"Jeff" <jeff_x02@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:13to1oihinm9p6e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 13, 9:56 am, "Curmudgeon" <gfuller1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> No, I am saying really that you may not correctly understand what is
>> meant
>> by what you read, if you do not depend on the understanding afforded by
>> the
>> Holy Spirit.
>
> When I read a training manual called "Doctrines of the Gospel Student
> Manual," should I not assume that what I read in that manual is all
> doctrine? Why isn't the manual called "Doctrines and Speculations of
> the Gospel Student Manual?"
Doctrine merely means that which is taught. It has little to do with
truth.
However, you have departed from what I said. I said nothing about whether
what was in the manuals is or is not doctrine. I said that "you may not
correctly understand what is meant by what you read, if you do not depend
on
the understanding afforded by the Holy Spirit".
Snip
> Is eternal progression a doctrine or a speculative idea?
It is a true teaching, true doctrine, if properly understood.
Here are some references from General Authorities to sup****t the doctrine
correctly undestood,
President N. Eldon Tanner, Conference Re****t, October 1969, Second
Day-Morning Meeting, p.48
We mortals have never experienced death and the resurrection, nor do we
remember our preexistence. Therefore, it is not commonly believed or
understood that we had a premortal existence, that we are the spirit
children of God, the Eternal Father, and that when we have finished our
life
here upon the earth we will enjoy a literal resurrection and may continue
on
in eternal progression. In fact, many who question this say that if
someone
would return from the dead as a witness of these things, they would
believe.
This is not so.
President Alvin R. Dyer, Conference Re****t, October 1969, Second
Day-Morning
Meeting, p.55
Repentance, as an eternal law, is not confined to conversion. Its use and
application is broader than that. It is a principle of eternal
progression.
After faith, repentance, and baptism, which are first principles,
repentance
leads the way to many regenerations, without which the soul shall never
reach perfection.
President Hugh B. Brown, Conference Re****t, October 1969, Third
Day-Morning
Meeting, p.105
Eternal life means more than merely continuing to exist. Its qualitative
value will be determined by what we believe and do while in mortality and
by
our conformity to eternal law in the life to come. Eternal existence would
be most undesirable if that existence became fixed and static upon arrival
there. "It is hope and expectation and desire and something ever more
about
to be" that gives lilt and verve to mortal life. We cannot imagine nor
would
we desire an eternity without op****tunity for growth and development. We
believe in eternal progression.
Elder Franklin D. Richards, Conference Re****t, October 1969, Third
Day-Morning Meeting, p.123
Objectives and goals should not only be worthwhile but also realistic.
They
should be an incentive to work effectively. Thus the setting of realistic
objectives and achieving them becomes an im****tant part of the great
process
of eternal progression.
President Hugh B. Brown, Conference Re****t, April 1969, Second Day-Morning
Meeting, p.51
The gospel is a system of continuing education, resulting in eternal
progression. Education is, in fact, a part of our religion. We believe the
glory of God is intelligence.
President N. Eldon Tanner, Conference Re****t, October 1968, Second
Day-Morning Meeting, p.48
How fortunate is the person who looks forward to the resurrection as an
im****tant step in eternal progression and prepares now to meet God!
I could post much more, Of course if you are implying something here that
sup****ts the speculation that God was once a mortal man on some other
planet, I don't think you will find it. The references I gace came from my
copypf LDS COllectors Edition 2005. I will also search on lds.org, but
don't
plan to post anything from there since you can do your own search there.
It is my own belief that the manual you mention is for Latter-day Saint
students who have a basis of understanding of the teachings of the Church
so
have a better likelihood of correctly understanding the teaching that I
believe you do not correctly understand. They have at the least been
baptized and confirmed and invited to "receive the Holy Ghost". If I
understand correctly, you have not. I cannot really judge, but my
observation says that you do not demonstrate humility and teachableness.
So
if you do not understand what you find in our manuals that are not really
intended (in my opinion) for you, that is not surprising.
Snip
> This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in
> plainness by the First Presidency of the Church (Joseph F. Smith, John
> R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund) when in speaking of pre-existence and
> the origin of man, they said that man as a spirit was begotten and
> born of heavenly parents and reared to maturity in the eternal
> mansions of the Father.
Yes, I have been aware of that, although it slipped my mind at the time.
If
something is included in a do***ent, and in that manner becomes a
teaching,
so be it.
> While this does not fall within the last 50 years as you wanted to
> limit yourself to, would this be a true doctrine? Or was this a
> doctrine of only the First Presidency but rejected by the General
> Authorities and all the other Latter-day Saints of that time?
I have no idea. I would say that it was a true teaching but subject to
incorrect interpretations. If it was something that was taught by that
presidency but is not taught now or in recent years, since we believe that
Jesus Christ is in actual control of His Church, I am willing to think it
is
something that He does not consider to be a necessary teaching (doctrine)
to
be emphasized at this time. There well may be more im****tant doctrines for
our current efforts.
> Besides the LDS teachings of a HeavenlyMother in Gospel Principles,
> Gospel Fundamentals, etc, we can also look back to 1998 in the
> church's "The Family - A Proclamation to the World". It is found here:
>
> http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,105-1-11-1,00.html
>
> "All human beings--male and female--are created in the image of God.
> Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents".
> Is this a true declaration to the world?
>
> Jeff
Of course it is. But the world is not prepared, it seems, to understand
it.
It contains no detailed instruction (doctrine) as to what that means. All
mortal men are created in the image of God. Alll mortal women are created
in
the image of God. All are beloved of God.
It seems that we are talking about two subjects here, 1) eternal
progression -- a true principle, a true doctrine but subject to incorrect
understanding and 2) something about the parents of our spirits, also a
correct principle and correct doctrine if properly undestood. But subject
to
incorrect emphasis and understanding.
Thank you for your references. I do not consider them as evidence that the
Church or the General Authorites really teach these principles. But the
Church may well be said to hold to these as true Principles.
|
