Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluebell

Do the doctrines of God change?

Recommended Posts

Sacrifice Isaac: here's a ram instead.

This isn't a novel issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

You mention “line upon line” as a principle. Latter Day Saints often quote this without knowing the origin.

Isaiah 28:10

I read the scripture with a different context than I normally hear it [partially] quoted.  The writing around that verse (context) is condemning the beliefs and practices of the “Drunkards of Ephraim.”  I read the verse as condemning the pattern of revelation (line upon line) that those people were using.

I’m certainly the LAST person you want to trust regarding interpretation of scripture. But, I urge you to take a look if you haven’t already and decide for yourself whether Isaiah believes their pattern of receiving revelation is how God wants to give us revelation.

The idea is that we are not worthy to have the fullness all at once. We get only line upon line to the church as a whole precisely for the reasons Isaiah gives. Likewise as Matt 13 notes parables are given so that "Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive;" 

So what you see as a problematic usage is actually pretty key to our usage. It's why the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon remains sealed, for instance. I'd say Alma 13 outlines the same principle. "...nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him. And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full." (Alma 12:9-10)

God could reveal lots of things to the Church as a whole that he doesn't because of the receptiveness of the Church. However it doesn't mean he doesn't reveal things. I'm quite confident the brethren know things about certain topics well beyond what is taught to the church as a whole.

The principles of Isaiah 28 are key to the restoration idea of revelation I'd say. (I'd also say that we, as the heirs of Ephraim, also fulfill well the other parts of that chapter)

 

Edited by clarkgoble
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

It might help to define what doctrine is.  I'll just leave you all with that can of worms!

 

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I'm quite confident the brethren know things about certain topics well beyond what is taught to the church as a whole.

How are you so confident of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JulieM said:

What if we get back to God and he tells us we should have just kept it simple like Christ did?  Love each other and afterwards come back to His love and forever be with those we love?

The evidence (what scripture quotes Christ saying in the New Testament if you want to limit to what he is quoted as saying as a mortal) isn't simple and is more than just the two great commandments.

I have no problem if people believe those two teachings are the only ones we should be paying attention to in the scriptures, but implying that was all he said involves ignoring a lot of stuff, imo.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Sacrifice Isaac: here's a ram instead.

This isn't a novel issue.

Not the same issue at all.

Isaac and the ram was directly symbolic of the Savior's atonement and therefore represents an eternal unchanging doctrine as opposed to a change.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JulieM said:

What if we get back to God and he tells us we should have just kept it simple like Christ did?  Love each other and afterwards come back to His love and forever be with those we love?

I do think about that and just wonder sometimes.

See, I don't think on it, because I don't believe for a second that that's what Christ did.

I think this Disneyfied version of Christ is one of the biggest problems in the world today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Not the same issue at all.

Isaac and the ram was directly symbolic of the Savior's atonement and therefore represents an eternal unchanging doctrine as opposed to a change.

This is a reason why the bible is questionable. Abraham should have been prosecuted for attempted murder in a perfect world. In any event, this story sounds mythical, as being unnecessary. Surely God could teach his questionable blood sacrifice for sin requirement without actually going to this extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JulieM said:

I think sometimes it’s just two humans with different opinions.  That’s all.

Maybe God is indifferent about using the words Mormon or Mormons?

I agree. When you look back over the history of the church and all the things that were practiced that have been changed or disavowed, I have a hard time thinking that god is that schizophrenic.  I don't believe that god gives a "revelation" then totally does a 180 three years later.  A much more believable explanation to me (and apparently many, many others) is that this is all coming from men.  Men in charge that exercise their authority and make their decisions.  

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

How are you so confident of this?

Agreed.  What evidence is there of this at all.  None.  

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JulieM said:

What if we get back to God and he tells us we should have just kept it simple like Christ did?  Love each other and afterwards come back to His love and forever be with those we love?

Is this Jesus keeping it simple in your view or something else (serious question, I am not understanding how you deal with the times Jesus talks about punishment):

Quote

Matthew 11:23

23 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.

Matthew 25:29-33

Quote

29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheepfrom the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

John 2:15

Quote

15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables;

 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Can you justify that belief?  What are God's eternal truths?  Does He outline them for us anywhere?

 I want to hear your arguments and evidences that support that idea.  Not so I can debate with you but so I can understand why you believe it and not just that you believe.

 

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

So you are an absolutist (as far as the blog uses the word), correct?  (I don't want to assume anything).

I see my view as balanced (I know most people here disagree).
I 100% believe in continuing revelation.  I believe in it completely.  Joseph Smith taught that " This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire." 
I even agree with Brigham - "I felt like a thousand lions. I took the books and laid them down one by one beginning with the Bible, and said, "there lies the Bible, there the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, the revelations God has given through Joseph for the salvation of the people in the 19th Century, yet I would not give the ashes of a rye straw for these three books so far as they are efficacious for the salvation of any man, that lives without the living oracles of God."

But circumstance specific revelation and prophetic guidance are a far cry from following a gospel where anything and everything is temporary and subject to change at any time.
That kind of gospel I believe goes completely against scripture and the teachings of Joseph Smith.  Those teachings are how I justify my belief.
As far as "God's eternal truths" - if it's important enough to be restored in every dispensation I'd call that eternal.  Even the adversary recognizes the eternal, doing that which is done on every world.  The plan of salvation is the same on every world, so are the ordinances.  The name of the Church - probably not.

I can give you some:

  • Ecclesiastes 3:14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him
  • Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
    9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
  • “Ordinances were instituted in heaven before the foundation of the world of in the priesthood, for the salvation of man are not to be altered. not to be changed.  All must be saved upon the same principle.”  Joseph Smith
  • "How, it may be asked, was this known to be a bad angel? By the color of his hair; that is one of the signs that he can be known by, and by his contradicting a former revelation."  Joseph Smith
  • He set the temple ordinances to be the same forever and ever and set Adam to watch over them, to reveal them from heaven to man, or to send angels to reveal them. Joseph Smith
  • D&C 127 27 ... and build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein.  28 For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.
    40 And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein unto my people.
    41 For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times.
    42 And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be built."
  • Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

I could keep going, there are so many.  This barely scratches the surface.

My issue and concern isn't continuing revelation, it isn't command/revoke.  It's that there appears to be nothing to believe in when anything can change.  And I believe there is a gospel that is the always the same, unchanging, and utilized on all God's worlds without number.  They are the laws required to become a Celestial being, the ones that made God into God.  Even if we can't all agree or even understand them right now.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Not the same issue at all.

Isaac and the ram was directly symbolic of the Savior's atonement and therefore represents an eternal unchanging doctrine as opposed to a change.

Abraham didn't know that. Focus on the instant his hand was stayed, just before recognition occurred. Such moments are where our souls are made or broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Abraham didn't know that. Focus on the instant his hand was stayed, just before recognition occurred. Such moments are where our souls are made or broken.

So does that represent God changing an element of the gospel?  If not, I don't see that it falls under the thread topic.
God told Abraham to do something different, just as he told the saints to go from Nauvoo to Utah.

God didn't change any doctrine.  He never except to reveal more or newer doctrines.  He never contradicts himself.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So does that represent God changing an element of the gospel?  If not, I don't see that it falls under the thread topic.
God told Abraham to do something different, just as he told the saints to go from Nauvoo to Utah.

God didn't change any doctrine.  He never except to reveal more or newer doctrines.  He never contradicts himself.

G-d said to Lehi, as He'd said to Abraham, "Lekh lekha!" But then He said, "Hold on. Send the boys back for the girls." And then He said, "Just keep waiting here for a bit longer. The boys need to go back a second time. For plates this time."

G-d never changed His mind. The prophet only knew a part of G-d's mind. Then more was revealed. Same as Abraham on Moriah. Same as now.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

if it's important enough to be restored in every dispensation I'd call that eternal.

How do you determine something has been restored in every dispensation when records are so limited?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Calm said:

How do you determine something has been restored in every dispensation when records are so limited?

Correct. It simply isn't knowable.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Calm said:

How do you determine something has been restored in every dispensation when records are so limited?

So you don't believe that everyone on the earth needs to be baptized by authority  (either in life or vicariously) to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?
You don't believe that only those sealed for time and all eternity will be married in the hereafter?
I believe Joseph when he teaches that the ordinances were established before the earth, revealed each time by Adam, and that all men must be judged on the same principles.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So you don't believe that everyone on the earth needs to be baptized by authority  (either in life or vicariously) to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?
You don't believe that only those sealed for time and all eternity will be married in the hereafter?
I believe Joseph when he teaches that the ordinances were established before the earth, revealed each time by Adam, and that all men must be judged on the same principles.

JL, that's how I've always thought it was supposed to be. Not saying I believe it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

How are you so confident of this?

 

2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Agreed.  What evidence is there of this at all.  None.  

Actually the idea of an inner circle that knows more than the rest started with JS. Think about polygamy, the anointed quorum, and the council of 50 for really obvious examples. Second anointings have continued up until today according to multiple sources, and they are meant to be entirely secret, so there is at least one topic in which they believe they are meant to know more on a given topic than others. My guess is there is more to the modern inner circle knowledge than just about the second anointing and church finances.

Edited by Benjamin Seeker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

So you don't believe that everyone on the earth needs to be baptized by authority  (either in life or vicariously) to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?
You don't believe that only those sealed for time and all eternity will be married in the hereafter?
I believe Joseph when he teaches that the ordinances were established before the earth, revealed each time by Adam, and that all men must be judged on the same principles.

I wasn't challenging you, but asking for clarification.

I thought you meant something different, that we could check in other scriptures ( specifically the Bible given the context, but also PoGP for believers) to see if there was a prophet discussing a certain principle in each dispensation to determine what were eternal principles.

It becomes something different imo when one prophet says "I am teaching a principle that has been taught in each dispensation" but we have only record of his teaching.  At that point, it is about having faith that prophet speaks the revealed truth and if one believes he speaks revelation from God, what does it matter whether it has been taught before (or whether or not there are records of this teaching) or revealed for the first time by God through him?

PS:  I don't believe God is inconsistent, I believe we just lack understanding of the whole picture...just as somethings in science seem paradoxical because we don't have a truly unified theory yet.  Nature is not being inconsistent because water as a solid floats while most other compounds, the solid form is heavier than the liquid, for example.  Or because sometimes light acts as a particle from what scientists can measure and sometimes as a wave, does this mean it actually switches its nature and is thus inherently inconsistent or is it that we only see some of the picture of what it is at this point, so our understanding is what is inconsistent?

Edited by Calm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

 

Actually the idea of an inner circle that knows more than the rest started with JS. Think about polygamy, the anointed quorum, and the council of 50 for really obvious examples. Second anointings have continued up until today according to multiple sources, and they are meant to be entirely secret, so there is at least one topic in which they believe they are meant to know more on a given topic than others. My guess is there is more to the modern inner circle knowledge than just about the second anointing and church finances.

What about the forty day period or times when Christ told his apostles to speak to no one of his teachings?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Calm said:

What about the forty day period or times when Christ told his apostles to speak to no one of his teachings?

I just meant in the modern church. I don’t doubt JS was inspired by these exact type of NT verses in creating his inner circle.

Edited by Benjamin Seeker

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

I just meant in the modern church. I don’t doubt JS was inspired by these exact type of NT verses in creating his inner circle.

:good:

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...