Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluebell

Do the doctrines of God change?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, JulieM said:

Yes, that’s a great example!

Christ drank wine and so did Joseph Smith.  Brigham Young drank beer.  And so on.  It’s been men who have made the rules about this that we are now regulated by (to get a temple recommend).  Those can change and have, so I believe these are manmade commandments (it wasn’t even a commandment at first and even that changed).

Which is why it's a temporal commandment, not an eternal law or ordinance.  It's one of those where faith to listen to God's representative is more important than the law itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Which is why it's a temporal commandment, not an eternal law or ordinance.  It's one of those where faith to listen to God's representative is more important than the law itself.

For me, that makes no sense.  It was ok for Joseph or Brigham to get drunk but just not if they lived today?

So how do we know what will be ok in 100 years from now?  (We don’t!)

I agree with others here that we should live to be in tune so we can know what God’s laws or eternal truths are.  They don’t change, in my opinion.

Edited by JulieM

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, JulieM said:

For me, that makes no sense.  It was ok for Joseph or Brigham to get drunk but just not if they lived today?

So how do we know what will be ok in 100 years from now?  (We don’t!)

I agree with others here that we should live to be in tune so we can know what God’s laws or eternal truths are.  They don’t change, in my opinion.

Eternal truths don't change.  A physical law like the word of wisdom is clearly temporal, not eternal. It's a modern day law of Moses.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, JLHPROF said:

Eternal truths don't change.  A physical law like the word of wisdom is clearly temporal, not eternal.

I agree.  And I believe those come from man (humans).  Nothing wrong with that.  Men are still trying to get it right 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, JulieM said:

I agree.  And I believe those come from man (humans).  Nothing wrong with that.  Men are still trying to get it right 😛

The law of Moses didn't come from man.  I see no reason to believe the word of wisdom did either.

Having it as a temple recommend condition however seems to have come from man.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

The law of Moses didn't come from man.

How do you know that is true?

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ALarson said:

How do you know that is true?

Funny.  I suppose if you don't believe then anything you want can be called man-made. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Funny.  I suppose if you don't believe then anything you want can be called man-made. 

Exactly.

But, it comes down to each one of us studying and praying for our own confirmation or inspiration regarding what comes from God (and then living our lives accordingly).  

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, ALarson said:

Exactly.

Can you explain to me why you would ever feel the need to study and pray for confirmation on stuff you agree is godly in the first place?

5 hours ago, JulieM said:

And I believe those come from man (humans).  

If specific rules applying to temporal laws are all man made, then it appears to me that the only laws you likely believe are from God are general ones like Love one another...that few people would ever question.  Can you explain why we would have to live by faith if God gave us only laws that were obviously good and few would question?

This approach makes sense from the human's side to me (don't trust fallible leaders), but I got to wonder why God would waste his time and effort.  Wouldn't we having been given a decent brain and awareness of others be able to get to the stage of knowing the value of a general law of "love one another" (interpreted how one is to do that however one will because no prophet actually has instructions from God on temporal how tos, such as pay10% tithing and cost of two meals or more fast offerings, that is just how the prophets have chosen to interpret God's law)?

(Not mocking, but wondering how this works)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, let’s roll said:

I see abundant evidence and I’m a trial lawyer with a fair amount of cynicism attendant to that vocation.

I have no doubt of the existence of God or His Son, Jesus Christ.  And I certainly don’t worship them because any man has “commanded” me to do so but because of the love that I have for God and His Son, born of countless instances of communion with them.

I’ve proved God truthful in keeping His promise to provide His wisdom when sought with real intent.

I’ve proved Christ truthful in His promise to give me rest as a strive to follow Him.  An important aspect of that rest is dissipation of fear and doubt.  Choosing rest over restlessness has been a great blessing in my life.

He invites all of us to do the same.

You've proved it? How? Probably through feelings, right? And of course your feelings could never be wrong. Also, my guess is that you have to compartmentalize religious reliance on feelings from the thinking required everywhere else. Religious thinking just doesn't cut it outside of the church building.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Calm said:

Can you explain to me why you would ever feel the need to study and pray for confirmation on stuff you agree is godly in the first place?

I"m not referring to the two great commandments that Christ gave us.  I'm speaking of anything that comes through our leaders who are men.  I have mostly had confirmations that what they teach is from God, but I have also had confirmations that some of what they believe is not (ie. polygamy for example).  Studying and praying about things is how I determine (for myself) whether it's of God of of man.

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Exiled said:

You've proved it? How? Probably through feelings, right? And of course your feelings could never be wrong. Also, my guess is that you have to compartmentalize religious reliance on feelings from the thinking required everywhere else. Religious thinking just doesn't cut it outside of the church building.

Let's roll can answer for himself (and I'm guessing his answers are better than the answers you've made up/assigned to him), but I just wanted to add that my 'proof' (in those few areas where I have it) has nothing to do with feelings.  "Feelings" (which is usually just a snarky way for a nonbeliever to describe what a believer would call a manifestation of the Spirit) help me to have faith, but they are not what I base my 'proof' on.  Those are different.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I"m not referring to the two great commandments that Christ gave us.  I'm speaking of anything that comes through our leaders who are men.  I have mostly had confirmations that why they teach is from God, but I have also had confirmations that some of what they believe is not (ie. polygamy for example).  Studying and praying about things is how I determine (for myself) whether it's of God of of man.

Those two great commandments that Christ gave us come to us through men though, right?  I don't understand distinguishing what Christ gave us and what came through men when there is nothing that Christ gave us that has not come through men.  Can you explain what you mean there?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Those two great commandments that Christ gave us come to us through men though, right?

Yes, they were recorded by men.  I haven't claimed that everything that comes through men can't possibly be from God.  Just the opposite.  I stated:  "I'm speaking of anything that comes through our leaders who are men.  I have mostly had confirmations that what they teach is from God."

Edited by ALarson
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Exiled said:

You've proved it? How? Probably through feelings, right? And of course your feelings could never be wrong. Also, my guess is that you have to compartmentalize religious reliance on feelings from the thinking required everywhere else. Religious thinking just doesn't cut it outside of the church building.

You have your assumptions and guesses, I have my certainty.  

I use the logic and intelligence that comes with an IQ in the 140s within the context and perspective provided by Divine wisdom and guidance.  My experience has been that each can be a catalyst in increasing the other, no compartmentalizing required.

It’s available to you as well. 

If you decide to seek it out I wish you Godspeed in your efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, bluebell said:

Let's roll can answer for himself (and I'm guessing his answers are better than the answers you've made up/assigned to him), but I just wanted to add that my 'proof' (in those few areas where I have it) has nothing to do with feelings.  "Feelings" (which is usually just a snarky way for a nonbeliever to describe what a believer would call a manifestation of the Spirit) help me to have faith, but they are not what I base my 'proof' on.  Those are different.

 

Thanks bluebell.  I enjoyed, and agree with, your perspective.

 I agree many discount “feelings.”  While I think we all benefit from bringing our intelligence and logic to spiritual undertakings (no reason to compartmentalize), if that’s all we bring, we’ll never understand spiritual truth.  Things of the Spirit require the Spirit to be understood.  As you noted, feelings are part of that.  

Those who discount or mock feelings would do well to remember that scripture has defined the inability to understand things of the Spirit as the state of being “past feeling.”

Edited by let’s roll
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Let's roll can answer for himself (and I'm guessing his answers are better than the answers you've made up/assigned to him), but I just wanted to add that my 'proof' (in those few areas where I have it) has nothing to do with feelings.  "Feelings" (which is usually just a snarky way for a nonbeliever to describe what a believer would call a manifestation of the Spirit) help me to have faith, but they are not what I base my 'proof' on.  Those are different.

 

bluebell, I admire that you are aware of such differences and that your proof is not always based on feelings.  You are the first that I am aware of to admit that as a stalwart member.  Thank you,

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, ALarson said:

I"m not referring to the two great commandments that Christ gave us.  I'm speaking of anything that comes through our leaders who are men.  I have mostly had confirmations that what they teach is from God, but I have also had confirmations that some of what they believe is not (ie. polygamy for example).  Studying and praying about things is how I determine (for myself) whether it's of God of of man.

No, I get that (I think)...I don't think I am expressing the thing I can't get my head around...and won't tonight.  Maybe another day.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Jeanne said:

You are the first that I am aware of to admit that as a stalwart member. 

This is one of the comments that makes me feel I am missing something here.

I would have said almost every stalwart member has described their experience like bluebell.  There are assumptions here by me, by others? I am not getting.

Ah, well, think I will try and sleep.  :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/8/2019 at 4:27 PM, bluebell said:

ALarson and I were having a small discussion on this topic and I thought it would be better to move the conversation to its own thread.  I think this topic intrigued me today because I had just finished reading a blog by BYU professor Edwin Gantt and Dr. Jeffrey Thayne titled "Can the Teachings of the Church ever Change?" 

In that blog, they assert that yes, God's teaching do change and that they should be changing if God is continuing to reveal things.  They talk about the two common perspectives in this debate, absolutism and on-going revelation.
Absolutism (per the blog, in connection with the topic at hand) is where: 


On-going revelation (as it pertains to the topic at hand) is believing: 

Thoughts?  Are the authors right?  Does our belief in on-going revelation mean that contradictions in past and present teachings don't matter?  Here is what they say specifically about such contradictions:

 

And what about the ever-popular Doctrine vs. Policy debate?  Does that focus actually do more harm than good by perpetuating the idea that doctrine can never change while policy can?  The authors state:

 

The authors also claim that when we embrace the idea that God's teachings can never and will never change, we are elevating the "law" above the "law giver"  Are they right?  Does such a belief place our loyalty and faith in the wrong thing?

 

Thoughts on all of this?  Thoughts that don't necessarily have anything to do with the blog?  I thought the blog added an intriguing perspective but this topic is much larger than those points.  Does God change in what He requires and how He interacts with His children?

My thought are yes, of course he does.  That is what a good parent does, he or she changes depending on their children's understanding, maturity, and needs.  Rules change depending on age and the level of trust had in a child.  Discipline changes as well.  So do expectations.  

When I read in the scriptures that God is unchangeable to me that doesn't mean that He always does the exact same thing the exact same way at the exact same time, etc.  To me it means that He is always a perfect parent.  Always perfectly just.  Always perfectly merciful.  But I do believe that being a perfect parent looks different depending on the child He is parenting.

I know that others disagree though so I'm interested in hearing their justifications for their beliefs (as I have put up my justifications for mine) so that I can understand their perspective better.

Unsurprisingly I vote for the profs.

Think about it.

Eternal progression without change is a contradiction.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Jeanne said:

bluebell, I admire that you are aware of such differences and that your proof is not always based on feelings.  You are the first that I am aware of to admit that as a stalwart member.  Thank you,

I think I've written numerous times on this point too. Feelings sometimes invite or even entice me to engage and experiment, but without something more -- in this case, firsthand experience -- we know nothing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, let’s roll said:

You have your assumptions and guesses, I have my certainty.  

I use the logic and intelligence that comes with an IQ in the 140s within the context and perspective provided by Divine wisdom and guidance.  My experience has been that each can be a catalyst in increasing the other, no compartmentalizing required.

It’s available to you as well. 

If you decide to seek it out I wish you Godspeed in your efforts.

So, what makes you so certain? It seems you are just making a bald assertion without anything else. Counsel, I need evidence, other than feelings that can be easily manipulated by the group or manipulated by an over anxious desire to believe. Do you actually believe that Joseph Smith communicated with the divine via an ordinary rock? That seems like a fraud or delusion to me. Do you believe that God told the Q15 to make the November 2015 policy, then walk it back a little when the press found out back in 2015 and then walk it back further after a few years of criticism? That seems like the work of a man-made organization that merely makes empty assertions of inspiration. How can this even be justified much less preached to the world at large?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Exiled said:

So, what makes you so certain? It seems you are just making a bald assertion without anything else. Counsel, I need evidence, other than feelings that can be easily manipulated by the group or manipulated by an over anxious desire to believe. Do you actually believe that Joseph Smith communicated with the divine via an ordinary rock? That seems like a fraud or delusion to me. Do you believe that God told the Q15 to make the November 2015 policy, then walk it back a little when the press found out back in 2015 and then walk it back further after a few years of criticism? That seems like the work of a man-made organization that merely makes empty assertions of inspiration. How can this even be justified much less preached to the world at large?

I invite you to reread my posts, they set out what I believe, including my belief that God has promised to share His wisdom with each one of His children if they have a sincere desire to receive it.

I suggest to you that your time and effort would be much better spent preparing yourself to seek Divine wisdom and then seeking it, rather than seeking advice from mortals.

Armed with certainty of the existence of God you’ll recognize how presumptuous it would be to question the power of the Omnipotent and how futile it would be to question the logic of the Omniscient.  And, freed from doubt and uncertainty, knowing God is in charge and relying on His promise that in the end each and every one of His children will acknowledge that ALL of His judgments are just, you will feel confident in focusing all of your efforts on loving Him and your brothers and sisters.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think I've written numerous times on this point too. Feelings sometimes invite or even entice me to engage and experiment, but without something more -- in this case, firsthand experience -- we know nothing.

Sorry if I have missed or forgotten these points made before.  Perhaps it is the way bluebell put it out there that makes the difference.  It was a compliment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sorry if I have missed or forgotten these points made before.  Perhaps it is the way bluebell put it out there that makes the difference.  It was a compliment.

I wasn't being critical and I read it as a nice compliment of bluebell.  It just surprised me.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

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...