Is church doctrine evolving?

Nephi · **Posted:** Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:43 am

harmony wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Nephi wrote:

harmony wrote:

I think church doctrine is devolving, rather than evolving. It's getting to be less and less, almost as if the unique doctrines of the LDS church are disappearing. Adam-God? We don't teach that. Man progressing to Gods? We don't teach that. Eternal polygamy? We don't teach that. We don't teach much of anything that's unique anymore, except the stuff that doesn't matter in the eternities: what you ate, what you drank, how many earrings you had, what color your shirt was on Sunday... We spend an inordinant amount of time bustling around the inconsequentials, very little time on the basics, absolutely no time on anything beyond the basics, and altogether too much time worrying about money and numbers.

No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger. I think the church still believes in many of these ideas, but they do not "teach" them (ie, openly speak of them in church or public) because most people cannot grasp these concepts. The church has had to boil down to the lowest common denominator.

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

It's certainly larger than it was when Brigham was boldly declaring doctrine to the world. Ya gotta give those old guys credit; they didn't back down, just because what they thought was both bizarre and unacceptable to their neighbors.

Yet another good point.

Mercury · **Posted:** Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:45 pm

Nephi wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Nephi wrote:

harmony wrote:

I think church doctrine is devolving, rather than evolving. It's getting to be less and less, almost as if the unique doctrines of the LDS church are disappearing. Adam-God? We don't teach that. Man progressing to Gods? We don't teach that. Eternal polygamy? We don't teach that. We don't teach much of anything that's unique anymore, except the stuff that doesn't matter in the eternities: what you ate, what you drank, how many earrings you had, what color your shirt was on Sunday... We spend an inordinant amount of time bustling around the inconsequentials, very little time on the basics, absolutely no time on anything beyond the basics, and altogether too much time worrying about money and numbers.

No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger. I think the church still believes in many of these ideas, but they do not "teach" them (ie, openly speak of them in church or public) because most people cannot grasp these concepts. The church has had to boil down to the lowest common denominator.

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

I never stipulated that the membership of the church is growing (you assumed that). I am stipulating that the church is growing in the eye of the world community. More people know of the church and are searching for what the church believes, but many cannot understand such concepts, and the media with which they gain this information is notorious for spinning the info that is given.

Quoth the burnout:
"No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger"

Nephi · **Posted:** Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:45 pm

Mercury wrote:

Nephi wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Nephi wrote:

harmony wrote:

I think church doctrine is devolving, rather than evolving. It's getting to be less and less, almost as if the unique doctrines of the LDS church are disappearing. Adam-God? We don't teach that. Man progressing to Gods? We don't teach that. Eternal polygamy? We don't teach that. We don't teach much of anything that's unique anymore, except the stuff that doesn't matter in the eternities: what you ate, what you drank, how many earrings you had, what color your shirt was on Sunday... We spend an inordinant amount of time bustling around the inconsequentials, very little time on the basics, absolutely no time on anything beyond the basics, and altogether too much time worrying about money and numbers.

No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger. I think the church still believes in many of these ideas, but they do not "teach" them (ie, openly speak of them in church or public) because most people cannot grasp these concepts. The church has had to boil down to the lowest common denominator.

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

I never stipulated that the membership of the church is growing (you assumed that). I am stipulating that the church is growing in the eye of the world community. More people know of the church and are searching for what the church believes, but many cannot understand such concepts, and the media with which they gain this information is notorious for spinning the info that is given.

Quoth the burnout:
"No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger"

Very good. This does not imply I am speaking of the church population. I am speaking of mass media and the world society in general.

Lucretia MacEvil · **Joined:** Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:01 am **Posts:** 1271

Nephi wrote:

harmony wrote:

I think church doctrine is devolving, rather than evolving. It's getting to be less and less, almost as if the unique doctrines of the LDS church are disappearing. Adam-God? We don't teach that. Man progressing to Gods? We don't teach that. Eternal polygamy? We don't teach that. We don't teach much of anything that's unique anymore, except the stuff that doesn't matter in the eternities: what you ate, what you drank, how many earrings you had, what color your shirt was on Sunday... We spend an inordinant amount of time bustling around the inconsequentials, very little time on the basics, absolutely no time on anything beyond the basics, and altogether too much time worrying about money and numbers.

No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger. I think the church still believes in many of these ideas, but they do not "teach" them (ie, openly speak of them in church or public) because most people cannot grasp these concepts. The church has had to boil down to the lowest common denominator.

No offense to you, but you are very, very wrong here. Mormons aren't stupid and they are as able to grasp those concepts now as they were back then. What you're doing is buying into the Mormon myth that "the church is perfect but the members aren't." Any problem has to be ascribed to the failings of the members instead of to the real source of the problem, a church built on Joseph Smith' (and then BY, et al.'s) haphazard ideas. I'd put it this way: "the church is imperfect, the members are doing the best they can with what they have to work with."

Lucretia MacEvil · **Joined:** Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:01 am **Posts:** 1271

Nephi wrote:

Quote:

Quoth the burnout:
"No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger"

Very good. This does not imply I am speaking of the church population. I am speaking of mass media and the world society in general.

Actually, the church is growing in numbers, as far as I know (although not exponentially, and as far as World:Mormon goes every day the World gets larger and the church gets smaller), but regardless, why the backpedaling? If you want to speak of mass media and world society, maybe you shouldn't use the word "church" to do so, because there is certainly no obvious connection.

Nephi · **Posted:** Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:29 pm

Lucretia MacEvil wrote:

Nephi wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Quoth the burnout:
"No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger"

Very good. This does not imply I am speaking of the church population. I am speaking of mass media and the world society in general.

Actually, the church is growing in numbers, as far as I know (although not exponentially, and as far as World:Mormon goes every day the World gets larger and the church gets smaller), but regardless, why the backpedaling? If you want to speak of mass media and world society, maybe you shouldn't use the word "church" to do so, because there is certainly no obvious connection.

No backpedaling. In the eye of the world, the church is growing in presence. This is what I meant to begin with, and there is no backpedaling occuring.

Jason Bourne · **Joined:** Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:00 pm **Posts:** 8851

Mercury wrote:

Nephi wrote:

harmony wrote:

I think church doctrine is devolving, rather than evolving. It's getting to be less and less, almost as if the unique doctrines of the LDS church are disappearing. Adam-God? We don't teach that. Man progressing to Gods? We don't teach that. Eternal polygamy? We don't teach that. We don't teach much of anything that's unique anymore, except the stuff that doesn't matter in the eternities: what you ate, what you drank, how many earrings you had, what color your shirt was on Sunday... We spend an inordinant amount of time bustling around the inconsequentials, very little time on the basics, absolutely no time on anything beyond the basics, and altogether too much time worrying about money and numbers.

No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger. I think the church still believes in many of these ideas, but they do not "teach" them (ie, openly speak of them in church or public) because most people cannot grasp these concepts. The church has had to boil down to the lowest common denominator.

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

The Church is still growing albeit at a slower rate then in the past. Only an idiot think otherwise. Thus you say and and thus we see.......

Mercury · **Posted:** Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:36 am

Jason Bourne wrote:

Mercury wrote:

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

The Church is still growing albeit at a slower rate then in the past. Only an idiot think otherwise. Thus you say and and thus we see.......

Convert retention does not counteract those leaving, dying, etc.

Jason Bourne · **Joined:** Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:00 pm **Posts:** 8851

Mercury wrote:

Jason Bourne wrote:

Mercury wrote:

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

The Church is still growing albeit at a slower rate then in the past. Only an idiot think otherwise. Thus you say and and thus we see.......

Convert retention does not counteract those leaving, dying, etc.

Yes it does. You are simply wrong. I have numbers that prove it. You do not.

Mercury · **Posted:** Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:06 pm

Jason Bourne wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Jason Bourne wrote:

Mercury wrote:

The church is not growing. Spoken like a true sucker.

The Church is still growing albeit at a slower rate then in the past. Only an idiot think otherwise. Thus you say and and thus we see.......

Convert retention does not counteract those leaving, dying, etc.

Yes it does. You are simply wrong. I have numbers that prove it. You do not.

Lay them down jason.

Mercury · **Posted:** Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:08 pm

Nephi wrote:

Lucretia MacEvil wrote:

Nephi wrote:

Mercury wrote:

Quoth the burnout:
"No offense to the masses, but I think this is a biproduct of the church becoming larger and larger"

Very good. This does not imply I am speaking of the church population. I am speaking of mass media and the world society in general.

Actually, the church is growing in numbers, as far as I know (although not exponentially, and as far as World:Mormon goes every day the World gets larger and the church gets smaller), but regardless, why the backpedaling? If you want to speak of mass media and world society, maybe you shouldn't use the word "church" to do so, because there is certainly no obvious connection.

No backpedaling. In the eye of the world, the church is growing in presence. This is what I meant to begin with, and there is no backpedaling occuring.

You were either extremely unclear, purposefully obfuscating or are now backpedaling. Which of these three was it?

ajax18 · **Joined:** Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:56 pm **Posts:** 1908

There is an interesting thread over at MAD on polygamy that seems to shed some light on this question. I've always been taught that polygamy was an eternal principle and we just don't practice it because its against the law but it will be practiced in eternity. This has been the party line for some time.

Yet Juliann, who probably considers herself a TBM, believes that since modern prophets have not spoken on the issue polygamy is not an eternal principle and will not be practiced in eternity. I'm seeing more people buy into her line of reasoning. As time goes by and more LDS by into this reasoning, start to preach it quietly, and then not so quietly, the brethren will probably have the stomach to do little more than ask them not to talk about it. Yet this will only stop people from preaching it in Church. Behind the scenes you'll probably see more and more of the private beliefs of the members change. If that is not a doctrinal shift, than what is?

Is church doctrine evolving?

Who is online