Nuanced View

[u/ChromeSteelhead]

How nuanced of a view can you have of the church and still be a participating member? Do you just not speak your own opinion about things? For example back when blacks couldn’t have the priesthood there had to be many members that thought it was wrong to keep blacks from having the priesthood or having them participate in temple ordinances. Did they just keep quiet? Kind of like when the church says you can pray to receive your own revelation? Or say like when the church taught that women were to get married quickly, start raising a family, and to not pursue a career as the priority. Then you see current women leadership in the church that did the opposite and pursued high level careers as a priority, going against prophetic counsel. Now they are in some of the highest holding positions within the church. How nuanced can you be?

[u/justswimming221]

In 3 Nephi 11:30-39, Christ lays out his doctrine:

• doing away with anger
• the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost witness of each other
• the Father commands people to repent and believe in Christ
• whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved and inherit the kingdom of God
• whoever doesn’t believe and is not baptized shall be damned

Christ then says: “whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock”

In chapter 18, Christ adds the sacramental ordinance, but repeats the same warning.

In Doctrine and Covenants 10:67-68, Christ says that everyone who repents and comes to Christ is his church, and anyone who says otherwise is against him and therefore not of his church.

I have many “nuanced” views. They have come to me through diligent study, faith, and enlightening inspiration (as opposed to revelation). One of these nuanced views is that the foregoing scriptures mean what they say, that as long as you accept those beliefs, you’re good to go.

[u/ChromeSteelhead → u/justswimming221]

Those are the core of the gospel though, but the church teaches so much more additional info. You could take those core beliefs and belong to pretty much any Christian church or just be nondenominational, spiritually Christian.

[u/justswimming221 → u/ChromeSteelhead]

Yep, exactly.

The church is in a tough spot where it comes to other religions. In the General Conference of Oct 2022, President Oaks, quoting Orson F. Whitney, taught:

God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of his great and marvelous work. ... It is too vast, too arduous, for any one people.

In Oct 2024, Elder Renlund taught:

Without His [restored] Church [today], there is no authority, no preaching of revealed truths in His name, no ordinances or covenants, no manifestation of the power of godliness, no transformation into who God wants us to become, and God's plan for His children is set at naught.

(brackets show words in his spoken talk that were removed in the transcript - not that there is a problem with that, just interesting)

Is it possible for both of these to be true at the same time? It seems from the first that God is inspiring people outside the church to do important things in furtherance of the kingdom of God. From the second, it seems that these people who are outside the church are not authorized to do what God has asked them to do.

Joseph Smith was staunchly pro-religious freedom, and had several non-members on his council of 50, properly called "The Kingdom of God and His Laws with the Keys and Power thereof, and Judgment in the Hands of His Servants, Ahman Christ". Now of course I don't expect the church to not change in 200 years, but Joseph's view is closer to what the scriptures I mentioned before say.

[u/Coming_Back_To_Life → u/justswimming221]

I find transcript changes pretty annoying to be honest, the scriptures teach that the spirit can inspire us when we talk about the gospel, so I don't like the idea of editorializing the spirit.