The Reuters Article

[Portland Ute]

What prevents Mormons from serving their fellow man outside the structure of the Mormon Church?

Nothing.

But the discussion isn't about individual members and their personal finances and time. It's about the organization's finances and resources and how they appropriated, isn't it?

I could be a member of a book club and do and donate to humanitarian service and causes. That doesn't mean the organization that is the book club is charitable or involved in humanitarian causes.

[Portland Ute]

The teaching is received very well.

That deserves a chuckle.

(I assume you intended that little bit of self-deprecating humor.)

[LA Ute]

You'll suggest - but can you show me one way or the other using the scriptures themselves? I would guess you are right, but partially because what I've read doesn't have Jesus doing a comparative survey of what is more important than what.

I don't know that he did. I do think he was pretty clear that there are many things He invites us to do beyond caring for the poor and needy. For example:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Looks comprehensive to me.

As to not worth considering, I can make the argument that some of the Standard Works aren't worth considering. But you wouldn't buy it any more than I would consider the first few chapters of Genesis to be anything more than legend. So you can have an asterisk too. Remember, we're not starting from the same point, even though we participate in the same organization at the same level superficially.

I wasn't clear. Your approach is fine as far as it goes. I thought you wanted to teach after forming your own conclusions as to what the uncorrelated LDS-recognized scriptures teach. If you're going to omit some of those scriptures from the get-go, then I don't think you are being intellectually honest. But it sounds like I had your objective wrong.

[Jeff Lebowski]

What are you thinking of here?

This is one example:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...5&postcount=76

Start at post 76 in the thread.

There are also some very interesting outcomes if you carefully analyze what the BOM says (or doesn't say) about the Godhead, priesthood, church organization, etc. In many ways it is more similar to basic Protestantism than to modern Mormonism.

[Portland Ute]

This is one example:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...5&postcount=76

Start at post 76 in the thread.

There are also some very interesting outcomes if you carefully analyze what the BOM says (or doesn't say) about the Godhead, priesthood, church organization, etc. In many ways it is more similar to basic Protestantism than to modern Mormonism.

It's amazing that the temple and celestial marriage is such a huge part of the restored church but there is absolutely no mention of it in the Book of Mormon which is the pure, correctly translated book containing the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Pheidippides]

Looks comprehensive to me.

This is exactly the point (although probably not the one you are making). Jesus says this, but what does it mean? There are zero specifics here that are applicable to me personally, at least as the words read on their face. I'm not sure what actions I'm supposed to take or not take based on that alone.

[LA Ute]

This is exactly the point (although probably not the one you are making). Jesus says this, but what does it mean? There are zero specifics here that are applicable to me personally, at least as the words read on their face. I'm not sure what actions I'm supposed to take or not take based on that alone.

We're talking past each other. My only point is that the verse supports the idea that Jesus taught more than caring for the poor and needy.

[Pheidippides]

We're talking past each other. My only point is that the verse supports the idea that Jesus taught more than caring for the poor and needy.

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you (not intentionally, anyway). I was using your example to bolster my completely separate point as an example. Jesus obviously taught much more than caring for the poor.

[UtahDan]

This is one example:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...5&postcount=76

Start at post 76 in the thread.

There are also some very interesting outcomes if you carefully analyze what the BOM says (or doesn't say) about the Godhead, priesthood, church organization, etc. In many ways it is more similar to basic Protestantism than to modern Mormonism.

That is exactly what I think.

Godhead=modalism (if you read Abinidi there is just no way around this).
Priesthood=prophet/kings ordain "teachers and priests" who function much like the traveling ministers of Joseph's day...it is not at all a system of government. No higher and lower.
Eternal marriage=nearly no mention of marriage at all.
Hell=eternal damnation and torment
Pre-existence not mentioned.
Eternal progression, kingdoms not mentioned.
No temple work or proxy work mentioned.

There is just very little theologically in the BOM to offend a protestant. This has led some to speculate that while the D&C clearly represents the mind of Joseph, the BOM must represent someone else's mind such as Oliver. I believe that Joseph's beliefs simply evolved.

[UtahDan]

When UD says he doesn't mean to mock he is about to do so.

How'd I do?

By the way, link?

[LA Ute]

That is exactly what I think.

Godhead=modalism (if you read Abinidi there is just no way around this).
Priesthood=prophet/kings ordain "teachers and priests" who function much like the traveling ministers of Joseph's day...it is not at all a system of government. No higher and lower.
Eternal marriage=nearly no mention of marriage at all.
Hell=eternal damnation and torment
Pre-existence not mentioned.
Eternal progression, kingdoms not mentioned.
No temple work or proxy work mentioned.

There is just very little theologically in the BOM to offend a protestant. This has led some to speculate that while the D&C clearly represents the mind of Joseph, the BOM must represent someone else's mind such as Oliver. I believe that Joseph's beliefs simply evolved.

Remember that the BofM is an abridgment by Mormon, as Bushman reminds us (Givens too). To a believer like me this is important, and causes me to ask why certain things were chosen, and to wonder (sometimes) what was left out, or was in the sealed portion.

The system of government evolved from kings to judges, etc. (Mosiah 29.)

Alma 13 is thought to refer, however obliquely, to the premortal existence.

Just a few thoughts.

[UtahDan]

Remember that the BofM is an abridgment by Mormon, as Bushman reminds us (Givens too). To a believer like me this is important, and causes me to ask why certain things were chosen, and to wonder (sometimes) what was left out, or was in the sealed portion.

The system of government evolved from kings to judges, etc. (Mosiah 29.)

Alma 13 is thought to refer, however obliquely, to the premortal existence.

Just a few thoughts.

I'm familiar with the argument. I think the more you read the book and see how much repetition, etc. it has the less weight it (that argument) has. But I've skipped to the end of the book and know the answer here:

President Ezra Taft Benson taught that when the Lord said the Book of Mormon contains the fulness of the gospel it “does not mean it contains every teaching, every doctrine ever revealed. Rather, it means that in the Book of Mormon we will find the fulness of those doctrines required for our salvation. And they are taught plainly and simply so that even children can learn the ways of salvation and exaltation” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1986, 4; or Ensign, Nov. 1986, 6 ).

So the answer is, if it isn't in the BOM (such as the things Jeff and I were discussing) then it is not required for your salvation. Now there is something to think about.

[LA Ute]

I'm familiar with the argument. I think the more you read the book and see how much repetition, etc. it has the less weight it has. But I've skipped to the end of the book and know the answer here:



So the answer is, if it isn't in the BOM (such as the things Jeff and I were discussing) then it is not required for your salvation. Now there is something to think about.

What? Now ETB's conference talks are authoritative as stand-alone statements of essential doctrines? No context is necessary?

Also, to attack the BofM's credibility because of repetition ignores the way a complex narrative fits together within its pages.

I am just saying there is plenty of room for reasoned belief. One may choose not to believe the BofM, but one cannot make an intellectually honest argument that it is not believable to intelligent people.

[UtahDan]

What? Now ETB's conference talks are authoritative as stand-alone statements of essential doctrines? No context is necessary?

That was out of a seminary manual. The context was sufficient for them.

Also, to attack the BofM's credibility because of repetition ignores the way a complex narrative fits together within its pages.

Hang on, I wasn't attacking i's credibility. I was responding to the argument that there was simply wasn't room for everything. My point was if there was room for lots of repetition and five million "and it came to passes" it seems unlikely that is the reason many of these things are not found there. I think even from a faithful perspective it is more parsimonious to say they aren't there because they simply didn't exist among BOM peoples, maybe God had a reason for not revealing them.

I am just saying there is plenty of room for reasoned belief. One may choose not to believe the BofM, but one cannot make an intellectually honest argument that it is not believable to intelligent people.

You are bobbing and weaving with this, sir. Cut it out. No one is suggesting you are dumb. You can't use the Holland Dodo defense on me. It won't work.

[UtahDan]

Remember that the BofM is an abridgment by Mormon, as Bushman reminds us (Givens too). To a believer like me this is important, and causes me to ask why certain things were chosen, and to wonder (sometimes) what was left out, or was in the sealed portion.

The system of government evolved from kings to judges, etc. (Mosiah 29.)

Alma 13 is thought to refer, however obliquely, to the premortal existence.

Just a few thoughts.

By the way, I am aware of this and you are correct in my view.