I'm inclined to agree with this statement. :)
According to modern Christianity, a Christian is not only a follower of Christ, but someone who has a personal relationship with Christ. As far as I know, the LDS Church has this:
Mormon.org - Exhibit
It would have been better if that question was rhetorical as madhatter had suggested.
No WAY am I going to mention my home, my friends, or my LDS mentors on the INTERNET. I don't know who reads this, and I don't, nor have I ever trusted YOU.
THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY THAT I WILL REVEAL MY CITY...
It's personal belief. I never said it was official doctrine. On the contrary, if you look at my statement, I said it was UNOFFICIAL doctrine.
Wow! That's sad that he was excommunicated over a personal belief.
HAHAHA! This is the Internet. I don't know who you are, and you don't know who I...
I wish you would've said something to me about it. I just changed it. I never meant to barge in here trying to offend someone. That's just another name for Mormon Fundamentalism.
And where have I said that I practiced polygamy?
Just for the record, I am a member of the LDS Church, but I...
Wrong. I created it at the urging of madhatter85 to discuss not debate. Apparently it turned into that, though.
I'll just be more careful in the future about what I respond to and what I don't. :cover: Lesson learned.
Let me just state that I feel like I'm sorta being attacked here. I'm not a genius. If I have given that impression, my apologies. When it comes to Mormon Fundamentalist doctrine, I don't know everything.
If a Mormon Fundamentalist is embarrassing to the LDS community here (which I sincerely...
Here's the question that I'm trying to answer. If it's the wrong one, correct me. These entries have been spread out over a time period of several days so I may have mixed things up.
--------------------------------------------------
Old Testament - No blacks could hold the priesthood. It was...
Okay. I thought about it for a while. This is not doctrine as far as I know. This is my personal hypothesis. Just want to clear that up. I may very well be wrong on this.
Old Testament - No blacks could hold the priesthood. It was only the descendants of Levi.
New Testament - Blacks were...
I do not disagree with that statement. It was your reference for blacks and the priesthood in the restoration that I disagreed. Apparently, they could hold the priesthood back during the ministry of Jesus.
Maybe this is an important time to distinguish between an apostle and a prophet. I believe the prophet to be binding. An apostle writes his own opinion which may or may not be correct.
This is an interesting video if you wonder about polygamy.
YouTube - Polygamy-A Glass House
Scripture, to my understanding, is something that is canonized by a group of people that generally believe something is inspired of God. A "thus saith the Lord" statement would be uncanonized if it weren't voted to be official scripture by the congregation, but I believe, is just as binding as...
I didn't agree with what you said. I thought the one I presented was a possibly more accurate statement rather than just letting Gentiles and blacks partake of the priesthood.
Well, according to madhatter's passage in Matthew, the Latter-days were not the time that the priesthood was allowed to be held. It was back during the times of Christ. Here's how I see it.
Time of Chist:
1. Mosaic Law fulfilled through Christ.
2. Relationship with Christ possible and salvation...
If it is followed by or previous to a "Thus saith the Lord" then it is scripture. Everything else is doctrine. So, yes.
I don't rely upon a council stating what is and isn't inspired. If a prophet is truly the mouthpiece of the Lord, then everything that come from the mouth of that prophet is...
I think we agree on this point.
The Gospel is saving ordinances, and... according to True to the Faith, "In its fulness, the gospel includes all the doctrines, principles, laws, ordinances, and covenants necessary for us to be exalted in the celestial kingdom." So, perhaps you are right on...