Are the words of Christ not always doctrine?

[NamasteMama]

I got in a heated discussion at another forum with a woman who was saying just because Christ said something did not make it doctrine. Is this so?

[sbsion]

no question, when a perfect intelligence speaks, it's nothing but truth hence, doctrine

[Rand]

John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." Sounds doctrinal to me.

[LukeAir2008]

I got in a heated discussion at another forum with a woman who was saying just because Christ said something did not make it doctrine. Is this so?

It depends in what context she was talking. We don't know that all the supposed quotations of Christ as given for example in the New Testament are always accurately recorded.

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.(Matt 22:30)

But certainly the true words of Christ are always doctrine wherever we find a true recording or transcription of such

[alexoyarzun]

I got in a heated discussion at another forum with a woman who was saying just because Christ said something did not make it doctrine. Is this so?

I'm glad you brought up this question because it is clear to me that Jesus Christ in not quoted enough. And that is true not only in the LDS church of Jesus Christ, but in all other churches of "Jesus Christ". I hope we would quote Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and 3rd Nephi more than the other books. All of the other books are great, but they all fall short to the words of Christ himself. I get into the same discussions with supposed Christians who proclaim to be Christian, yet don't believe what Christ said or don't want to follow his commandments. It is very sad because the world is in so much turmoil and confusion and yet Christians are not even preaching what Christ preached. How are we going to get out this mess? God, have mercy on us all!

[Silas]

I suppose it is theoretically possible that Christ or an angel representing him, could say something privately to an individual and unless it is also revealed to the church by the prophet it is not "official" church doctrine. It would still however be truth, just a truth that hasn't been given to the church as a whole yet. However if we are talking about anything Christ said in scripture then it is both true and "official" church doctrine. (Excepting mis-translations as has already been pointed out.) If someone argues those points I would just remove myself from the conversation. It simply isn't fruitful at that point.