Mormon doctrines never ever subject to change?

[Marie5890]

Since this seems to be one question that has emerged from another thread, I think it’s a credible theological thread to have when it comes to Mormons.

So, what Mormon doctrines that are now in existence are never ever ever subject to change?

JSmith was considered to be THE PROPHET of this dispensation.

What teaching did he ever put forth that will never, ever, ever be subject to change?

BYoung certainly did not teach exactly what JSmith taught.

Does that mean that BYoung issued in another apostasy?

I would like some clarity when it comes to Mormon theology. Because thus far, I find it all very confusing with no continuity. SOOO Much has CHANGED since Joseph Smith was THE PROPHET of THIS dispensation

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

They are very like the Moslem Religion, most of the Mormon’s have three or more wives.

There was a programme on English Television only last week, one guy said he had 3 wives, and 18 children, and he said his father had six wives and 46 children of which he was one of them.

I thought by American law one could only have one wife, so how are the Mormon’s allowed so many wives and all the children

 

[captainrick]

They are very like the Moslem Religion, most of the Mormon’s have three or more wives.

There was a programme on English Television only last week, one guy said he had 3 wives, and 18 children, and he said his father had six wives and 46 children of which he was one of them.

I thought by American law one could only have one wife, so how are the Mormon’s allowed so many wives and all the children

They don’t. It is illegal, and very rare among Mormons in the U.S.

 

[dianaiad]

They are very like the Moslem Religion, most of the Mormon’s have three or more wives.

There was a programme on English Television only last week, one guy said he had 3 wives, and 18 children, and he said his father had six wives and 46 children of which he was one of them.

I thought by American law one could only have one wife, so how are the Mormon’s allowed so many wives and all the children

Dear Celtic Maiden:

Yes, there are Mormon groups that practice polygamy. However, these are minority groups. The largest group…by a huge margin…, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints, (the one based in Salt Lake City, Utah), does not. In fact, one of the fastest way to get oneself excommunicated is to try it.

 

[iepuras]

They are very like the Moslem Religion, most of the Mormon’s have three or more wives.

There was a programme on English Television only last week, one guy said he had 3 wives, and 18 children, and he said his father had six wives and 46 children of which he was one of them.

I thought by American law one could only have one wife, so how are the Mormon’s allowed so many wives and all the children

Those people are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They belong to a breakaway Mormon group. The polygamist men only have one legal wife.

Marie, I’m getting the popcorn out.

 

[dianaiad]

Since this seems to be one question that has emerged from another thread, I think it’s a credible theological thread to have when it comes to Mormons.

So, what Mormon doctrines that are now in existence are never ever ever subject to change?

JSmith was considered to be THE PROPHET of this dispensation.

What teaching did he ever put forth that will never, ever, ever be subject to change?

BYoung certainly did not teach exactly what JSmith taught.

Does that mean that BYoung issued in another apostasy?

I would like some clarity when it comes to Mormon theology. Because thus far, I find it all very confusing with no continuity. SOOO Much has CHANGED since Joseph Smith was THE PROPHET of THIS dispensation

Marie, we have two problems here.

First, since we do claim to have living prophets who receive revelation to guide the church, it would, actually, be logical and expected for the church to change practices and reactions as the needs of the people changed, just as Moses’ people had different needs at different times, and what God told them to do changed along with that.

The same thing happened in NT times; Jesus was Jewish and lived the Law…and so did most of His followers. It wasn’t until a bit later that the gospel was expanded to include gentiles, and one of the more famous ‘changes’ was the idea that Christians didn’t need to obey the dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law.

Practices kept changing.

In the CoJCoLDS, we claim that our basic beliefs do not change; the basic doctrines do not. Practices do, things we are told to do in response to our environments do, church meeting times do, even who gets the priesthood does (though our basic doctrine has always stated that all men would eventually get the priesthood, so in fact, that didn’t change either; it just, finally, got put in practice.)

I think that we need to define the difference between doctrine, practice and dogma. “Practice” does not become dogma simply because it is more convenient to criticize it as such.

 

[iepuras]

Marie, we have two problems here.

First, since we do claim to have living prophets who receive revelation to guide the church, it would, actually, be logical and expected for the church to change practices and reactions as the needs of the people changed, just as Moses’ people had different needs at different times, and what God told them to do changed along with that.

The same thing happened in NT times; Jesus was Jewish and lived the Law…and so did most of His followers. It wasn’t until a bit later that the gospel was expanded to include gentiles, and one of the more famous ‘changes’ was the idea that Christians didn’t need to obey the dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law.

Practices kept changing.

In the CoJCoLDS, we claim that our basic beliefs do not change; the basic doctrines do not. Practices do, things we are told to do in response to our environments do, church meeting times do, even who gets the priesthood does (though our basic doctrine has always stated that all men would eventually get the priesthood, so in fact, that didn’t change either; it just, finally, got put in practice.)

I think that we need to define the difference between doctrine, practice and dogma. “Practice” does not become dogma simply because it is more convenient to criticize it as such.

Then, instead of beating around the bush, please define doctrine, practice and dogma in an LDS context and let us know what is not subject to change and what can be relied upon to not change.

I cannot speak for Marie, but I believe that is the point of this thread - to discuss what does not change.

Instead of talking about how there are terms to define and how there are problems, please define those terms and attempt to solve those problems in an LDS context.

 

[Marie5890]

Yes, I would like to know what doctrines and dogmas will never ever change in the LDS Church.

With JSmith being THE PROPHET of this dispensation, called to RESTORE the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I want to know what doctrine and dogmas that JSmith taught as THE PROPHET of THIS dispensation will never ever change, since THE PROPHET has restored them in their fullness. (and assuming no apostasy has happened sinse THE PROPHET of this Dispensation has come to RESTORE THE GOSPEL that WAS LOST DUE TO APOSTASY

It’s a simple question…

Was JSmith THE PROPHET sent to RESTORE THE GOSPEL in THIS DISPENSATION since the GREAT APOSTASY…

…or was he not???

Truly…simple question…

THE PROPHET? or not??

 

[LivingWaters7]

In the CoJCoLDS, we claim that our basic beliefs do not change; the basic doctrines do not. Practices do, things we are told to do in response to our environments do, church meeting times do, even who gets the priesthood does (though our basic doctrine has always stated that all men would eventually get the priesthood, so in fact, that didn’t change either; it just, finally, got put in practice.)

Where does the LDS church claim that basic beliefs/doctrines do not change? Where are these unchangeable basic beliefs/doctrines defined?

Also, various prophets have taught various things about all eventually getting the priesthood. The further back we go, the more we see the view that yes, blacks would eventually get the priesthood, but it would be after everyone else got it. How nice.

I think that we need to define the difference between doctrine, practice and dogma. “Practice” does not become dogma simply because it is more convenient to criticize it as such.

Where does the LDS church define such words?