THE CONFLICT BETWEEN DEAD AND LIVING PROPHETS, Chap 8 of Holy Priesthood Vol 5

It would be a poor lighthouse that gave off a different signal to guide every ship entering a harbor. (Spencer W. Kimball, Conf. Rept., Apr. 1976, p. 7)

A schism has developed within the Church–not so much among the members as among its leaders–past and present. The contemporary leaders seem to have little difficulty in rationalizing their current position even though it contradicts that of the inspired early leaders. But many members are asking questions, such as, “How can some leaders teach one thing and other leaders something just the opposite, and both be right?” Like the changing of seasons, the Church seems to take on different appearances with the passing of time. As Mormons, it is easy for us to see that there is something wrong with the following conflict: John the Baptist baptized people by immersion in the River Jordan; others have come along since then, also claiming to be prophets, saying we can now baptize by sprinkling, pouring, or not at all. It is evident that they both cannot be true prophets. It is more difficult, however, for Mormons to recognize and admit that similar changes have occurred within the LDS Church in the last century. (See 95 Theses by the same author.) We should ask ourselves:

1. Would the Lord give two different and conflicting practices for any Gospel ordinance?
2. Should any eternal ordinance, principle, or doctrine by changed, substituted or rejected?
3. Has the Lord ever revoked any of His laws except in the case of the unworthiness of the people?
4. When there is a conflict in doctrinal teaching, does it mean that mankind can be saved or exalted based on different laws, principles, and ordinances?
5. If one prophet is teaching vastly different from another, doesn’t it mean that one of them is wrong?