A follow-up to part one.
Can a prophet state his own opinion, or must everything he say as a prophet be considered doctrine? If he can state his personal opinion while speaking as a prophet, can this opinion be influenced by popular beliefs of the society in which he lives? If so, can this opinion affect the opinions of succeeding prophets? If so, can an opinion ever be stated long enough and by enough prophets that it becomes a de facto doctrine?
What’s a de facto doctrine?
See definition #2.
Yeah, a prophet is just a man when he’s not relying revelation. And the only way you know if he is recieving revelation is when the Spirit tells you. Peace in your mind and heart.
Kim, I know what “de facto” means. I’m just trying to undestand specifically what you mean in this case. A doctrine that isn’t really a doctrine, that lacks the force of doctrine, isn’t what I would call a “de fact doctrine.” It’s what I would call a “non-doctrine.”
Something that people believe is a doctrine, but has never been formally accepted as a doctrine. Things like the Book of Mormon lands taking up all of North and South America, all American indigenous peoples descending from Lehi, blacks never being able to receive the priesthood, and so forth.
Without wanting to dwell on a mere quibble, I would just say, again, that I view those as nondoctrines, not as “de facto doctrines.”
So would I, but many in the wards I’ve attended would disagree with us.