Should We Stop Addressing Old Teachings and Non-Official Beliefs? (MORMON

Perhaps the most honest and appropriate page on the entire lds.org domain is http://www.lds.org/official-doctrine. As of October 2, 2009, it reads, "The requested object does not exist on this server. The link you followed is either outdated, inaccurate, or the server has been instructed not to let you have it." The irony is rich."

On a personal level, I get the impression that committed Mormons oftentimes want at some level for their religion to be misunderstood, for it to remain esoteric and elusive. It is as though direct light on the shadowy religion would kill the precious shadow itself, hence it must be protected from the light of illumination. There is power seen in ambiguity, strength in ambivalence, solidarity in equivocation. The lifeline task of engaging Mormonism is tremendously frustrating. Over time, the metaphor of nailing green Jello to the wall starts to make increasing sense.

Christians who attempt to engage in meaningful dialog with their Mormon friends are often frustrated by the way teachings and beliefs can be obfuscated and downplayed. When a question is posed by a Christian they are many times told that a particular teaching “is not official.” Behind this are the assumptions that Mormonism is immune to any fatal criticism if it involves anything outside the scope of officiality, and that evangelical engagement should be limited to that which is binding upon Mormon members.

One problem with this is that the Mormon Church has no binding and official position on what constitutes a binding and official position. Mormon leaders and thinkers have proposed a variety of approaches to defining what constitutes official doctrine, not one being settled upon. Multiple things must be taken into account. First, and most important, Mormons have been taught that they enjoy a continual stream of prophetic counsel and revelation, and that their leaders will never lead them astray. They have also been taught that “The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,” 1980). A sense has been fostered that the living leadership is for members a more direct line to God than ancient scripture. But Mormonism also attempts to esteem its scriptures and ensure some stability. When leaders have gone especially awry, subsequent generations of leaders have downplayed prior teachings by appealing to the boundaries of scriptures (that the previous leaders failed to stay within). In short, Mormonism teeters between maximalism and minimalism, expansion and reduction.

In my study I have so far identified three general Mormon approaches to the standard of officiality:

sola scriptura – The Standard Works are the final and alone binding source of authority. If it is not in scripture, or if it is not inferred by scripture, it is not doctrinal and it is not binding.

prima scriptura – Scripture is the highest, most final binding source of authority, but it is not the only source of that which is binding and doctrinal. Other sources, such as current church leadership (considered lesser because they are compared with scripture and discarded if in contradiction with scripture) are also binding.

prima ecclesia – Modern church leadership is the highest, most final binding source of authority and doctrine, and may override other sources of authority and doctrine, like scripture, if there is contradiction. This is rarely done by direct repudiation and instead is done by re-interpreting, making obsolete, or questioning the preservation of a particular text. When addressing the question of whether living leaders trump scripture, or vice versa, BYU professor Robert Millet admits with refreshing honesty:

“I think most Latter-day Saints would be prone to answer this by pointing out the value and significance of living oracles, or continuing revelation, or ongoing divine direction through modern apostles and prophets, and thus to conclude that living prophets take precedence over canonized scripture” (Claiming Christ, p.31).

Rather than endorsing this mainstream approach, Millet goes on in the book to promote an approach much like prima scriptura.

There are nuances and ambiguities to the above three models, but you get the basic idea. My contention is that Mormonism oscillates between varying models to keep alive the theme of the “continuing revelation” as well as enforce some regulatory sanity.

BYU professors who promote the need for modern prophets to understand ancient prophets often violate their own stated principles in their interpretation of the watershed passage 2 Nephi 25:23 (“…for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do”). They obstinately reject the usage and interpretation from General Conference and modern church publications, preferring instead their own personal interpretations. Minimalists like Millet say that we need modern leaders to understand ancient scripture, but seem to only selectively apply the principle.

1. We care about what the Mormon mainstream people and individual persons actually believe. When they believe something the institution doesn't strictly, officially bless (according to some particular model of doctrine and authority), it still matters with regard to the spiritual condition of their individual heart.

2. The institution, regardless of the lack of formal approval, still ought to bear responsibility for acquiescing to unrepudiated longstanding beliefs that were initiated or at least fostered by Mormon leadership or by the implications of the traditional Mormon worldview.

3. Regardless of whether a particular Mormon individual agrees or doesn't agree with important teachings that have been recently been promoted from institutional Mormon channels of influence, that Mormon's spiritual heart condition is also related to his or her willingness to be a part of such an institution that tolerates and/or teaches such things.

4. Regardless of how old a particular Mormon teaching is, it can still have bearing on whether a person today should choose to become or remain Mormon. There are plenty of old teachings that have been abandoned by Mormonism that still call into question the reliability and integrity of the historic succession of alleged prophets and apostles. Remember, it only takes one false prophecy or one public heresy about the nature of God—especially one not repented over—to make a prophet false.

A Mormon once asked, "If there is no official position in the LDS faith [on a given matter], why do you care if LDS members believe one way or another?"

The answer is that God and individual people matter more than the LDS Church. Organizations and religions only matter because of how they relate to and impact people. And people matter because God matters.

Do you really think Paul wouldn't have written Galatians if the Official Church of the Judaizers didn't have an official position on whether Christians are required to get circumcised and live up to the demands of the Law? Do you really think Jesus wouldn't have rebuked the Pharisees if the Official Pharisee Association didn't have an official position on whether it was proper to heal on the Sabbath? Do you really think Jesus wouldn't have wept over Jerusalem if the Official Jerusalem City Council didn't have an formalized official position on whether its citizens should reject Jesus as the messiah?

To obscure real problems within any religion by appealing to abstract notions of what is and what is not "official" would be cruel, because it would overlook individuals affected---individuals that Jesus loves.

•"If the general authorities do not teach something today, it is not part of our doctrine today. That does not, however, mean that a particular teaching is untrue. A teaching may be true and yet not a part of what is taught and emphasized by the Church today. In fact, if the Brethren do not teach it today, if it is not taught directly in the standard works, or if it is not found in our correlated curriculum, whether it is true or not may actually be irrevelant." - Robert Millet, Getting at the Truth, p. 66

•"Evangelicals are more likely to encounter a Mormon than Mormon Doctrine™." - Tim McMahan

•“Though the prophet may step out of his official role in dealing with the daily affairs of life, he can never divest himself of the spirit and influence which belong to the sacred office which the Lord has placed on him…he lives under inspired guidance, which makes him great among men, and therefore, his unofficial expressions carry greater weight than the opinions of other men of equal or greater gifts and experience without the power of the prophetic office. It would be wisdom on all occasions and with respect to all subjects in any field of human activity, to hearken to the prophet’s voice” (John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, p.237. Ellipses mine. See also Teachings of the Living Prophets, 1982, p.22).

•“Every member of the Church, and all men for that matter, would do well to give heed, and indeed should do so, to any public utterance or to the unofficial counsel of the man who has been called to the office of prophet. One cannot limit him by saying that on some subjects pertaining to human welfare he may not speak. The spiritual and the temporal have ever been blended in the Church of Christ. Obedience to the counsels of the prophet brings individual and collective power and joy. Of all men, the prophet of the Lord should, at all times, have most influence with the Latter-day Saints. No other cause can be greater than that of the Church of Christ” (John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, p.238).

•“Besides this we have our living prophet, for whom I am grateful, and I hope to follow after him all the days of my life. I know that when I don't follow him I am wrong, and I know that when I do I am right, even if I don't agree with him. To those who only follow him when they do agree with him he is not a prophet unto them” (Richard L. Evans, Conference Reports, October 1940, p.61).

From the article: Perhaps the most honest and appropriate page on the entire lds.org domain is http://www.lds.org/official-doctrine. As of October 2, 2009, it reads, "The requested object does not exist on this server. The link you followed is either outdated, inaccurate, or the server has been instructed not to let you have it." The irony is rich.".

From the article: Remember, it only takes one false prophecy or one public heresy about the nature of God—especially one not repented over—to make a prophet false.

From the article: I get the impression that committed Mormons oftentimes want at some level for their religion to be misunderstood, for it to remain esoteric and elusive. It is as though direct light on the shadowy religion would kill the precious shadow itself, hence it must be protected from the light of illumination. There is power seen in ambiguity, strength in ambivalence, solidarity in equivocation. The lifeline task of engaging Mormonism is tremendously frustrating. Over time, the metaphor of nailing green Jello to the wall starts to make increasing sense.

Ah yes. How appropriately Utah...nailing green jello to the wall! Ah...one of the reasons for the timing of this post...the mention of Utah's infamous/famous green jello...which Mormons often love to serve with carrots!

And so we have the nominees for the top "Green Jello" mentions on the FREEPER Lds threads for 2010.

Other nominees include:
* Birth of a Mormon Tradition: Jello!
* Green Jello and Matzah Balls

Seekers of truth,

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There's an anti-Mormon group of people here that spends a great deal of their time attacking the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They post regurgitated propaganda on an almost daily basis.

They have a misguided obsession. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. The straw man argument is a big favorite and is frequently preceded by cherry-picking quotes or other material. After the "quotation" the attacker will misrepresent what has been said or what was meant and then attack their own interpretation.Later they will have the audacity to claim they were "only" quoting our own material.

They will of course insist ad nauseum that they are merely using our sources and are therefore innocent of any deceptive practice. LDS persons have no issue whatsoever having our scriptures or leaders quoted as long as it is presented fairly and accurately. This is rarely (if ever) done.

Another favorite is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma. They make something out of nothing while never bringing up a single objection that hasn't been addressed a hundred times before.

You might note a couple of other tactics used to try to antagonize is the use of disrespectful or insulting terms or language and/or pictures. That's a Christlike thing to do right? Yeah I don't think so either. It does speak volumes about them though.

Some of them claim being some sort of special witness to you as being supposedly former Mormons. So someone who is an ex-member of any organization would never have an axe to grind or have reason to try to justify their actions by any means? Perhaps not but perhaps so. The LDS Church gains members from other denominations as well as others faiths all the time. This doesn't make them an expert on anything and you certainly won't hear them attacking their forner Church.

Frequently they cruise the headlines of the day seeking any story that might be twisted into making the Church look bad. Anything will do, just watch the progression of posts following it and see what I mean.

After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever "issue" they seem to be "revealing" or "exposing". I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the "ahah" moments you will have will be many and frequent. You will start to recognize the tactics employed to cleverly twist and attack and will likely chuckle the more you see. In actuality, there's nothing new here. It's all been addressed many times before.

The latest twist in the anti-Mormon propaganda machine is to actually go to the links provided, but then they cherry pick what they want, then quote and straw man attack that. Clever. It almost appears that they are helping you, the seeker of truth out by doing some footwork for you. Not so much. Don't be insulted, look for yourself. It's not the haystack they want you to think.

Here's a few links to get your started from a different viewpoint. I have found that the vast majority of the "issues" brought up can be found and addressed at http://www.fairlds.org/ but here's more:

http://scriptures.lds.org/
http://www.lds.org
http://www.fairlds.org/
http://www.mormonapologetics.org/
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Main_Page
http://www.lightplanet.com/response/index.html
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml
http://www.answeringantimormons.com/index.htm
http://promormon.blogspot.com/

Now you will likely notice the "you never address or answer our points" posts pop up as usual. All after providing the answers just as you have here.

Sometimes it is claimed that these sites present a needle in a haystack. Far from it. But if you give up before you try you won't know will you? They often state that these sites provide no answer. They just don't want you looking. It is as simple as that.

Will you wear blinders too? Seek truth. Find out for yourself. Want to chat with someone on any topic? A few of these sites provide just that. So do your homework sincere seeker of truth. Listen and read from both "sides". Make up your own mind.

I witness to you of these truths and wish you the best, in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.

SEEKERS OF TRUTH

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There’s a mormon poster here that spends a great deal of his time posting . He posts regurgitated propaganda on an almost daily basis.

These multiple spam messages do not address the many examples of mormon doctrine that are posted directly from mormon scriptures and the statements of mormon leaders.

This must lead you to realize that there is NO legitimate method for FR mormons to address the words of their scriptures and leaders in an attempt to paint the mormon religion as Christian. In fact, statements from mormon doctrine and leaders can ONLY show that these doctrines and leaders were RABIDLY ANTI-CHRISTIAN, from the founder Joseph Smith down through more than 180 years.

Mormonism is attempting to co-opt the Christian message and twist it to include this anti-Christian doctrine so that the world will accept the demand of the mormon church that it be included in the Christian community.

Don't fall for the lies. Your eternal soul is at risk.

To those who question the designation of mormonism as a cult, how many sects that claim to be "Christian" would have a nativity scene in their huge church-owned university with their cult leader as a baby featured in the manger instead of the baby Jesus?

Are you willing to do for the truth what the cults do for a lie? If you REALLY want to know about mormonism..click here

Deeper Mormon Letters...

Dear Mr. Paragon Defender,

Thank you for the opportunity to learn much more
about Mormonisms. It seems to be a very tricky
religion and often confusing to me.

On the FreeRepublics, I see lots of things posted
directly from the Mormonisms website. But then I
read posts from Mormons that say those things are
propaganda. How can that be? Does Mormonisms put
out propaganda about itself? This doesn’t seem
to make sense. Can you explain this? Is this to keep
the publics from understanding the real secrets of
Mormonisms?

Also, I am confused about how a person could
possibly become a god. I would very, very much like
to become a god. I would like to have powers
and have worshippers. Is there anything in writing
or do you have an interwebs links that would tell
me how I can become a god? I have cash for the
tithes. Is there a minimum tithes? [this may not
matter, but I am Canadian and our Loonie is worth
more than your US Dollar right now. It seems I
will have to do a conversion of Loonies to join
your group and I should probably get a discount
because of exchanging the Loonies]

Other than the New Age Movement (I saw Shirley
McClain on TV), I can’t find any other religion
that can tell me how to become a god. When I first
heard that Mormonisms can tell me how to become
a god, I leaped with excitement. Where is the link
I can follow to get the godhoods?

Also, if this is not one of the deeper-member-secrets
of Mormonisms, can you tell me about “celestial s&x”.

I’ve read once I become a Mormonisms god, I will have
a Mormonisms goddess wife - or even LOTS of Mormonisms
goddesses - for, well, you know. Anyway, if you could
show me a link that gives some details, I would like
to read about that too! For sure! The links you give in
your posts do not cover becoming a Mormonisms god or
the other thing. I’m not sure why?

Thank you for posting this thread for us who are
interested in Mormonisms to learn the very
real stuff that is pretty much held secret from the
publics.

I am excited to learn the deeper mormon secrets!

Very thankfully,

A More Perfect Unions

PS - Mr. PD, I had a very traumatic experience in 4th grade
of falling off a bicycle and hitting myself where it hurts.
Please tell me I do not have to ride a bicycle again, if I
become a Mormonisms.

Really? Besides posting this drivel of yours, sending folks to NON-official sites, what is your purpose?

My assessment of those sites is as follows. They can’t “address” the “issues” PD, they don’t speak for your deceitful church. Only the church has the authority to speak on matters of doctrine PD.

Therefore, it’s only their opinion. I wonder what parts of official mormon doctrine they’ve misrepresented? I wonder what parts are only their opinion?

You persistently allege (falsely I might add), that we do so, yet you haven’t proven any of your slanderous remarks. So what’s the difference then PD? What spin or lie is going to answer that question? Who is taking things out of context now?

Mormonism is deceitful, nothing new here either. The faux persecution complex notwithstanding.

Praise the Lord I am free of the lies of satan. I am no longer a mormon.

A Christmas Eve Mormon bashing eh? /eyeroll

Not a "bash" -- but a "mash" -- as in...
..."We did the Mormon Mash..."
...It was a baptism-for-the-dead graveyard smash...
...The thread caught on in a flash...
...We did the Mash...
...We did the Mormon Mash...

Why the Halloween connection on Christmas Eve?

Why, that's simple.

Here we have an article mentioning green jello, Utah's fave, and old teachings and non-official beliefs...ya know kind of like of visiting with the GHOST of Christmas Past, eh PD?

So I was just warnin' ya, PD, that if you hear some stirring overnight up on the roof...
...It might not be Santa...
...It could be that Ghost of Christmas Past...
...Revisiting with you to discuss...
...That bit of "undigested beef" otherwise known as...

...Brigham Young's Adam-is-God 20-year+ teaching...
...Or, Brigham Young's ya gotta atone-for-your-own-sins-with-your-own-blood teaching...
...Or, Joseph Smith's multiple-partner-celestial-polygamy teaching...
...Or, the United Order communist-socialist Lds practice in late 19th century Utah...
...Or, Mayor Joseph Smith ordering the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor by about 200 mobocrats...
...Or the Mormon handcart tragedy...
...Or Mountain Meadows Massacre's victims coming back to haunt Southern Utah Mormons...
...Etc...

I hear tell this ghost's tour is pretty extensive.

And, oh. You don't want to even meet the Ghost of Christmas Future!

My local and VERY LIBERAL newspaper ran a front page fluff piece on the LDS “church” yesterday.

They must feel a new kinship after Senator Harry Reid’s work to destroy the US military with the DADT repeal.

I wasn’t surprised in the least to get the same non-responses from the locals in the comment section. Same pattern, ignore the question and “answer the question they should have asked”, fail to check out referenced quotes for themselves, then finally attack the messenger and accuse him/her of HATE.

Their leaders steal a lifetime of 10%+ and 30-50 hours a week based on lies, and when we try to expose them and help them out of the cult they accuse US of hate.

Pathetic really.

Merry Christmas Freepers, even the mormons...Unless you’re here to support Romney or Reid, then as far as I’m concerned you can stuff it.

In spite of what FLDS/LDS “Prophet” Brighan Young remember that Christ was born of a Virgin, lived a sinless life, and died and rose again to save us all.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.