How much can the church change yet still remain credible?

[Anonymous]

BJE wrote:

4 But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Why do we still call the priesthood after Melchizedek rather than by its correct name?

Good point. It seems at some time a person felt the name needed to be shortened to make it more practical.

At another time someone things the shortened name of the church needs to be more formal to reinforce the name and purpose.

And it can be credible either way. As long as the prophets get people to see the purpose for changes and course corrections.

[Anonymous]

BJE wrote:

Why do we still call the priesthood after Melchizedek rather than by its correct name?

I think we (and I include myself in this) find reasons for doing what we want to do or to make us feel better about what we have already done.

I personally have been overjoyed with so many of the recent changes, I tend to give President RMN a pass on this one. Still a decent batting average, all things considered.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

BJE wrote:

Why do we still call the priesthood after Melchizedek rather than by its correct name?

I think we (and I include myself in this) find reasons for doing what we want to do or to make us feel better about what we have already done.

I personally have been overjoyed with so many of the recent changes, I tend to give President RMN a pass on this one. Still a decent batting average, all things considered.

Agreed. He hasn’t been blinded by faith in my view. It took courage to cancel the HT program, for example. I hope someone else doesn’t take his place eventually and play hard-nut with us…

[Author]

Posts