[Elyse]

I’ve read this whole thread and I find it hard to understand why any of our Mormon posters haven’t taken the article step by step and told us what was wrong with it and what they really believed.

If someone had posted a convoluted article on the beliefs of Lutherans, I’d be taking it sentence by sentence and site scripture references and references to writings of Martin Luther and my church history to explain my church’s true beliefs.

I wouldn't want anyone to walk away from this thread not knowing the truth. But maybe that’s just me, because I’m not ashamed of my true beliefs or afraid for someone else to criticize them.

[Alex Murphy]

I’ve read this whole thread and I find it hard to understand why any of our Mormon posters haven’t taken the article step by step and told us what was wrong with it and what they really believed.

"...While certain doctrines are enunciated in the standard works and some doctrinal issues have been addressed in formal pronouncements by the First Presidency, there is nothing in Mormonism comparable to the Westminster Confession of Faith or the Augsberg Confession. Few of the truly distinctive doctrines of Mormonism are discussed in official sources. It is mainly by unofficial means -- Sunday School lessons, seminary, institute, and BYU religion classes, sacrament meeting talks and books by Church officials and others who ultimately speak only for themselves -- that the theology is passed from one generation to the next. Indeed it would seem that a significant part of Mormon theology exists primarily in the minds of the members... the absence of a formal creed means that each generation must produce a new set of gospel expositors to restate and reinterpret the doctrines of Mormonism..."

- Peter Crawley, writing in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1982

KING: You are the prophet, right?
HINCKLEY: Right.
KING: Does that mean that, according to the church canon, the Lord speaks through you?
HINCKLEY: I think he makes his will manifest, yes.
KING: So if you change things, that's done by an edict given to you.
HINCKLEY: Yes, sir.
KING: How do you receive it?
HINCKLEY: Well, various ways. It isn't necessarily a voice heard. Impressions come. [snip]
KING: And that came from something higher than you.
HINCKLEY: I think so.

"I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it."
- Mormon Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley,
Time Magazine, August 4, 1997, page 56

[fproy2222]

I’ve read this whole thread and I find it hard to understand why any of our Mormon posters haven’t taken the article step by step and told us what was wrong with it and what they really believed.

++++++++++++++++++++

Started to and was ripped a new,,was told I could not use “mormon” reference to show why the writer of the artical was wrong when he/she used “mormon” references incorrectly.

[restornu]

I did!

[Elsie]

I’ve read this whole thread and I find it hard to understand why any of our Mormon posters haven’t taken the article step by step and told us what was wrong with it and what they really believed.

Good Point!

(Good screen name as well!!)