Changing Doctrine

Quote from Preserving the Restoration by Denver C. Snuffer, page 474. The second paragraph is footnote 1280. Also, for those who are not aware, Denver does not support plural marriage, and points out that the pattern was one woman and one man from the creation of people on this earth (Adam and Eve).

There are several possibilities to account for the LDS Church's history of compromise on their doctrine. The first possibility is these teachings, although once proclaimed to be fundamental, even necessary to obtain exaltation in the afterlife, were falsely portrayed in the first place and were never saving “doctrines at all. The Book of Mormon seems to support this view.¹²⁸⁰ If this is so, then contrary to LDS past claims, no soul was ever damned by refusing to accept the doctrine of plural wives. Nor was God going to take away all priesthood from the church as soon as the church attempted to ordain black African descendants. Nor has Almighty God banned women from the priesthood. Nor is homosexuality a serious moral offense before God. God's silence led the LDS Church to oversell these teachings and therefore they were, and are, free to “correct them.

¹²⁸⁰ See 3 Ne. 11:31-40 where Christ declares His “doctrine.” The explanation has no mention of plural wives, priesthood or priesthood bans, or homosexuality. It concluded with the warning, “whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil.” (Id v. 40.) The LDS Church is in the process now of backing away from earlier positions. Through abandonment of earlier doctrinal positions and condemnation of those leaders who advanced them, current LDS Church leaders appear convinced they can fix “errors.” Therefore, none of these discarded teachings were ever true or important.