"We've" never established that... You keep saying that hoping it will be true.

Link?

You want a link showing that we've never argued it?

Give me a link that shows that you're not a gay leprechaun wearing a man-shaped robot suit first. THEN we'll give you a link that shows we've never established that the church has no doctrine.

I want a link showing LDS doctrine. Is this it?

http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Doctrin...8061109&sr=1-2

No, here is the link you want:

http://www.lds.org/languages/youthma...eFaith_000.pdf

http://scriptures.lds.org/

Or this:

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1

This is pretty obscure. For example, I was hoping it would tell me whether Jesus and Jehova are the same person

I don't think obscure means what you think it means (hint, published in the last 30 years does not equal obscure).

Also, it does answer your Jehovah question but, of course, you would have to read it to find that out.

See definition no. 2

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obscure

So you think it is too obscure. Others will argue it is too specific. Or too narrow, or broad.

But you're not arguing whether or not it is obscure. You're arguing that it doesn't exist. That means you don't get to quibble over its qualitative value. You're going to have to stare at it and tell me it isn't there.