What is doctrine and what is not?

[wenglund]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, the discussion actually is helpful. Part of our education and progress is finding and knowing truth and establishing a testimony from that coupled with action. The prophets sure seem concerned with it as they are always in the news defending, defining, and proclaiming the doctrine on marriage, freedom, etc.

Yes, the prophets have been actively proclaiming gospel principles, teachings, doctrines and truths. . However, I haven't seen them all that active of late, if at all, debating what is "doctrine" or not, official or otherwise. 

Elder Oaks has been particularly active on the marriage front, though he has pointed out that: "Attaining what the Apostle Paul described as 'the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ' (Ephesians 4:13) requires far more than acquiring knowledge [or truth]. It is not even enough for us to be convinced of the gospel [have doctrinal faith]; we must act and think so that we are converted by it. In contrast to the institutions of the world, which teach us to know something [i.e. know doctrine and "truth"], the plan of salvation and the gospel of Jesus Christ challenge us to become something." (See HERE) 

Yet, in his most recent Conference talk Oaks did indicate that: "During this revelatory process, a proposed text was presented to the First Presidency, who oversee and promulgate Church teachings and doctrine" (Emphasis mine--see HERE), thus indicating the manner in which teachings and doctrines are promulgated. He also inferred that the Proclamation on the Family contains "unique doctrine and different ways of viewing the worlds." (Emphasis mine--ibid) Even still, referring to principles as "teachings and doctrine," is not to debate what is or isn't teaching or doctrine. In fact, such debates would be beside the points he is making--which is the point I am making.

As always, though, to each their own. My intent here is not to argue yea or nay regarding debates over what is doctrine, but rather to offer a different, and I believe more productive way of looking at things .

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Colirio]

4 hours ago, Vort said:

Agreed. Like, for example, the three degrees of glory.

Yes, and like when the Lord Himself refers to being married for TIME and all Eternity? D&C 132:18

 

Or how when it says that TIME will be no longer? D&C 84:100

 

Or how when it says that TIME only is measured unto men? Alma 40:8

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Yep. Anything the church has ever taught from day one is doctrine. Now, determining if all doctrine is truth...thats a whole different matter!

Yeah, doctrine that is not truth is called "False Doctrine."  I guess you believe the Church teachings are false doctrine. 

[Rob Osborn]

15 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Yeah, doctrine that is not truth is called "False Doctrine."  I guess you believe the Church teachings are false doctrine. 

You are completely wrong. I believe our church contains the most truthful doctrine of all religions. Is our doctrine as we understand and teach it perfect? No. Enough said!

[Rob Osborn]

4 hours ago, wenglund said:

Yes, the prophets have been actively proclaiming gospel principles, teachings, doctrines and truths. . However, I haven't seen them all that active of late, if at all, debating what is "doctrine" or not, official or otherwise. 

Elder Oaks has been particularly active on the marriage front, though he has pointed out that: "Attaining what the Apostle Paul described as 'the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ' (Ephesians 4:13) requires far more than acquiring knowledge [or truth]. It is not even enough for us to be convinced of the gospel [have doctrinal faith]; we must act and think so that we are converted by it. In contrast to the institutions of the world, which teach us to know something [i.e. know doctrine and "truth"], the plan of salvation and the gospel of Jesus Christ challenge us to become something." (See HERE) 

Yet, in his most recent Conference talk Oaks did indicate that: "During this revelatory process, a proposed text was presented to the First Presidency, who oversee and promulgate Church teachings and doctrine" (Emphasis mine--see HERE), thus indicating the manner in which teachings and doctrines are promulgated. He also inferred that the Proclamation on the Family contains "unique doctrine and different ways of viewing the worlds." (Emphasis mine--ibid) Even still, referring to principles as "teachings and doctrine," is not to debate what is or isn't teaching or doctrine. In fact, such debates would be beside the points he is making--which is the point I am making.

As always, though, to each their own. My intent here is not to argue yea or nay regarding debates over what is doctrine, but rather to offer a different, and I believe more productive way of looking at things .

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well, it seems your intent is to debate but nevertheless I u derstand your points about living the gospel. Living the gospel contains an active part in defending the gospel.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

You are completely wrong. I believe our church contains the most truthful doctrine of all religions. Is our doctrine as we understand and teach it perfect? No. Enough said!

Yet again, your saying so must make it so.

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, Carborendum said:

Yet again, your saying so must make it so.

Give you a hint, go study section 88 and get back with me.