DISCLAIMER: IF YOU
ARE A MEMBER OF THE LDS CHURCH AND DON’T WANT TO KNOW DIFFICULT INFORMATION
ABOUT THE CHURCH, PLEASE DON’T READ THIS POST
Just as a reminder, as in the last post, don’t read this if
you don’t want to know or believe your life would be significantly negatively
impacted by a faith crisis or faith transition. If you do read on, do so with
your spouse. If you look up information, either on the Gospel Topics Essays, at
Fair Mormon, or outside sources, take the journey with your spouse. I will also
ask the same question as I did in the last post: If the church is not true,
would you actually and honestly want to know?
Before I get into this post, I need to put something out
there. I’ve been struggling to complete this post. My first five articles were
based on my personal experiences, feelings, and reactions. I felt really good
about writing those and putting words to what I was going through. It helped me
to cope and externalize as not too many church members close to me reached out
to specifically ask how I was doing or what I was going through. While I can
definitely understand the whys behind those decisions, it was still difficult.
I felt isolated and writing helped. But my last two posts, as well as this one,
have been about specific issues within the church. I have not enjoyed writing
or posting these. I feel like it is important to write about the issues I came
across in my research, so those that desire to understand my journey can have
that opportunity, but I feel anxious about posting these. Three of my kids
continue to attend church activities. When I go to the church to drop them off,
I worry what the reactions will be from members there. I worry that I am
driving my church attending family and friends away. I understand that I don’t
get to have my cake and eat it too. I don’t get to choose the consequences of
my actions; the dice fall as they will. But I want people to know that I am not
gleefully posting these issues with the purpose of ruining the church for
people. I am actually looking forward to moving on from posting about the
issues and going back to writing about my experiences.
But before I do that, this post needs to be completed, which
is about issues I have discovered that have not been acknowledged by the
church. This will not be an exhaustive list. There are many problems that I
just don’t have the space or time to write down. But I will include the major
ones that I believe were most impactful for me in my faith transition. The
issues that I will discuss in this post are:
1.
Book of Mormon Problems
2.
Validity of Spiritual Experiences in Determining
Truth
3.
Prophets’ Testimony and Revelatory Process
4.
Discernment/Hofmann Forgeries
5.
Church Finances
6.
The Second Anointing
1.
Book of Mormon Problems
In the church we are taught that the Book of Mormon is the
most correct book on the earth. This statement came from the church’s founder
and prophet, Joseph Smith. We were told that because this book came directly
through revelation from God that there were no problems with it. There were no translation
or copying errors, as there were in the Bible, because it came directly from
the source of scripture, namely God. Some members are aware that there have
been changes to the Book of Mormon over the years, but we were reassured that
these changes were grammatical or to correct mistakes in printing, essentially
to bring it back to what it was when it was spoken from Joseph Smith’s mouth.
What many members aren’t aware is that there have been close to four thousand
changes over time. There have been around fifteen editions of the Book of Mormon
over the years. Sometimes the changes have been spelling and grammatical, it is
true. But even these changes are problematic when you know how the book itself
was translated. Multiple accounts from different individuals, including Joseph’s
scribes, tell us that Joseph would place his seer stone in his hat then place
his face in the hat in order to block out light. A character in “Reformed
Egyptian” would appear in the stone and below it, a word in English. The next
character and word would not appear on the stone until the previous word had
been documented correctly, without mistakes. So, following this pattern, there
should be absolutely no mistakes in spelling or word choice. But there were a
significant number of these exact changes over the decades. I have read the
1830 version of the Book of Mormon and confirmed these changes for myself.
Sections that used to say that Jesus was God or the Eternal Father or the
Everlasting God were changed to the Son of God or the Son of the Eternal
Father, etc. The incorrect plural of seraphims/Cherubims was changed to the
correct plural seraphim/Cherubim at a later time. As discussed before, a racist
section stating that the Native Americans would become a white and delightsome
people was changed to pure and delightsome. Several places where there was
excessive usage of “And it came to pass” were removed. Spelling mistakes such
as “phrensied” were corrected. Misusing the word subsequent. Making up the word “numerority”. None of these errors should have crept into the earliest print of
the Book of Mormon considering the method of translation.
The Book of Mormon is full of anachronisms. This was a major
issue for me during my faith crisis. The definition of anachronism is attributing
something to a period to which it does not belong. An example of this would be
saying that I found a long-lost play by Shakespeare in my attic. Upon reading
the script, I discover that the main character owns a Walkman. I know that
Walkmans (Walkmen?) weren’t invented until 1979. Shakespeare lived from
1564-1616. That means it is impossible that this play was written by
Shakespeare because a Walkman is anachronistic. It is not possible for Shakespeare
to know what a Walkman was during his lifetime as it was not invented until
later. When writing the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith took things that he was
familiar with and placed them in the Americas; things that did not belong there
at the time the Book of Mormon was supposed to take place. Examples of
anachronisms in the Book of Mormon include: horses, elephants, cattle, domesticated
swine, wheat, silk, chariots (including wheel technology), and steel (including
swords, and the technology used to create them). Joseph Smith didn’t know that
these things were either introduced to the Americas after Columbus arrived or
they never were present in the Americas at all (I’m looking at you, elephant). Along
with these anachronistic problems, Joseph did not include extremely common
things that were native to the Americas at the time. Things like jaguars,
monkeys, bison, turkeys, dogs, llamas, deer, corn, squash, cocoa beans, etc. He
did get serpents and goats correct though…But by placing these things in the
Americas during a time when it was impossible for these things to be present,
Joseph reveals that he was not writing a true history.
Which finally brings me to the meaning of tapir in the title
of my blog. A specific LDS apologist suggested that the word “horse” in the
Book of Mormon didn’t actually mean horse. It could mean some other four-legged
creature that was similar to a horse but that was actually native to the
Americas, such as a tapir. While this theory has fallen out of favor, it caused
the post-Mormon community to accept the tapir as a mascot. The image of the
Native Americans riding tapirs into battle or tapirs pulling their
(anachronistic) chariots was humorous to say the least. So instead of the term
“Straight from the horse’s mouth,” I decided to substitute horse with tapir for
the title. “Straight from the tapir’s mouth.” I thought it was clever, anyway…
Other issues with the Book of Mormon include King James
Version Bible translation errors and passages from Deutero-Isaiah. Members of
the church consider the King James Version of the Bible to be the most correct
version. Bible scholars agree that this is not the case as there are many other
versions that were translated more closely to the original, ancient documents
that comprise the Bible. There are translation errors in the KJV that are also
found in the Book of Mormon. If God were directing Joseph Smith on the exact
words to include in the Book of Mormon, God would have corrected these errors
by giving Joseph the correct translations. But this was not the case. This greatly
increases the chances that Joseph was copying from the specific 1769 edition of
the KJV Bible which the family owned, as these errors were from that specific
edition, and including these passages in the Book of Mormon. Bible scholars
also agree that Isaiah was written by more than one author. Early Isaiah
passages are from Proto-Isaiah while later passages are from Deutero-Isaiah.
The problem here is that Deutero-Isaiah wasn’t written until after the people from
the Book of Mormon left Jerusalem. So, there would have been no way for these
passages of scripture to be brought with them when they left Jerusalem or to
have been included on the Gold Plates, since they weren’t written yet. Joseph
Smith would not have known about the KJV errors or about Deutero-Isaiah before
adding these Bible verses into the Book of Mormon.
Many of the themes in the Book of Mormon were common in the
early 1820s. The revival culture in the Palmyra area where Joseph lived is
extremely similar to several sermons in the Book of Mormon. In both there were settings
where the people would camp/pitch tents; preaching was designed to produce a powerful
emotional impact; the conversion pattern of being convinced of sin, prayer for
forgiveness, receiving a calming assurance of being forgiven, accompanied by
trembling, tears, falling, etc.; denunciations of those that believe all will
be saved no matter what they do in life; denouncing the belief that God doesn’t
interact with mankind; and descriptions that humans are in a fallen, degenerate
state. Anti-masonic temperament was high at the time and is akin to secret
combinations in the Book of Mormon. Richard Bushman, the believing member who
wrote the book Rough Stone Rolling stated, “…there is phrasing everywhere - long
phrases that if you google them you will find them in 19th century
writings. The theology of the Book of Mormon is very much 19th century
theology, and it reads like a 19th century understanding of the
Hebrew Bible…” Blake Ostler, another LDS scholar stated, “Many Book of Mormon
doctrines are best explained by the nineteenth-century theological milieu.”
Joseph should not have been able to add 19th century theology into
the Book of Mormon considering every word was supposed to come by revelation
from God.
There are numerous impossibilities written about in the Book
of Mormon. I will only write about one: the Jaredite submarines. We are taught
that around 2200 BC, God commanded a group of people to build 8 submersible
boats in order to traverse the ocean. Considering transoceanic travel was
unheard of for thousands of years, this would be an impossible feat. These
ships were constructed to be submersible when waves crashed against them, generally
like a submarine. They were completely closed off except for a hole at the top
and bottom of the ship that could be opened or shut when needed. Now imagine
taking a year long voyage in one of these with flocks and herds (male and
female of every kind), swarms of bees, and fish. These submarines would not
only carry human passengers and these creatures, but enough food and water for
all for a year’s journey. There being only one hole that could be open at a
time, there was no ventilation for breathing or the gasses that would be
created. Can you imagine how much even one cow eats, and excretes, during a
year long journey? Where were the stores of grass and water that would have to
have been hundreds if not thousands of pounds themselves? And factor in that
these ships were made to be tossed on the sea. With bees. And poop. And
extremely heavy animals. The food would be ruined, the water spilled, bones
broken, etc. And this is considering you could even fit the amount of food and
water in these ships with the animals and your family. This does not sound like
the design of an all-knowing God. It sounds impossible.
There is an account of Martin Harris, one of the three
witnesses of the Book of Mormon, taking characters that Joseph Smith copied
from the Gold Plates to a scholar named Charles Anthon. In the church we are
taught that Professor Anthon stated that “…the
translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from
the Egyptian. [Harris] then showed him those not yet translated, and said they
were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic"; and that they
were "true characters." According to Harris, Anthon wrote Harris a
letter of authenticity declaring the fragment to contain true Egyptian
characters. Anthon was also reported to have confirmed the translation of these
characters as correct. When informed that an angel of God had revealed
the characters to Smith, Anthon reportedly tore up the authentication stating
that there was no such thing as angels and asked Harris to bring the plates to
him for translation.” Except there are numerous problems with this account.
First, Professor Anthon repeatedly denied ever authenticating these characters.
He stated, “The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite
inscription to be 'reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics' is perfectly false .... I
soon came to the conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax…” Anthon
stated that it was all “a scheme to cheat the farmer [Harris] of his money.” In
a later account, Anthon stated, “The import of what I wrote was, as far as I
can now recollect, simply this, that the marks in the paper appeared to be
merely an imitation of various alphabetical characters, and had, in my opinion,
no meaning at all connected with them.” Considering that the ability to translate
Egyptian by way of the Rosetta Stone had not made its way to America at this
time makes Anthon’s supposed account that the characters were true Egyptian
characters impossible. Anthon could not translate ancient Egyptian because no
one in America could translate ancient Egyptian at that time. I have included
two links, one from Wikipedia showing the “Caractors” that Martin showed to Professor
Anthon, and another showing the similarities of many of these characters to
English letters. Scholars today do not recognize any of these characters as legitimate
letters or words from any language.
Scholars have identified many of the sources that Joseph
Smith used to write the Book of Mormon, as well as the Book of Abraham (which,
if you recall, is acknowledged by the church as being incorrectly translated),
and the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible.
For the Book of Mormon, Joseph used copious amounts of the
King James Version of the Bible. Not only did he copy passages straight from
the 1769 or later edition, he mimicked several stories. For instance, the story
of Alma and Paul are extremely similar. Joseph also had access to the Apocrypha,
in particular 1
st and 2
nd Maccabees. The name Nephi is
contained in 2 Maccabees. The book View of the Hebrews discusses how the Native
Americans were one of the 10 tribes of Israel and came to the American
continent and spread throughout the land. Joseph Smith did specifically
mention that the View of the Hebrews supported the Book of Mormon (even though
VotH was written before the Book of Mormon), so Joseph was very aware of it. Some
would say that Joseph Smith plagiarized from this book but I disagree. Joseph
got ideas from VotH and integrated them into the Book of
Mormon
rather than specifically plagiarizing from it. The Late War Between the United
States and Great Britain was another source but it is clear that this book was
plagiarized by Joseph Smith. The following link describes the parallels found
through statistical analysis: http://wordtree.org/thelatewar/.
This book was common reading material in schools of the day and uses a
scriptural style. Chiasmus is contained in this work. The phrase “It came to
pass” was common throughout. Warfare was discussed at length. Hebraisms,
negative questions, adverbials, all of which were items that apologists used to
claim the Book of Mormon was authentic and historical are also found in The Late
War. And finally, The First Book of Napoleon was another book whose phraseology
and word usage is extremely similar to the Book of Mormon. As with The Late
War, The First Book of Napoleon contains rare 4-gram phrases, word strings of
four words that are not common to the English language, that are shared between
the Book of Mormon at a rate that is statistically significant. Meaning that
Joseph read and used these phrases that he found in these books when writing
the Book of Mormon.
The Book of Abraham’s sources are essentially completely accounted
for in five 19th century works. All were available to Joseph in the
Nauvoo library. These are: The Works of Flavius Josephus (biographical information
about Abraham), a 1769 or later edition of the King James Version Bible (86% of
Abraham 2, 4-5 come from Genesis 1, 2, 11, and 12), Philosophy of a Future
State by Thomas Dick (19th century astronomical concepts), The Six Books of Proclus on
the Theology of Plato by Thomas Taylor (especially volume 2, Newtonian
astronomy and model of the universe, which have been discredited by modern
Einsteinian models), and Joseph Smith’s study with Hebrew scholar Joshua Seixas
in the winter of 1835-36 (Hebrew names and phrases). Another source for some of
Joseph’s doctrine came from Emanuel Swedenborg, who wrote the book Heaven and
Hell, which Joseph had access to. Similarities include three levels of heaven, compared
to the sun, moon, and stars; marriage being essential to exaltation; the spirit
world; one way to qualify for perdition is to know the truth and deny it; the
law of consecration; and God as a man. For those that argue that the Book of
Abraham makes sense, that Joseph couldn’t have come up with these ideas on his
own, or that they just feel right must take account of these sources before
determining the divine nature of these writings.
In a paper published in March 2017, two students at BYU,
Haley Wilson and Thomas Wayment, stated they had “uncovered evidence that Smith
and his associates used a readily available Bible commentary while compiling a
new Bible translation, or more properly a revision of the King James Bible [The
Joseph Smith Translation]. The commentary, Adam Clarke’s ‘Holy Bible,
Containing the Old and New Testaments’, was extremely well known for Methodist
theologians and biblical scholars alike, and was one of the most widely
available commentaries in the mid-1820s and 1830s in America. Wilson and
Wayment state that “the number of direct parallels between Smith’s
translation and Adam Clarke’s biblical commentary is too numerous and explicit
to posit happenstance or coincidental overlap. The parallels between the
two texts number into the hundreds…”
This information severely discredits the authenticity and
historicity of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, and the Joseph Smith
Translation of the Bible. Joseph did not receive revelation in order to write
these books. He utilized the information that he had available and copied
others ideas while calling them revelation.
2.
Validity of Spiritual Experiences in Determining
Truth
Whether we are talking about missionaries teaching people
about the church or members trying to gain or strengthen their faith, a
scripture in the Book of Mormon is always discussed. Moroni 10:4-5 reads, “And
when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God,
the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if
ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he
will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by
the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” So, essentially
the way people can know if the Book of Mormon is true, or if the LDS church is
true, is to pray about it. The belief is that God will answer your prayer by
the Holy Ghost. Either a still small voice or a burning in the bosom will occur
to tell you what is truth.
Except the problem with this idea is that every person from
every religion has spiritual experiences testifying either that their church is
true or they are part of the religion that God wants them to be in. How can
people from different belief systems have experiences where God tells them they
are doing what is right but they all come to different conclusions? If this is
God’s perfect method of telling us His will, how is it possible that people can
get completely different answers to the same questions? And to say that one
person’s spiritual experiences are somehow more valid than someone else’s is
the height of hubris and arrogance.
As I have stated before, I have had spiritual experiences
myself, but I had to re-evaluate what they actually meant. I determined that feelings
and spiritual experiences cannot tell us what is objective truth. Two of the
most powerful videos I have seen in regards to what I am talking about here are
in the following links. The first depicts real people from numerous religions
and faiths saying exactly the same thing: that they know their church is true
or their belief is correct. The method by which they know is prayer and feelings
that God sends to them. In the second video, the important part starts at the ten-minute
mark. It shows a man by the name of Marshall Applewhite. He suggests a way for
people to know if what he says is true. He tells them to go into a private
place and ask God. He says that God will tell them that his message is correct.
The video goes on to show members of his following bearing their testimonies
that they KNOW that what he teaches is the truth. This group was known as the
Heaven’s Gate and in 1997, thirty-nine members of the group committed suicide. They
did this because of their belief that God had answered their prayers, told them
Applewhite’s message was true, and to join this group and follow its leader. We
look at this now and believe they are naïve. They should have known better. But
in the LDS church we are told that the prophet speaks for God. If he told us
that Jesus was coming soon and to sell everything we as members have and to
move to Utah, or Missouri, we would be expected to do so. It’s no different
just because it’s a different religion. Trying to determine objective truth
from a feeling is in no way accurate.
3.
Prophets’ Testimony and Revelatory Process
Most members of the church believe that the modern prophet
and apostles see God or Christ regularly in order to run the church. Or perhaps
they only see them on occasion or once, when they are called as an apostle or
prophet. But members believe that these men have sure knowledge that Jesus runs
this church. I will include several quotes from apostles and prophets to
clarify this belief.
“I don’t think we’ll get it [a testimony] like Paul did on the
road to - where an angel appeared to him, where Alma the Younger had a
startling experience. The Lord used a few of those kinds of experiences, and
they’re recorded in the scriptures to catch our attention and teach us the
answer. But I’ve never had an experience like that and I don’t know anyone
among the 1st Presidency or Quorum of the 12 who’ve had that kind of
experience.” – Dallin H. Oaks, Multi-Stake Youth Fireside in Bellevue, WA,
January 23, 2016.
“Interviewer: As the world leader of the church, how are you in touch with God? Can you explain that for me?
Gordon B. Hinckley: I pray. I pray to Him. Night and morning. I speak with Him. I think He hears my prayers. As He hears the prayers of others. I think He answers them.
Interviewer: But
more than that, because you’re leader of the Church. Do you have a special
connection?
Gordon B. Hinckley: I have a special
relationship in terms of the Church as an institution. Yes.
Interviewer: And you receive........
Gordon B. Hinckley: For the entire
Church.
Interviewer: You receive?
Gordon B. Hinckley: Now we don't need a lot of continuing revelation. We have a great,
basic reservoir of revelation. But if a problem arises, as it does occasionally,
a vexatious thing with which we have to deal, we go to the Lord in prayer. We
discuss it as a First Presidency and as a Council of the Twelve Apostles. We
pray about it and then comes the whisperings of a still small voice. And we
know the direction we should take and we proceed accordingly.
Interviewer: And this is a
Revelation?
Gordon B. Hinckley: This is a
Revelation.
Interviewer: How often have you
received such revelations?
Gordon B.
Hinckley: Oh, I don’t know. I feel satisfied that in some circumstances
we’ve had such revelation. It’s a very sacred thing that we don’t like to talk
about a lot. A very sacred thing.
-
Gordon B. Hinckley, Compass Interview,
November 9, 1997
McComas: I should
like to ask one question. You say that the councilors are appointed by
the president of the church. How are the apostles selected?
Smith: In the first place they were
chosen by revelation. The council of the apostles have had a voice ever
since in the selection of their successors.
McComas: When vacancies occurred
thereafter, by what body were the vacancies in the twelve apostles filled?
Smith: Perhaps I may say in this
way: Chosen by the body, the twelve themselves, by and with the consent and
approval of the first presidency.
Hoar: Was there a revelation in
regard to each of them?
Smith: No, sir; not in regard to
each of them. Do you mean in the beginning?
Hoar: I understand you to say that
the original twelve apostles were selected by revelation?
Smith: Yes, sir.
Hoar: Through Joseph Smith?
Smith: Yes, sir; that is right.
Hoar: Is there any revelation in
regard to the subsequent ones?
Smith: No, sir; it has been
the choice of the body.
McComas: Then the apostles are
perpetuated in succession by their own act and the approval of the first
presidency?
Smith: That is right.
Chairman: You have
revelations, have you not?
Smith: I have never pretended to
nor do I profess to have received revelations. I never said I had a
revelation except so far as God has shown me that so-called Mormonism is God’s
divine truth; that is all.
Chairman: You say that was shown to
you by God?
Smith: By inspiration.
Chairman: How by inspiration; does
it come in the shape of a vision?
Smith: “The things of God knoweth no
man but the spirit of God;” and I cannot tell you any more than that I received
that knowledge and that testimony by the spirit of God.
Worthington: What
was the last revelation that came to the church from the one authorized to give
it as the law of the church?
Smith: Well, according to my
best recollection, it must have been about 1882 [21 years prior].
The purport of the revelation was calling to the apostolate or apostleship
two men, who are named in the revelation.
Worthington: Who was the
president through whom that revelation came?
Smith: President John Taylor.
Worthington: You say that was
the last one?
Smith: I do not now recall any
since then except the manifesto.
Worthington: Except the
manifesto?
Smith: Yes, except the
manifesto.
Worthington: Then do I
understand you to say the only revelation that has come to the church in the
last twenty years is the one that says polygamy shall stop?
Smith: Since 1882?
Worthington: Yes, since 1882 –
twenty-one years.
Smith: Yes, sir; I
think it is
-
President Joseph F. Smith, Reed Smoot Congressional
Hearing, 1903
These quotes tell us several things about revelation to leaders of
the church and how exactly prophets and apostles know that what they are doing
is the will of God. The quote by Dallin H. Oaks tells us that none of the 1st
Presidency or the Quorum of the 12 Apostles has ever seen God, Christ or angels.
That is not the way God communicates with the leaders and it is not how they
received a witness of the truthfulness of the LDS church. The interview with Gordon
B. Hinckley tells us that the way God communicates with the prophets is that
they pray and they “think” those prayers are answered. Hinckley specifically
says the church doesn’t need a lot of continuing revelation. It is only when
there is a problem that needs an answer. The way the leaders receive the answer
is they pray, they discuss it as a group, and they feel the still small voice
of the spirit. They do not see God. They do not see Christ. They do not have
visions. They pray and feel the spirit in the exact same way everyone else in
the church does. The final interview, with the president of the church at the
time, Joseph F. Smith, tells us that apostles since the 1830s-40s are not
chosen by revelation, they are essentially chosen by vote. Joseph F. goes on to
say he had never received a revelation. He gained his testimony by the same way
everyone else does, the spirit. A feeling. From his perspective, the only revelation
that had been given in the 21 years prior was the Manifesto in 1890, ending the
public practice of polygamy. Church sanctioned polygamous marriages continued
until 1904, but that is a story for another day. So, to conclude, leaders of the
church don’t know better than the regular members that Christ is real or that
the LDS church is the one true church on the earth. They do not see Christ.
They do not have visions. Revelation is infrequent and is through the exact
same process as regular members get it, through feelings. Which begs the
question, why don’t we see miracles like we hear about in the Bible? Joseph
Smith saw numerous angelic beings, why don’t current leaders of the church?
The recent change in the November 2015 policy of exclusion is
evidence of the process of decision making in the church. In November of 2015,
the LDS church made an announcement. The children of gay parents would no
longer be permitted to be baptized into the church. If they desired to join the
church, they would have to wait until they turned 18 and renounce the lifestyle
of their parents. Many members were extremely upset and hurt by the decision of
the leaders of the church to withhold blessings to children. Jesus always
allowed children to come to him. This decision was not Christlike. In
describing this pronouncement, Russel M. Nelson, then an apostle, explained “This prophetic process was followed...with the recent additions to the Church's handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord's will in this matter. Ever mindful of God's plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And
then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to
declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord [to prevent
baptism for children of LGBT parents], each of us during that sacred moment
felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process...” Then, several days ago in April 2019, the leaders reversed this
decision. A message from the First Presidency stated “These policy changes [to allow
baptism for children of LGBT parents, reversing their previous decision] come
after an extended period of counselling with our brethren in the Quorum of the
Twelve Apostles and after fervent, united prayer to understand the will of the
Lord on these matters.” How could both of these decisions be revelation or the
will of God? Did God change His mind less than four years later or is He the
same, yesterday, today, and forever? Would God honestly cause that much pain
then arbitrarily tell the leaders of the church to reverse the change? Or were
the leaders of the church mistaken? Were they wrong in their belief that God
led them to make that decision? Do they really know the will of God? Or does
God not lead these men at all?
We know that prophets can be wrong. They have been in the past. Brigham
Young taught that Adam is God. He taught this over and over, in General
Conference and in the Temple. If Brigham Young, the president and prophet of
the church at the time, did not know the nature of God, how can prophets be
trusted to teach us His will? Brigham Young also taught Blood atonement. This doctrine
was that some sins were so terrible that it would be better to kill yourself,
to spill your blood on the ground as a sacrifice to God, than to continue
living. Some of these things that were considered terrible sins were mixed race
marriages and having mixed race children. The church now disavows the theories
that black people were cursed even though there are scriptural passages in the
Book of Mormon and in the Book of Abraham stating that black skin is a curse. If
modern prophets can be wrong, what is the point of following them? Why should
we unquestioningly follow them when we know they can be mistaken? What else are
they currently wrong about?
4.
Discernment/Hofmann Forgeries
In the 1980s, a man named Mark Hofmann claimed to have found
several LDS church history documents from the early days of the church. These
documents included a blessing given by the church founder, Joseph Smith, to his
son, naming him as his successor as prophet and leader of the church rather
than Brigham Young. Another was the White Salamander Letter. This document discussed
Joseph Smiths involvement with treasure digging, magical practices, and
replaced the angel that gave Joseph Smith the Gold Plates with a supernatural white
salamander. Needless to say, these documents would be very problematic for the
church’s truth claims if they came to light. With the case of the White
Salamander letter, Hofmann himself leaked the documents existence, which forced
Dallin H. Oaks, an apostle, to present an explanation in 1985. In a
presentation to Church Educational System educators, Oaks asserted that “white
salamander” could be equated to an angel because in the 1820s salamander also meant
a mythical being thought to be able to live in fire. He told them that a “being
that is able to live in fire is a good approximation of the description Joseph
Smith gave of the Angel Moroni.”
Unfortunately, Oaks apologetic explanations were unnecessary.
When Hofmann’s debts began to pile up and collectors began asking for their
documents, he murdered two people with homemade bombs. After the murders,
Hofmann met with several high-ranking leaders of the church, including then
president Spencer W. Kimball, future president Gordon B. Hinckley, and apostle
Boyd K. Packer. These men purchased his documents for thousands of dollars with
the intent of hiding them. Hofmann was eventually arrested and it was
discovered that his documents were all forgeries. How did the prophet and
several apostles not know they were meeting with a murderer? Why did God not
tell them that these documents were all forgeries? The practice of hiding
documents that do not substantiate the truth claims of the church is extremely
dishonest. And the principle of discernment that members of the church believe the
prophet and apostles have does not exist.
5.
Church Finances
Although the principle of tithing has evolved significantly over
time, the church has made it a requirement for members to pay 10% of their
income since 1941. If members don’t pay this amount, they are not considered
members in full fellowship and are not permitted to engage in the highest form
of worship in the church, namely temple attendance. The president of the church
recently visited a poverty-stricken African country and told the people there
that the way to get out of poverty was to pay their tithing!
The church reports a membership of 16.3 million people worldwide.
While only about a third of these are actively attending, the church still makes
a significant amount of money. Estimates of the total worth of the church seven
years ago were 35 billion, making it the richest church in the world, richer
even than the Catholic church (approx. 1 billion members but worth only 30
billion dollars). The church brings in 8 billion dollars per year in tithing
and investments. One would expect that a large percentage of this income would
go towards humanitarian aid, but this is not the case. Reports of the amount
the church donates to humanitarian causes is approximately 40 million per year.
This equates to half of one percent of its annual income. That’s 1/200th
of its income.
So, the question is, where does the church spend its money? The
fact is, we don’t know exactly, as the church has not disclosed its finances
since 1959. Obviously, there is maintenance and upkeep of buildings. These
costs have been decreased as much as possible in recent years. Paid cleaners
for church buildings were let go and members are expected volunteer to clean
meetinghouses weekly. Temples are multi-million dollar buildings. Despite the
church teaching that we have no paid ministry (this is true, however, for local
leadership), General Authorities are given $120,000 American per year. This is
after all their debt is paid off by the church. The City Creek Center, a
shopping mall in Salt Lake City, was paid for by the church at an expense of
1.5 billion dollars. The church owns 2% of the entire state of Florida! I have
issues with the church spending money on investments rather than making a
positive difference in the world. The Seventh day Adventist church, founded in
1863, has almost 21 million members. They have purchased almost 200 hospitals,
133 nursing homes, and roughly 8500 schools. While the Seventh Day Adventist
church makes one third of what the LDS church makes in a year, they contributed
22 times the amount of humanitarian aid in 2014. These financial discrepancies
should not be occurring if the LDS church were the one true church on the
earth.
6.
The Second Anointing
The final point that I will make is about the ordinance of the
Second Anointing. Also described as making your calling and election made sure,
this is an ordinance that is not known among most members of the church. There
have been three first hand accounts that I personally know of regarding this
ordinance. Essentially, a high-ranking member of the church (stake president, mission
president, etc.) is called in by a General Authority under the direction of the
prophet. They are told they will receive their second endowment or the second
anointing in the temple. They are asked to prepare by reading what Bruce R. McConkie
had written on the subject of making your calling and election made sure in his
book “Mormon Doctrine.” The ordinance includes an apostle washing your feet,
you are anointed with oil and blessings are pronounced upon you, your wife washes
your feet and then your wife gives you a blessing. This is unusual in the
church, as women are not permitted to hold the priesthood, which is required in
order to give blessings. One of the blessings pronounced is that you are sealed
up to eternal life. From that point onward, no matter what sin you commit
(except murder or the unpardonable sin of denying the Holy Ghost) your exaltation
is guaranteed. This goes against everything the church teaches. We are taught
that we have to endure to the end of our lives and can only receive exaltation
if we have done so. The idea that high ranking church leaders are giving each
other blessings that signify they are guaranteed salvation no matter what they
do from that point onward is not okay with me and shouldn’t be okay with anyone
else.
I apologize for another long post. I didn’t want to make this into
two separate ones because, like I have said earlier, I want to move on from
discussing issues with the church and get back to discussing my experiences.
But I hope that by going through these problems that other members of the church
can see that my issues were not trivial. I have legitimate issues with many
aspects of the church. If this church told its members that it is one of many
good places to worship, it would be easier for me to go. But because the church
claims itself as the one true church, it needs to be able to back up this
claim. And unfortunately, at least in my opinion, it does not. That is why I
have taken a step back, why I do not attend regularly. I believe that I can be
a better person outside of the church than I could ever be inside it. I can
allow people to live their own lives, by their own conscience, without judging
them. I can choose the charity and causes that I donate my money to. I can
decide on my own what is right and what is wrong. I don’t have to listen to any
other person tell me the “right way” to live. I still have high standards and good morals. I can follow my conscience and be a good person not because someone else tells me to but because I want to. In a lot of ways, this process
has been extremely liberating. But in other ways it has been terrifying.
In the next post I will discuss the stages of grief I experienced
due to losing my faith in the LDS church. I want people to understand that it
was a horribly difficult event to have to go through, not at all the easy way
out. I hope it helps members of the church to love those that leave rather than
pushing them away, and hopefully to accept their choices, because they are
honestly made due to integrity and their conscience. We are all trying the best
we can to live our lives in the best way possible. And all roads are
legitimate.
