False doctrine taught in church

[ute4ever]

Back in 1999 when I had been in the church less than a year, my EQP asked me to teach the lesson on a non-manual week. In class, I brought up the point that Cain followed Lucifer in the war in heaven, but came to earth because he had a role to fulfill. (I don't recall why I thought that was relevant). It was something that my roommate, a 27-year-old RM, had told me the day before while looking through my lesson notes.

One guy got up and walked out. Several others just looked at me and smiled politely. I was so green in the church, I don't know how I would have felt had the lesson been interrupted with comments about false doctrine.

[Indy Coug]

I wouldn't explicitly state it was "false doctrine" or berated the person for teaching such; I would just try to correct what was stated and provide a reference or two to back it up.

[K-dog]

I ignore it if it doesn't seem problematic. I've been known to talk a teacher through the reason why it is false doctrine if I think it is important. If I have a leadership role in that particular class, I always correct it.

[FMCoug]

You don't think stating that Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith are equals is blatant false doctrine? What the hell would be? Yikes.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

You don't think stating that Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith are equals is blatant false doctrine? What the hell would be? Yikes.

That's one I would probably try and talk a brother through. That isn't a fine point of irrelevant doctrine. That is a major misunderstanding and problem.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by creekster

LOL. I like this approach best. Makes the point but almost certainly scares them from bothering you again. Genius.

Its the Rocky Balboa approach. Someone has to have the balls to call those instructors on all of their bullshit. Most people are just too scared to do it so you need a real man at the ready.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by K-dog

That's one I would probably try and talk a brother through. That isn't a fine point of irrelevant doctrine. That is a major misunderstanding and problem.

I like Solon's approach of disagreeing by agreeing.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by K-dog

That's one I would probably try and talk a brother through. That isn't a fine point of irrelevant doctrine. That is a major misunderstanding and problem.

Oh I don't know. How are you going to live your life any differently if they are equals as opposed to that they aren't. I think as members of the church we are all exceptionally clear on what we should do (attend church, love one another, read the scriptures, etc) and not do (adultery, alcohol, porn, etc) but when it comes to church doctrine people are wildly all over the map and there is authority out there for a great many things that are not all consistent with each other.

This is why I would only correct if someone were suggesting a "should or shouldn't do" that is wrong. As to the other stuff, I'm pretty happy to let people believe whatever they want even if I think it is wrong. The brethren have resisted attempts at "Mormon Doctrine" type volumes for a reason: Mormon Doctrine is not always easy to define.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Oh I don't know. How are you going to live your life any differently if they are equals as opposed to that they aren't. I think as members of the church we are all exceptionally clear on what we should do (attend church, love one another, read the scriptures, etc) and not do (adultery, alcohol, porn, etc) but when it comes to church doctrine people are wildly all over the map and there is authority out there for a great many things that are not all consistent with each other.

This is why I would only correct if someone were suggesting a "should or shouldn't do" that is wrong. As to the other stuff, I'm pretty happy to let people believe whatever they want even if I think it is wrong. The brethren have resisted attempts at "Mormon Doctrine" type volumes for a reason: Mormon Doctrine is not always easy to define.

I agree with you on most things. But the example given is pretty egregious.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I like Solon's approach of disagreeing by agreeing.

A very good approach.