Thinking

SAYS YOU: "The "Principles of the Gospel" [“Gospel Principles” manual] and "True to the Faith" are not Latter-day Saints creeds anymore than any manual is."

ME: By definition, those cited books are close enough to being a creed, or at least the explorations of a given creed. The Temple interview assumes a creed, a set of beliefs, that must be accepted:

Creed

1. a brief authoritative formula of religious belief.

2. a set of fundamental beliefs.

Those books are authoritative (Corporation approved). They put down fundamental religious beliefs. So is the Articles of Faith.

An Honest Pursuit

Joseph Smith says "You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards of doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works".

So, I study the Standard Works. I see exactly what they say. They delight in plainness in that no man can err. Then I joyfully read Hugh B. Brown who says:

"...be unafraid to express your thoughts and to insist upon your right to examine every proposition..."
"Here we are free to think and express our opinions".

"...be unafraid to dissent-if you are informed..."

"Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression...People should express their problems and opinions"

"...we should all exercise our God-given right to think and be unafraid to express our opinions..."

I concur with "Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant". I want truth to be triumphant so I raise my opinions in the marketplace of ideas, church meetings.

I know we are not authorized to teach it to others as truth, so I leave my opinion in the "it appears to me" realm.

I present multitudinous scriptural references that have led me to dissent. Hugh B. Brown encourages me to express my problems and opinions and to be unafraid to think without fear of ill consequences. To assure any listeners that I am informed, I employ astonishing scholarship, irrefragable reasoning and delightful presentation with compelling illustrations. Because I have informed my self, I can answer all objections and questions.

I assure my listener that we should accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards of doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. I show my listeners that, in my humble opinion, some doctrines do not accord with the plain and precious parts found in the Book of Mormon. After all, even Church leaders often present a personal, though well-considered, opinion. I am merely doing the same, being encouraged by Hugh.

I sincerely invite and encourage everyone to correct me where I am wrong. However, I find that simple but passionate declarations that I am wrong useless and regard that approach as a clear demonstration of weakness of the LDS position or the ineptitude of members. Likewise when folks "pass on the rest of [my] comments" I am bemused. Show me, instead, 1) which scriptures I am misinterpreting or misapplying and 2) tell me what they actually mean in truth.

I respect the opinions of others and listen intently to them and consider them carefully. I am willing to adjust my opinion accordingly. I love the marketplace of opinions and participate to hone and correct my own and those of others!

Yikes! The bishop warns me and tells me I am expected to stop teaching those things to others. In meeting with him, I employ astonishing scholarship, irrefragable reasoning and delightful presentation with compelling illustrations. Because I have informed my self, I can answer all objections and questions.

I am booted out of the marketplace of ideas because I am "teaching false doctrine", which I wasn't. How could I be? Joseph Smith himself said "the Latter Day Saints have no creed, but are ready to believe all true principles that exist". I was simply telling folks my opinion, presenting what appears to me to be "true principles". I constantly interjected, ad nauseam, "in my humble opinion" to make it clear I am expressing my opinion as I was encouraged to do.

I am surprised to discover that, in my attempt to have truth reign triumphant, what Hugh B. Brown really meant is that we are free to think and express our opinions only if they agree with the current Church doctrine, the current creed as it is taught today.

Hugh! Because of you I am undone! You should have been up front with me like Paul who had "renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully"(2 Corinthians 4:2). You were only feigning when you encouraged me to express my problems and opinions and to be unafraid to think. Were you doing this for the deceptive purpose to lead people to think, as is had in the world, the Church was open-minded and not a mind-numbed cult? Now look where that trick led me!

Thanks, Hugh. thanks a lot.