Do “Official” Mormon Sources Exist?

Mormon Coffee (MRM.org) ^ | Jan. 26, 2012 | Sharon Lindbloom

[Colofornian]

How do you know?

[Elsie]

“You can’t hold an LDS “prophet” or “apostle” accountable for every obscure spiritual message he gives in public, can you?”

Notice: When we MORMONs drag up some statement that a christian has made, and try to hold THEIR feet to the fire for saying it; it is NOT the same thing!!

--MormonDude(Headquarters says so!)

[Elsie]

...it is NOT the same thing!!

--MormonDude(I cannot source any CHRISTIAN saying, "...anything I preach can be considered scripture...")

[Elsie]

There are some words missing from this sentence.

Indeed!

I've NEVER heard you say ANYTHING about MORMONisn in your posts; only things that are found in CHRISTIANITY!

[Elsie]

People should check with Church offical representatives and spokesmen and ask as regards these things before they quote those speeches as somehow being the offical doctrine of the church

HEY!

I thought we told you little people to QUIT bothering us at Headquarters with all of your inane little question!!??

[Elsie]

The LDS church has never set it forward as an authoritative declaration of doctrine.

Then WHY did it receive so much attention by HEADQUARTERs if it were NOT 'official'?

[Elsie]

Since some Lds posters so readily tosses parts of McConkie's prophecies into the waste bin -- as his leaders have modeled for him -- why, just do the same thing with ALL what Mormon leaders have prophesied through the years!

Hater!!

You bigots just WON'T leave POLYGAMY alone, will you!

--MormonDude(We are LAW abiding citizens. {US law, that is; not GOD's})

[Elsie]

 

Our ONLY function here is to say,

 

 

 

 

“YES! Yes YES!! Yes yes YES YES!!! yes Yes! YES Yes! and yes ”

[Elsie]

Maybe!!!

[greyfoxx39]

the LDS church has never put forward … the doctrine of the LDS church

Now mormons have produced a huge lie about the Savior's life..."all told from a mormon perspective."

Messiah: Behold The Lamb Of God (REAL Mormon / LDS)

[ejonesie22]

Ah, I so miss PD. He was the best Anti-Mormon around...

[Colofornian]

Notice: When we MORMONs drag up some statement that a christian has made, and try to hold THEIR feet to the fire for saying it; it is NOT the same thing!!

LOL !!! :)

[greyfoxx39]

Unofficial remarks made by the "Official" Robert L. Millet, professor of religion and emeritus dean of Religious Education at Brigham Young University, which he takes it upon himself to "define" Christianity and then says, "Latter-day Saints seek only the right to define themselves in today’s world.

Traditional Christianity and the Latter-day Saints [Mormon Doctrine]

[Colofornian]

Bingo.

Millet refutes himself...he (& many other Mormons) keep claiming that they ONLY want to define themselves...all as they define Christianity as...
...strayers & abandoners of original Christianity...
...lacking derived authority to act at God's moving...
..."apostates"...
..."corrupt professors"...
..."abominable" creed adherers...
...unrestored faith-clingers...
...a dead & false church...
..."church of the devil"...
...etc.

Sorry, Mormons. You can't keep having it both ways. You can't keep claiming the ability to 100% define...
...Christianity as the above...
...fLDS as non-Mormons...
...and Mormonism as the ONLY "restored Christianity" on the planet...
...and escape the reality that this makes you two-faced hypocrites!

[Elsie]

Good ol' Bob!

What's not to love??

---

 

 

Professor Robert Millet        teaching at the Mission Prep Club in 2004  http://newsnet.byu.edu/video/18773/  <-- Complete and uneditted

---

 

 

Timeline...    Subject...

 

0:59           "Anti-Mormons..."

1:16           "ATTACK the faith you have..."

2:02           "We really aren't obligated to answer everyone's questions..."

3:57           "You already know MORE about God and Christ and the plan of salvation than any who would ATTACK you."

[Elsie]

Good ol' Bob!

What's not to love??

---

If you like Jeff's reasonings; then THIS is the man to follow; Robert Millet; MORMON and Professor, Apologist.

 

 

I feel like I have a sense of responsibility to be as, as gentle and kind and, in my case, Christian as possible. It's, to me, if you're, if you want to talk about Christianity or what it stands for, you have to look carefully at what it produces in people. My religion, for me, not only sets forth my theology, but it sets forth my practical, daily living in terms of how I treat other people and how I come to love them. And whether they feel the same way about ultimate and eternal things that I do or not.

 

 

 

http://being.publicradio.org/programs/insidemormonfaith/transcript.shtml

[Elsie]

Good ol' Bob!

What's not to love??

---

Mr. Millet: I don't think we can ever transcend Joseph Smith or consider him to be a valued personality, but now we'll move on. I don't think you'll see that among believers in the faith, because there are too many other things that came from him that are the reasons why we do what we do and we are what we are. That there are unanswered questions, to be sure. That there are things that I'm as anxious as the next guy to learn more detail on, I really want to know. But in the interim, it really doesn't, doesn't trouble me. We're in the religion-making business, as you intimated earlier, only for a short time, I mean, compared to the Christian church, which has been at this for a couple of millennia. We're about halfway to Nicaea. And so, and so in that sense — I remember a very tender moment. I was speaking with — I've been invited to the Salt Lake Theological Seminary, basically an Evangelical seminary, to discuss a book I had done on Jesus. And they had read it, and they wanted me to come and just respond to questions.

 

And it was, it was a very enjoyable couple of hours.

The very last question that was asked by one of my friends there was this one.

He said, 'Bob, what can we do for you?'

 

And I, I wasn't ready for that question. I said, 'What do you mean?'

 

He said, 'What can we, as Evangelicals, do for our Mormon friends?'

 

And I, I guess my mind could have gone a hundred different ways, but what I came back with was this.

I said, 'Boy, I appreciate you asking that. I don't think I've ever been asked that.'

But, but I said, 'Try this. Cut us a little slack, will you? Give us a little time.

We're in the religion-making business, and this takes time. It takes centuries.

And, and trying to explain the faith and articulate the faith, that doesn't come over night.

We've really only been about that for 20 or 30 years.'

 

 

http://being.publicradio.org/programs/insidemormonfaith/transcript.shtml

[fishtank]

The lds-org denies that Jesus is the Creator, that everything was created THROUGH Him, BY Him and FOR Him.

[Godzilla]

"Official" Robert L. Millet, professor of religion and emeritus dean of Religious Education at Brigham Young University, which he takes it upon himself to "define" Christianity and then says, "Latter-day Saints seek only the right to define themselves in today’s world.

LOL, they can't define their doctrine beyond its someone's opinion.

[Godzilla]

Well, on March 21, 1963, the Deseret News ran an ad from Lds church leadership about the JoD. The ad read: Every Latter-day Saint should take this opportunity of owning the written words of remarkable teachings from the LDS pulpit. To the clear and vigorous exposition of Latter-day Saint doctrine is added the unmistakable authority of divine inspiration."

From the LDS website "Gospel Principles, Chapter 10, Scriptures:
Words of Our Living Prophets
In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, the Liahona or Ensign magazine, and instructions to local priesthood leaders. “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” (Articles of Faith 1:9).

Then they ask the following question

• Where can we find the words of our living prophets?

However, according to mormons here - those words are only opinions and not scripture. Yet their manual on doctrine - Gospel Principles - make it very clear that the WORDS given in conference, and official publications are scripture as well.

Joseph smith wouldn't recognize today's mormonism.

[Colofornian]

...according to mormons here - those words are only opinions and not scripture. Yet their manual on doctrine - Gospel Principles - make it very clear that the WORDS given in conference, and official publications are scripture as well. Joseph smith wouldn't recognize today's mormonism.

Today's Mormons -- in order to escape the charges they lob @ others -- try to distance themselves from the claims of their Past (& sometimes, present) leaders via weasel words.

What's interesting is that they've always touted having a "living prophet" (where they often cite Amos 3:7) so that they can present-tense revelational guidance given to their "seers." This is supposed to be one of the things they can look at with pride at what "sets them apart" from Christianity...(Of course, they fail to recognize that Jesus Christ HIMSELF...per Hebrews 1:1-2...remains our 'Living Prophet'...a title He no longer has to delegate to somebody else)

Their problem is they are downright embarrassed over MUCH of what their past leaders have said. Straight-arm time!

The thing is...they now claim that no Mormons want to immediately honor the words of their "seers" as direct revelation until a group of their leaders get together...sometimes 40...62...74 years later...and declare as a man-made creed-like council that a certain statement was "scripture" after all.

More hypocrisy...especially since Mormons condemn historic church leader councils that came up with certain creeds!

So it's A-OK for the Mormon church to have a "council" and decide, "Nope...most of these words uttered by this 'prophet' and this 'apostle' wasn't 'scripture'...but this little tidbit was."