Close Topic Options

Changes In Mormon Doctrine And Practice - Page 4

I agree that every aspect of temple worship is sacred, and therefore any changes must be according to direct revelation to be valid. However, allow me to respectfully disagree on the point that reasons must be fully explained for us to have active, faithful confidence in them.

I believe from my studies that God has not established a pattern of immediate full disclosure. In fact, the Lord often works by commanding and waiting to be obeyed before any reason is given. The reason we worship in any way is that we believe we are doing the will of God. From Adam offering sacrifices after he was cast out of the garden, to Abraham deciding to sacrifice Isaac, to Mormon redundantly including Nephi's record as well as the book of Lehi, to Brigham Young and those with him settling in a wild, desolate valley, the real reasons have never been readily apparent to those who obey. Their only motivation for doing these things was obedience to God - not logic, not peer pressure, not speculation. They loved him, so they did what did not seem reasonable nor sensible at the time, but what they knew to be revelation.

In this dispensation of the restoration, we have become spoiled in a way, because we have so many answers now that previous generations had to take on faith. However, we are not entitled to knowledge that God would not have us receive, and it is not our privilege to speculate where he chooses to remain silent. We are invited to experiment upon his word, and to test the fruits of it, even if it does not make sense in the beginning.

When it comes to the duties of the prophet and his associates, they are responsible to make the will of the Lord known to us in matters of Churchwide significance. Since this particular issue relates specifically to the temple and the way things are done there, it is appropriate that they have given instruction to the temple presidencies for implementation in the realm of their stewardship. However, the prophet is only obligated to say that which the Lord commands him, and he may be constrained by the Spirit not to reveal any more explanation than the commandment itself.

Additionally, if we can trust the teachings of Wilford Woodruff in the Doctrine and Covenants, we can trust that the head of the Church today is bound by the Lord to teach and administer the truth to us.

These are not attacks on those who do not share my views, but I believe them to be solid reasons for my sustaining the prophet and defending the doctrines the Lord has given him. However, the ultimate reason, even the rock of revelation upon which this work is founded, is the confirmation of the Holy Ghost.

Practice Doctrine Mormon Changes

There have been several times in our discussions where people have commented that the Lord will not take the Church from the Earth again. Actually, the scriptures say that the Priesthood will not be taken from the Earth again.

Does this mean the same thing?

Here is one quote that applies directly to this.

Also, Brigham Young said the following, regarding the early Christian Church, up through present day Christianity.

(Read the whole talk at: https://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_12/refJDvol12-16.html )

Where do we get the idea that we will actually do better than anyone ever before us? The only time in all of history where we know that the "Church" avoided apostasy for more than about 20 or 30 years is in the Book of Mormon, with the Nephites after Jesus' Resurrection. In that case, the people, as a whole, became Terrestrial in nature (at least spiritual nature). In all other cases, after the Dispensation Head died, the "Church" went into apostasy in very short order.

What assurance do we have that we, the Church in the Fullness of Times, haven't strayed into Apostasy? We have strong evidence that we have left many doctrines, and changed many ordinances over the years. The Saints have rejected doctrines, and proudly state that we no longer believe in, or practice, certain things because we are not worthy of them.

This is the Restoration! It is meant to be the time when things are restored for the last time! Yet we are happy to say that we no longer have to perform some "distasteful" portions of certain ordinances, nor do we have to live Plural Marriage or the United Order, because these things don't apply to us in the modern world.

I hold that we have left the path to the Kingdom of God, and that we, as a Church and a people, face a horrific tribulation to bring us back to the proper path. Not very many of us will be able to return to that path, either, since we have wholeheartedly embraced the move to appease the World (Babylon).

Just my thoughts on this matter.

Changes In Mormon Doctrine And Practice Studies Doctrine Mormon

I found an interesting article in lds.org about changes in doctrine and practice through Church history. Some quotes are quite controversial, please feel free to share your thoughts:

Source 8

Page 4 Practice Doctrine Mormon Changes

I don't think I have a problem with "new" doctrine. I have a problem with all the "old" doctrine that has been abandoned. And I really didn't like Elder Lee's statement, indicating that the "order of Heaven" would change with the circumstances in the world.

All that I know that has been given as "new" doctrine has been things like removing important parts of the endowment, changing the initiatory ordinances to make them more politically correct, etc.

And, yes, I love the way we are told to disregard the teachings of "dead" prophets like Joseph Smith in favor of "living" prophets. I have a huge problem with disregarding ANYTHING that Joseph Smith said, as he is the Head of this dispensation.

But, hey, I may be wrong. I may miss out on all the blessings. I will have to take that chance.

Practice Doctrine Mormon Changes

Let me add some other changes to the doctrine and ordinances of the Church.

1. Christ during his ministry limited his teachings primarily to the Jews, even commenting that the Gentiles were dogs, Peter later taught the Gentiles.
2. Book of Mormon Prohibition of Polygamy, while it was practiced in the Old Testament and in the Early Church.
3 The name of the Church Changed three times all within Joseph Smith Life. It was first called the Church of Christ, Then The Church of Jesus Christ, and finally THe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
4. Garments at one time went to the wrist and to the ankles.
5. Wine was the official liquid of the Sacrament, then it was changed to water.
6. The Sabbath was at one time on Saturday.
7. Joseph Smith asked Brigham Young to help begin perfecting the Temple Endowment during his tenure.

Brigham Young said

Is it not a stretch to believe that God will give us his truth only up to the capacity for us to understand it? If God has to simplify the endowment ceremony for us to understand the important concepts behind it, he will (the original endowment was eight hours). If he must add complexity, because we are progressing in knowledge, then we are blessed because of it. Does this change the meaning behind the words? I do not believe so. If he changes how the message is given, due to our inability to understand it, it is his right.

We have to ask, are the hand movements, words, clothing etc. More important then the meaning behind these movements, words, clothing etc. Have we lost sight of the covenants that we are making because God chooses to make them more accessible to us and to our limited capacities?

And when we complain that the Church has changed from Joseph Smith to the Current Prophet, we must acknowledge that the Church Changed (based on revelation) even during the Prophet Joseph Smith's fourteen years as Prophet.

Rather off topic, but... Joseph Smith said to Brigham Young when he (Joseph Smith) gave the endowment to him; QUOTE Brother Brigham, this is not arranged perfectly; however we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed. I wish you to take this matter in hand: organize and systematize all these ceremonies". Therefore Joseph Smith acknowledged that the endowment needed to perfected and that it was Brigham Young who would be responsible in trying to perfect it.

Therefore Joseph Smith acknowledged that the endowment needed to perfected and that it was Brigham Young who would be responsible in trying to perfect it.

Changes In Mormon Doctrine And Practice

One can argue that maybe we are not talking about simplifying but changing parts of the Temple ceremony and ordinances. We also could argue whether these changes come from divine revelation or simple social pressure/convenience:

a. Shortening the length of temple ceremonies (too long? too boring for some?)

b. Eliminating some very significant and important "oaths" (members getting scared of the consequences of breaking covenants?)

c. Initiatories (Church being sued for improper touching?)

d. Garments (too hot? too long?)

e. Protestant Minister gone (newer members offended?)

Many, many, many more changes....

It is also interesting that quote of Brigham Young (who claimed Joseph Smith told him to do the necessary changes) because Joseph Smith said:

Changes Mormon Doctrine Practice - Page 4

I think that you are correct LDS.
We all acknowledge that there were changes made, but determining if they were divinely inspired changes, or results of societal pressures seem difficult to determine. That question, probably is one that must be answered on a personal level for each individual.

But I do ask myself: Can the Church change or must it remain static? What is the purpose of a Living Prophet, if there is to be no changes in how the Church fulfills its calling of bringing people to Christ?

I find no issues with the changes that have come, as we have evidence, that Joseph Smith himself was changing the Temple endowment from the time it was institute until his death.

The ordinance of the Sacrament was changed fundamentally by Joseph Smith with the use of water instead of wine. In the statement that you have quoted, it would indicate that Joseph Smith did in fact change an ordinance. Are we to fault him for this change because it was different then he originally instituted it?

But are these changes a change in doctrine, or are they a change in how the doctrine is presented. I would purpose that the changes in the Temple ceremony are a change in how the message is presented, and not necessarily as change in the message itself. But I believe this is a point that we will disagree on.

Joseph Smith said that the endowment gave:

That is a grand purpose, and one, which I do not believe has changed throughout the years.

Changes Mormon Doctrine Practice Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 4

Hmmm...I am not sure about that Dbackers, we are speaking about changes (removing certain aspects of the sacred ordinances) not simply changing a couple of words around. We are talking about important changes, not linguistics or merely presentational but I am open to your point of view and would like to know more about the presentation theory. Thanks.