Does the Mormon Church Actually Change Its Doctrine?

Examining the evidence of doctrinal shifts in LDS history

Introduction

One of the foundational claims of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that it is led by living prophets who receive direct revelation from God. This claim carries an implicit promise: the Church teaches eternal, unchanging truth.

But does it?

If you've been a member of the LDS Church for any length of time, you may have noticed that some things have changed: temple ceremonies, policies, and even teachings that were once presented as doctrine. When you raise these concerns, you might hear responses like:

• "That was just a policy, not doctrine."
• "Prophets are human and can make mistakes."
• "We believe in continuing revelation."

But these responses raise deeper questions: If prophets can be wrong about significant teachings, how do we know when they're right? If doctrine can change, is it really eternal truth? And if the Church distinguishes between "policy" and "doctrine" only after something changes, how can members know which current teachings might be reclassified later?

This article examines specific examples of doctrinal changes in LDS history, not to attack, but to honestly evaluate the evidence and consider what it means for truth claims.

What Counts as "Doctrine"?

Before examining changes, we need to address how the LDS Church defines doctrine. This is surprisingly difficult, because the Church has never provided a clear, consistent definition.

Over the years, various leaders have offered different criteria:

Brigham Young taught that anything spoken by the prophet under the influence of the Holy Ghost is scripture:

"I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture." (Journal of Discourses 13:95)

Joseph Fielding Smith (later Church President) wrote:

"It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them." (Doctrines of Salvation 3:203)

More recently, the Church has tried to narrow what counts as doctrine. A 2007 Newsroom article stated:

"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine... With divine inspiration, the First Presidency... and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles... counsel together to establish doctrine."

This creates a convenient escape hatch: when a teaching becomes embarrassing, it can be reclassified as "opinion" or "policy" rather than doctrine. But this approach has problems:

1. It's applied retroactively. Members were expected to believe and obey these teachings when they were given.
2. It contradicts what earlier prophets said. Brigham Young didn't think his sermons were just personal opinions.
3. It provides no way to identify current teachings that might later be disavowed.

With that context, let's examine specific changes.

Major Doctrinal Changes

1. The Nature of God

Early Teaching: Joseph Smith's theology of God evolved significantly during his lifetime. In the Book of Mormon (1830), God is presented in largely trinitarian terms:

"And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end." (2 Nephi 31:21)

The original 1830 Book of Mormon contained passages that were later changed to distinguish between the Father and Son. For example, 1 Nephi 11:18 originally read "the mother of God" but was changed to "the mother of the Son of God."

By 1844, Joseph Smith taught a radically different view in the King Follett Discourse:

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!... I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea... he was once a man like us."

The Change: This represents a fundamental shift from the monotheistic God of the Book of Mormon to the "God was once a man" teaching. The Church has never officially repudiated the King Follett Discourse, but modern Church materials rarely emphasize it, and some leaders have distanced themselves from its implications.

In 2014, the Church published an essay stating: "Latter-day Saints' belief in a God who is embodied and who was once a man is not the same as believing that God was once a sinner or that God 'progressed' in power and knowledge."

This is a significant softening of what Joseph Smith actually taught.

2. Plural Marriage (Polygamy)

Early Teaching: Polygamy was taught as an eternal, essential doctrine, not merely permitted but required for exaltation.

Brigham Young declared:

"The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy." (Journal of Discourses 11:269)

Doctrine and Covenants 132 presents plural marriage as a "new and everlasting covenant" and warns that those who reject it "shall be damned" (D&C 132:4, 6).

The Change: In 1890, under intense government pressure, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto ending the practice. But this created theological problems:

• If polygamy was required for exaltation, how could it be discontinued?
• If it was an "everlasting" covenant, how could it end?
• If prophets received revelation requiring it, how could later prophets receive revelation forbidding it?

The Church's current position is that polygamy was a temporary practice for a specific time. But this contradicts what earlier prophets taught about its eternal, essential nature.

Notably, D&C 132 remains in the canon, and men can still be sealed to multiple women (if widowed or divorced), while women cannot be sealed to multiple men. The doctrine hasn't been fully resolved; just the practice.

3. Race and the Priesthood

Early Teaching: From Brigham Young until 1978, Black men of African descent were denied the priesthood, and Black men and women were denied temple ordinances. This wasn't presented as mere policy; it was taught as doctrine with theological justifications.

Brigham Young taught:

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses 10:110)

The restriction was explained as a consequence of actions in the pre-mortal existence or as the "curse of Cain." These weren't fringe ideas; they were taught in General Conference, in Church manuals, and by apostles and prophets.

The Change: In 1978, Official Declaration 2 extended priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy males regardless of race.

In 2013, the Church published an essay titled "Race and the Priesthood" which stated:

"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

This is remarkable: the Church officially disavowed doctrinal explanations that were taught by prophets and apostles for over a century. If those teachings were wrong, what does that say about prophetic reliability?

4. Blood Atonement

Early Teaching: Brigham Young and other early leaders taught that certain sins were so serious that the blood of Jesus Christ could not atone for them. Only the shedding of the sinner's own blood could provide redemption.

Brigham Young taught:

"There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins." (Journal of Discourses 4:53-54)

This doctrine was used to justify violence during the Utah territorial period.

The Change: The Church now completely rejects blood atonement. A 2010 Newsroom statement said: "So-called 'blood atonement,' by which individuals would be required to shed their own blood to pay for their sins, is not a doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

But it was taught as doctrine by Brigham Young and others. The change isn't just in practice; it's a complete reversal of what was once presented as revealed truth.

5. Adam-God Theory

Early Teaching: Brigham Young taught that Adam was actually God the Father in a mortal form:

"Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken. He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." (Journal of Discourses 1:50)

This was taught in General Conference and even incorporated into the temple endowment ceremony for a time.

The Change: The Church now explicitly rejects this teaching. Bruce R. McConkie wrote:

"There are those who believe or say they believe that Adam is our father and our god, that he is the father of our spirits and our bodies, and that he is the one we worship. The devil keeps this heresy alive as a means of obtaining converts to cultism. It is contrary to the whole plan of salvation set forth in the scriptures." (Seven Deadly Heresies, BYU Devotional, 1980)

McConkie called it a "heresy," yet it was taught by the prophet Brigham Young as revealed truth.

6. The Temple Ceremony

The temple endowment has undergone numerous changes since its introduction:

• 1990: Removed the penalties (symbolic gestures of having throat slit, chest cut open, and bowels torn out)
• 1990: Removed the Protestant minister character who was portrayed as being in Satan's employ
• 2005: Changed the wording so women covenant to God directly rather than through their husbands
• 2019: Further changes to make the ceremony more gender-equal
• Various: Changes to washing and anointing, clothing, and other elements

These aren't minor adjustments; they're significant changes to what members were told was a ceremony revealed by God and practiced since ancient times.

The "Policy vs. Doctrine" Defense

When confronted with these changes, Church members and leaders often distinguish between "policy" (which can change) and "doctrine" (which cannot). But this defense has serious problems:

1. The distinction is applied retroactively.

When the priesthood ban was in effect, it was defended as doctrine. Only after it changed was it reclassified as policy. How can members know which current teachings might be similarly reclassified?

2. Earlier prophets didn't make this distinction.

Brigham Young didn't say, "This is just my policy opinion about race." He presented it as the revealed will of God. The same is true for polygamy, blood atonement, and other changed teachings.

3. It undermines prophetic authority.

If prophets can teach false doctrine for over a century (as with the priesthood ban), and if there's no way to distinguish their errors from their revelations in real-time, what's the value of having prophets?

What the Bible Says About Prophets and Truth

The Bible provides a different standard for evaluating prophetic claims:

"If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed." (Deuteronomy 18:22)

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse!" (Galatians 1:8)

The biblical standard is high: true prophets don't teach false doctrine. They don't need later prophets to correct their errors. The message remains consistent because it comes from an unchanging God.

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8)

"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows." (James 1:17)

If God doesn't change, why would His revealed truth change?

The "Continuing Revelation" Defense

Another common response is that the LDS Church believes in "continuing revelation," so changes are expected and even celebrated.

But there's a difference between:

• Additional revelation: God revealing more truth that builds on previous truth
• Contradictory revelation: God revealing something that contradicts what He previously revealed

The Bible contains additional revelation (the New Testament builds on the Old), but it doesn't contain contradictory revelation. Jesus fulfilled the law; He didn't say the law was wrong.

When LDS prophets teach that polygamy is required for exaltation, and then later prophets teach that it's forbidden, that's not continuing revelation; that's contradiction.

Why This Matters

This isn't about finding fault or attacking sincere believers. It's about honestly evaluating truth claims.

The LDS Church asks members to:

• Pay 10% of their income
• Devote significant time to callings and temple attendance
• Make major life decisions based on prophetic counsel
• Believe that the Church is the only true church on earth

These are significant commitments. They deserve to be based on truth.

If the Church's foundational claim (that it is led by prophets who receive revelation from God) is undermined by a pattern of doctrinal changes and reversals, that's worth knowing.

An Invitation

If you're troubled by these changes, you're not alone. Many faithful members have wrestled with the same questions.

We'd encourage you to:

1. Research honestly. Read primary sources. Don't rely only on Church-approved materials or only on critical sources. Evaluate the evidence for yourself.

2. Consider the biblical alternative. The Bible presents a God who doesn't change and a gospel that has remained consistent for two thousand years. Salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not through temples, ordinances, or prophetic obedience.

3. Talk to someone. If you're processing these questions, we're here to listen without judgment.

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32)

We're Here for You

Use the "Talk to Someone" button below to connect with someone who can walk with you through these questions.

All Scripture quotations are from the New International Version (NIV) unless otherwise noted. LDS sources are cited from official Church publications and the Journal of Discourses.