authority" types never would have guessed that "Mormon Doctrine" was tantamount import-wise to the high sober calling of cereal selection. But who would have known had it not been for your authoritative, enlightened record-straigting correction?].

(Note for non-Mormons: "First Presidency" = top three head haunchos of the church, including the living "prophet")