Prophets Archives - FAIR

View Details

In his April 2026 General Conference address, Elder Patrick Kearon taught that Church callings are much more than assignments to fill vacancies or keep a congregation functioning. They are inspired invitations to join Jesus Christ in His redeeming work while allowing Him to refine our own hearts through service. Looking back on his first calling as a newly baptized member, Elder Kearon recognized that what once seemed unexpected became one of the Lord’s greatest tools for his growth.

I could see the Lord working through imperfect servants. . .who were striving to discern His will for those they were serving.

Many people struggle with Church callings. Others struggle with the fact that the Church itself is led and served by imperfect people. If leaders make mistakes or members fall short, does that mean the Church cannot be guided by God?

Elder Kearon’s answer is both honest and hopeful: God has always accomplished His work through imperfect servants who are sincerely striving to follow Him. Rather than being discouraged by human weakness, we can recognize it as evidence of the Savior’s power to accomplish divine purposes through ordinary disciples.

Common Criticism: The Church Can’t Be True Because Its Leaders and Members Are ImperfectOne of the most common criticisms of religion is that if a church truly represents God, its leaders and members should consistently reflect His perfection. When mistakes are made, people sometimes conclude that the Church’s claims to divine guidance must therefore be false.

Elder Kearon responds by shifting our focus from human perfection to divine partnership. God has never waited for perfect people before accomplishing His work.

Fallacy at Work: Perfectionism (The Nirvana Fallacy)

The Nirvana Fallacy occurs when we reject something good because it falls short of an unrealistic ideal.

Instead of comparing the restored Church with real-world alternatives, critics sometimes compare it to an imagined community without weakness, mistakes, or growing disciples. But throughout scripture, the Lord repeatedly entrusted His work to imperfect people—from Moses and Peter to Joseph Smith and the early Saints.

Expecting flawless disciples before believing in divine guidance misunderstands the way God has always worked.

Doctrine

The Lord has consistently called ordinary men and women to accomplish extraordinary purposes. King Benjamin taught that “when ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God” (Mosiah 2:17), reminding us that service itself is one of God’s principal means of shaping His covenant people.

Likewise, Paul described the Church as the “body of Christ,” where every member contributes according to the gifts God has given (Romans 12:4–5). The strength of the body comes not from the perfection of each individual member, but from Christ, who is its Head.

Elder Kearon reminds us that callings are “tailor-made for our growth” and that “it really isn’t where we serve but how that matters to the Lord.” God is not looking for flawless servants. He is looking for willing ones.

It really isn’t where we serve but how that matters to the Lord.

Elder Kearon’s Correction

Elder Kearon does not pretend that Church leaders always make perfect decisions or that every member serves flawlessly. Instead, he invites us to recognize something more remarkable: Christ patiently works through imperfect people who are striving to discern His will.

That perspective changes how we view callings, ward members, bishops, Relief Society presidents, youth leaders, and even ourselves. Rather than asking whether God’s servants are perfect, we begin asking whether they are honestly seeking to follow Him.

The answer, more often than not, is yes.

And that is exactly how the Lord has always built His kingdom.

Solution

The existence of imperfect servants is not evidence against God’s Church—it is evidence of God’s grace.

If God only worked through perfect people, no one could participate in His work. Instead, He invites imperfect disciples into His service, knowing that as they bless others, He will also sanctify them.

That is one reason Church callings matter so deeply. They are not merely responsibilities; they are one of God’s primary classrooms for discipleship.

Living Apologetics: Looking Beyond Human WeaknessIt is easy to become discouraged when we notice mistakes in Church leaders or fellow members. It is equally easy to become discouraged by our own shortcomings when serving in a calling.

Elder Kearon invites us to remember that Christ’s work has never depended on perfect servants. It depends on willing hearts.

Practical Apologetic Use

If someone says: “If the Church were really true, its leaders wouldn’t make mistakes.”

You can respond: “God has always worked through imperfect people. The real miracle isn’t that His servants never make mistakes—it’s that Christ consistently accomplishes His work through disciples who are humbly striving to follow Him.”

Ways to Apply Today

1️⃣ Extend grace. When someone serving in your ward falls short, remember that they are learning discipleship just as you are.

2️⃣ Support those you sustain. Pray regularly for your leaders and teachers rather than assuming they carry their responsibilities alone.

3️⃣ Embrace your own calling. Don’t wait until you feel perfectly qualified before giving Christ your willing heart.

Keep This Talk With YouElder Kearon’s invitation extends far beyond accepting a Church calling. It invites us to see God’s kingdom through the eyes of Christ. The Savior has never built His Church with perfect people. He has always built it with covenant disciples who are willing to follow Him, repent, learn, and keep serving.

That truth should fill us with both humility and hope. Humility because we recognize our own imperfections. Hope because Christ is not waiting for perfection before inviting us into His work. As we accept opportunities to serve, sustain one another, and trust the Lord’s guiding hand, we discover that He is shaping us even as He blesses others through us.

This week, try one small step:

Thank someone who quietly serves in your ward or branch. Your encouragement may remind them that their efforts matter more than they know.
Pray for someone whose calling seems especially demanding, asking the Lord to strengthen and guide them.
Look for one opportunity outside your formal calling to be “about His Father’s business” through an act of Christlike service.

Then we can learn to see one another the way the Savior does: not as finished disciples, but as willing ones.

How can you better support those the Lord has called, knowing that He accomplishes His work through willing—not perfect—disciples?

The Consider Conference series by FAIR offers an in-depth look at recent General Conference talks to help members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints navigate common questions, misunderstandings, and criticisms. Each post provides doctrinal insights, historical context, and practical ways to apply gospel principles in everyday conversations. Through this series, we hope to equip readers with faith-promoting resources that encourage thoughtful reflection, respectful dialogue, and a stronger foundation in gospel truths, fostering both personal conviction and meaningful discussions with others.

The post About His Business appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Turn Back to Godby Autumn Dickson

Time for another Old Testament story.

Jehoshaphat is a king of Judah. He is a righteous king who worked on pushing the hearts of his people towards the Lord. He tears down idols. He seeks out the will of the Lord. He’s a good man, though imperfect at times.

At one point in time, Jehoshaphat finds himself in Israel with his ally, the wicked King Ahab. Ahab wants to go fight Syria to recapture a city that was taken from Israel. Jehoshaphat agrees but wants to consult a prophet first. After consulting 400 false prophets who declare that they will be victorious, Jehoshaphat insists on consulting a true prophet.

The true prophet, Micaiah, comes and prophesies that they will lose and Ahab will die. Micaiah is actually quite awesome, but he is a story for another day.

Despite Micaiah’s prophecies, Ahab and Jehoshaphat try to fight Syria. It obviously doesn’t go very well. Ahab tells Jehoshaphat to wear royal robes, and Ahab dresses like a common soldier. Syria immediately starts trying to kill Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat calls out to the Lord and is saved. Ahab takes a random arrow and dies.

Jehoshaphat returns home and is greeted by a prophet from his own kingdom.

2 Chronicles 19:2-3

2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord.

3 Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God.

After this experience, Jehoshaphat continues to make reforms to point his people towards the Lord. Jehoshaphat was not a perfect king, but he was a good king. In the Old Testament, we read a lot about the Lord punishing disobedience quickly and strongly. There is a reason for that; the Lord is warning us about the spiritual consequences of disobedience. And yet, the Lord doesn’t do this with Jehoshaphat despite his multiple recorded failings.

We see Jehoshaphat’s weakness a few more times over his reign.

Later on, Jehoshaphat makes another alliance with Ahab’s son, the new king of Israel. They built a bunch of ships together, and the prophet, Eliezer, prophesies that the ships will get destroyed. They get destroyed.

One of the ways that these two nations were allied was through a marriage. Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram, marries Ahab’s daughter. It comes back to haunt Jehoshaphat later when Jehoram starts worshipping idols and Ahab’s daughter tries to wipe out the Davidic line.

I love the nuance here.

Jehoshaphat made mistakes, but God spares him. He has weaknesses; he keeps trying to connect himself further with the northern kingdom that is wicked and idolatrous. There are two “despites” here that teach something really important.

Despite the fact that Jehoshaphat loves God, his disobedience and lack of trust come back to bite him. He loves God, but he has to experience consequences because of his flaws.

Despite the fact that Jehoshaphat has flaws, God continues to save him. He is directly saved in the battle that he fought with King Ahab, but he is preserved upon the throne until he “rested with his ancestors.” This is a biblical phrase that suggests he died peacefully.

I see it in my own life all the time. Despite the fact that I love God, I have flaws and they come with consequences. They drive me to be unhappy. When I get frustrated with my kids or get prideful or uncharitable, I find innate consequences that come back to bite me.

And yet, despite the fact that I have flaws, God continues to save me. We just keep on trying to move forward.

As I pondered this pattern, I thought of some of the other patterns I find in the Old Testament, specifically the pattern where God punishes those who trust mankind over Him. We see examples of kings that trusted Egypt but found themselves completely fallen to Babylon. Why didn’t Jehoshaphat find himself in this category? As I pondered Jehoshaphat’s exception, I was reminded that Hezekiah is another example of this. Hezekiah tried paying tribute to Babylon to get them to go away, and he even stripped the gold and silver out of the temple in order to pay that tribute.

So why were Hezekiah and Jehoshaphat spared when they also didn’t put their trust fully in God?

There is one more verse I want to share. It’s about Jehoshaphat, but Hezekiah did a similar thing.

2 Chronicles 18:31 And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, It is the king of Israel. Therefore they compassed about him to fight: but Jehoshaphat cried out, and the Lord helped him; and God moved them to depart from him.

What was the difference? Jehoshaphat called out to God. Hezekiah did similarly. After stripping the temple and failing, Hezekiah went to the temple and pleaded with the Lord.

When do we really lose the battle? When we turn on the Lord and don’t turn back to Him again after.

I think that’s really one of the keys to life here. We all fail. It’s inevitable. What keeps us in the pattern of Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah? We turn to the Lord again even after we failed Him. We plead to Him and ask for forgiveness even in the midst of the potentially devastating consequences that we got ourselves into.

We just keep turning back, no matter how many times we’ve failed.

I testify that we can turn to God, no matter how many times we’ve failed. I testify that this pattern is the one that really grants us success: turning to the Lord over and over and over and over. Even when we’ve failed Him, we turn right back. We trust that He will still love us, and we ask Him to help us get out of it and get better.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 2 Chronicles 14–20; 26; 30 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 2 Chronicles 14–20; 26; 30 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 2 Kings 2–7 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 1 Kings 12–13; 17–22 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Deadly Lie of the Old Prophetby Autumn Dickson

There are major themes throughout the stories we read in the Old Testament. Some of the more negative themes are idolatry, fear over losing power, disobedience, and corrupting influences. The Old Testament does not shy away from showing the fallibility of humankind. There is great hope in faithful stories in the scriptures; there are also important warnings in the stories of people who were not obedient to the Lord.

One of the stories we read this week shows themes of obedience and disobedience. We see people who have a connection to God and follow Him, but we also watch them choose against God and find themselves in deep water because of it.

There are a lot of details for our story in this post, but stick with me. They are important because they set the stage for our principle.

In 1 Kings 13, we read about a man of God and an old prophet. Those are the only “names” we receive for these men, and these titles can get confusing especially when you’re reading the details of the story. Though they were labeled as a man of God and an old prophet, we see their fallibility on full display.

For some quick background, Israel has split into two kingdoms: Judah and Benjamin in the south and the rest of the ten tribes in the north. The man of God was from Judah where the true temple was. The northern kingdom had fallen into idolatry. The man of God was commanded to go to Bethel (in the northern kingdom) and condemn the idolatrous practice. He does so and performs a couple of wonderful miracles as well.

The Lord warns and commands the man of God to not eat or drink in Bethel. The man of God originally follows this command very well as he works to return to Judah. Unfortunately, another man, the old prophet, comes along and finds the man of God resting under the shade of a tree. The old prophet offers the man of God some food and drink, and the man of God refuses. The old prophet says this.

1 Kings 13:18 He said unto him, I am a prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied unto him.

The man of God listens to the old prophet and partakes in food and drink. While the man of God eats, the old prophet tells him that he won’t make it home because of his disobedience. On the way home, the man of God is killed by a lion. The old prophet collects the body, gives the man of God an honorable burial, and requests to be buried next to the man of God when he dies. The old prophet calls the man of God a brother. He testifies that the prophecy made by the man of God earlier regarding the idolatrous altar in Bethel will come true.

There are a lot of confusing details. I don’t know if this was one of those parts of the bible that was translated incorrectly or whether it’s simply highlighting the fallibility of real people who sometimes follow the Lord.

Who was the old prophet? Was he an actual prophet to the Lord? He was in the idolatrous kingdom so when they called him a prophet, was he a false prophet? Was he trying to tear down the man of God for prophesying against the northern kingdom? We know that the old prophet received some revelation from the Lord. He prophesied of the death of the man of God, and he testified of the prophecy given by the man of God. So why did he lie? Was he threatened by the man of God or did he see no harm in his white lie? Was he trying to just nourish the man of God? Was he wicked but then received a testimony while he watched the man of God come and eat?

There is a lot of ambiguity. Oftentimes, I’ll try to take one biblical theory and talk about true principles from it regardless of whether the details are perfect. This time, I’m going to embrace the ambiguity.

The man of God listened to the old prophet and found himself dead because of it.

I’ve seen a pattern on social media. This is a pattern that has existed for a long time, but I’ve seen it more readily because of its prevalence on social media.

On social media (and in real life), we find people who are disgusted by the church. They hate it. They actively fight against it. Their entire online persona can be defined by, “I hate the church.”

But there is another group of people. They claim to be part of the church, to receive revelation, and to love the Lord. Some of their posts are uplifting and encouraging, but some of their posts teach things that can be found in direct conflict with the Lord’s commandments. Some of their posts might not necessarily be in direct conflict, but they are critical of the church in the name of their love for the Lord.

These people are much more ambiguous. What are their true motives? What does it mean that they call themselves members? Because heaven knows you can call yourself a member without actually following Christ.

I don’t have any real desire to discover their motives. If they are sincere, the Lord will work with them and hopefully they will listen. If they are not sincere, then the Lord can handle all of that. I don’t need to know their motives or even condemn them.

Rather, I’d like to highlight a warning from this story. The man of God died because he followed the ambiguous old prophet who had some claim to God but also lied.

I don’t think we’ll get killed by a lion if we follow these accounts, but I do think it can spiritually deaden us. It can blind us.

Isn’t that funny? The rest of the world would call us blind and accuse us of drinking the Kool-aid, and yet, either side could be logically labelled as propaganda. Both sides label themselves enlightened. Everyone thinks their version is the closest one to the truth.

So how do we know whether we can trust the old prophet? How do we know whether we should whole-heartedly follow the prophet of our church?

I can’t answer that question for everyone. All I know is that I talk to the Lord, and He responds. I can’t answer for other people, but the more I study the gospel and the church, the more I see the Lord’s perfect hand working with the imperfection of mankind. I have watched some of my loved ones listen to these posts and believe they can disobey the Lord in little ways and be fine, and I have watched some of my loved ones turn these voices off. With the experiences that I’ve had in the gospel, I have no desire to follow anyone (real or on the internet) who tells me that I can disobey the Lord. It’s not just about avoiding dying either. I have found too much joy in the protection and safety of the Lord, and I refuse to lose that joy.

I testify that being obedient to the Lord provides safety and warmth and true happiness. I testify that even in the darkest times, following Him is where we will find respite. I testify that He teaches us through powerful stories in the scriptures, and that His patterns reflect across all generations on the earth. I testify that there is safety in joy in following the word of the Lord as given from Him directly.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 1 Kings 12–13; 17–22 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What Does it Mean to be a Prophetess?by Autumn Dickson

In a day and age where many are curious as to why women can’t hold specific positions in the church or be ordained to priesthood offices, reading about Deborah the prophetess can be confusing. Here is a verse that describes her as a prophetess.

Judges 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

If Deborah can be a prophetess, can we have a prophetess in our day? What does it even mean that she was a prophetess and what are the implications for women in the latter days?

I think it’s important to note that I’m not an official representative of the church. However, I’d like to share some of my own perspectives and interpretations surrounding Deborah and what it means as a female Latter-day Saint.

But first, some context.

Judges is a book of scripture that describes the time period when Israel had no king. Joshua, the prophet after Moses, died, and there was no prophet that directly succeeded him. We don’t know exactly how long it took before the Lord called another centralized prophet (Samuel), but educated guesses suggest 300-450 years.

As a society, they had the Law of Moses, and the government could be described as a tribal confederation. Despite having a law given unto them from God, they often fell in with Canaanites and found themselves in varying levels of apostasy.

Sometimes, in response to the Israelites finding themselves in trouble, the Lord would send a “judge.” The way that we define “judge” is not necessarily accurate in this particular book of scripture. In this context, a judge was a charismatic military leader that would help Israel. There were some major judges such as Samson; there were other minor judges that would help regions rather than the entire nation of Israel.

So who was Deborah?

Deborah was one of the major judges sent by God to help Israel. She was a judge in every sense of the word. She was a military leader, but people also literally went to her for guidance to settle their problems. She was also a spiritual leader over the nation of Israel.

Was she a prophet? The scriptures describe her as a prophetess, and she led all of Israel politically and spiritually. But was she a prophet in the way that we define “prophet” in our day?

At this point, I think it’s important to clarify what it means to have a prophet.

Definition One. The way that we usually define “prophet” in our church in the Latter-days is unique. It’s not just someone who studies the scriptures and knows them really well. It’s not just someone who receives revelation. When Latter-day Saints speak of prophets, we are often describing the man who has the authority to speak for God on behalf of the entire church. He is the only one with spiritual jurisdiction to lead (under Christ) the church. He holds all of the priesthood keys.

And yes, he is a male.

We don’t know if that will ever change. I don’t know if it’s doctrine that means this particular role will always be male, or if someday the Lord will use His unchanging love and wisdom to adapt His church according to circumstances as He has throughout the course of history.

But there is also a broader definition of this term, “prophet.”

Definition two. Anyone can have the spirit of prophecy which is defined as a “testimony of Christ.” We know that Jerusalem had centralized prophets in ancient times as well as lesser “prophets” who would also be sent by the Lord to teach and call upon people to repent. I am not a prophet in the sense that I hold all the priesthood keys or can define doctrine on behalf of the Lord for the entire church. However, I have come to view myself as a prophetess within my own family. Beside my husband, I lead our home. I receive revelation on behalf of our kids and what we need to do. I learn the will of the Lord for our family. I fulfill so many of the “prophetic” responsibilities often associated with prophets; I simply do it within the context of my own family. Most importantly, I am a witness of Christ to my family.

What kind of prophetess was Deborah? With the information we’ve been given, I feel pretty safe assuming she was the second kind of prophet. The Lord had declared that priesthood responsibilities would go through male descendants of Aaron and the tribe of Levi. Deborah was not ordained nor did she hold any keys.

So Deborah was a prophetess but not necessarily how we often define it in our day.

Perhaps there are some who are disappointed by this news. Perhaps there are some who hoped that because Deborah was a prophetess, we could have one in our day. Perhaps there are some who cling to the idea that things will change and long for the day to see a prophetess lead the church. I don’t know whether that will be a thing. If anyone has any insight into that particular doctrine, feel free to comment. But as far as I know, we don’t know.

Here’s what I do know.

Deborah doesn’t need to be disappointing. In fact, if we understand her properly, we should be exultant. If we understand what the Lord would like to bestow upon His daughters and His sons, then we would hold no fear. Deborah is excellent proof of what the Lord would have all of us do.

Deborah may not have been a prophetess in the modern sense of the word, but guys! She was still a prophetess! She was a national leader, and people followed her. She changed Israel. She made a difference. She has been regarded with respect by millions who learned about her generation after generation.

And she didn’t need the priesthood keys to do it.

The Lord is wonderful and wise and set up a priesthood organization with offices and keys. I know that can be a painful sticking point for some. I understand that. I’m personally grateful for this organization, but I can simultaneously understand why it’s painful. But that’s not really my point today.

My point is that you have all that you need to become everything God wants you to become, and He has much more in mind for you than you have for yourself. This has implications for men too. About 3-5% of men will hold priesthood keys at any given time in the church. That number jumps to 10-20% of men who will hold priesthood keys at some point in their lifetime.

BUT YOU DON’T NEED KEYS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND CHANGE THE WORLD.

No one came to Deborah and ordained her as a prophetess. The bible doesn’t tell us how she rose to that role, but I have my guesses as to how it happened.

It happened because she was a faithful daughter of God who chose to follow the Lord wherever He chose to lead her.

Following the Lord and handing your life over to Him in faith (female or male) does not mean you will be recorded for people to pore over your life story for generations to come. It doesn’t mean you’ll be famous or even particularly loud. But if that’s what you’re looking for, then you’re in the wrong place anyway.

I love the example of Deborah, if for no other reason than her story means that I can be a powerful tool for the Lord regardless of what mankind recognizes in me. Regardless of whatever official roles I’ve been given, I could part seas or change lives. Really what it comes down to is what the Lord wants for me and what He’s trying to teach me. Having enough power to change the world isn’t really the question here; the Lord will give me everything I need. The true question is whether I will give my life over to Him in whatever capacity He asks.

I have as well as I can, and I love my life.

I testify that we have everything we need to do everything the Lord wants us to do and become everything He wants us to become. I likewise testify that He has much more in mind for you than you have for yourself. If you (female or male) feel left out because you can’t be or aren’t a bishop, then hold tight. The Lord has much bigger plans for you. He loves you so much. You are so important to Him. It would be silly to ask more from Him when He already plans on giving you everything that He has.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Judges 2–4; 6–8; 13–16 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Deuteronomy 6–8; 15; 18; 29–30; 34 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Exodus 19–20; 24; 31–34 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Parted Waters, Messy Leadership, and Miraclesby Autumn Dickson

The story of Moses freeing the Israelites through the power of God is an incredible parable for the atonement of Jesus Christ. It’s probably the most important lesson we can pull from that story. However, it’s not the only story we can learn from it. There are other principles at work too. Let’s talk about one of them.

Within the story, we find Moses exhorting the people to have faith in God and His ability to deliver. We’ve come a long way from Moses being worried about talking to Pharaoh. After exhorting the people to believe and trust, he turns to the Lord. The Lord tells him to move forward, and there would be a miracle. Moses listens.

Exodus 14:21-22

21 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.

22 And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.

I want to zoom in on some of the people who were experiencing these events. I have no idea how the individual Israelites were truly reacting outwardly and in their hearts, but let’s talk about relatable hypotheticals.

I want you to imagine an Israelite who was particularly grumpy about being saved; let’s call him Joshua. Despite the fact that Joshua was saved, he was still a little peeved over the fact that there were so many problems along the way. Surely, the whole process of saving Israel could have been a lot smoother. Moses wasn’t very good at convincing Pharaoh to let the people go, and they ended up with a lot of extra work. He had to put blood on his doors which just seems unnecessary; why couldn’t God just save them if He was really so powerful? And then, of course, Joshua was one of the first to call Moses out when they noticed that the Egyptians were chasing after them to kill them in the wilderness.

What was Moses thinking bringing them out here? Sure, their lives weren’t fantastic, but at least they were alive. Why did Moses feel the need to go ruin it and why did everyone follow after him? If you’re going to save someone, you should do it right and actually save them. Not just do it halfway.

Joshua is legitimately worried about himself and his family and this supposed prophet who has led them into the wilderness to be slaughtered. Despite the real danger behind them, Moses has the gall to tell them to just have faith. Who does that? Moses is the reason they’re in danger, and his response is for them to trust him? Who does he think he is?

But then something changes. Moses starts walking towards the water, and miracle of miracles, the water parts for the Israelites to walk through.

Maybe there is something here. Maybe Moses has God behind him. So Joshua follows.

Unfortunately, this process isn’t necessarily smoother than the experiences with the plagues. The terrain left behind after the parted waters can be treacherous. Trying to get families safely through it is downright dangerous. It can be steep and rocky. It’s hard to tread through the sand. Couldn’t Moses have summoned a boat instead? Surely that would have been easier than parting the entire sea.

Not to mention, how do we know this miracle is going to hold? Joshua is pretty skeptical about this whole thing. Does he have the power to hold this long enough or are they all just going to end up drowning anyway? Conveniently for Moses, they don’t have a choice but to follow him anyway.

Now, I want you to imagine for a moment that Joshua slips and slides down the face of a rock. He becomes injured, and he is fed up. He is so over this. How can Moses be so reckless with the lives of people he apparently loves and wants to rescue?

Joshua is done. He’s turning back. He’s done putting his life at risk for this mortal man who is supposed to be saving them.

Seems a bit ridiculous, don’t you think?

And yet, don’t we see this all the time? The church hasn’t been perfect. The programs aren’t perfect. Leaders aren’t perfect. In fact, some people who were called into positions were downright evil and dangerous. Sometimes people have gotten hurt along the way because of those imperfections. Sometimes there has been true fear involved.

These are all true and legitimate statements.

But it’s also true that the Lord sent plagues and enabled the Israelites to walk out of Egypt. It’s also true that the Red Sea was parted.

The path was messy. There was difficulty and fear and devastation. There were also miracles beyond our wildest dreams and covenants with a Lord who has a land for our inheritance. There is a life beyond slavery. It’s not necessarily going to be an easy life, but it’s a life worth living. It’s worth growing and owning your decisions and having the freedom to build something for yourself. It’s worth the difficulty to get a front row seat for the miracles. It is worth leaving slavery for.

It is worth it to follow the prophet. Don’t miss the miracles of the priesthood structure and church and The Book of Mormon and the youth programs and welfare programs and the missionary programs. The church is doing miraculous things and changing lives. It’s giving people an opportunity to rise above previous circumstances. The prophet is being led by the Savior even if you think things should be done differently.

Maybe you don’t like the whole list of plagues you had to go through before the death of the firstborn. Maybe you don’t like the blood on the door.

Maybe the Lord is trying to teach you about His atonement.

Maybe you don’t like the difficult path you’ve had to walk within the church.

Maybe the Lord is trying to teach you about His atonement.

The story of the exodus from Egypt is a powerful parable for the atonement of Jesus Christ. It’s also an incredible example of why it’s important to follow the prophet even if things don’t go perfectly smoothly or even if you think that you could have done things better. The Lord has called a prophet, and He knows what He’s doing.

So you can stay in slavery or you can join the Lord in this journey where even the treacherous parts can contribute to a glorious you.

I testify that the Lord loves His children. I testify that He led Moses even when things weren’t going smoothly. I testify that following the prophet enabled the Israelites to be freed through the power of the Savior. I testify that the Lord is leading His church through a living prophet today. Perhaps that prophet hasn’t been led perfectly, but it would be ridiculous to miss out on the miracles because of the mistakes.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Exodus 14–18 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Note: This is the second in a two-part series about solemn assemblies to sustain a President of the Church. The first part addressed current procedures and the principles of solemn assemblies and sustaining Church Presidents.

Since October 1880 when John Taylor was first sustained as the President of the Church, a solemn assembly is held “for the body of the Church to express the voice of the Church in a first sustaining vote for a new President of the Church.”1 Although the exact procedures have varied over time, the fundamentals have remain unchanged.

Joseph Smith and Brigham YoungJoseph Smith introduced the special pattern of voting that is now followed in our solemn assemblies. During the dedicatory services of the Kirtland Temple on March 27, 1836, Sidney Rigdon:

The first special voting for Church leaders in this dispensation took place in the Kirtland Temple.Presented Joseph Smith jr. to the church as a Prophet and Seer. The Presidents of the Church then all in their seats, acknowledged him as such by rising. The vote was unanimous in the affirmative. The question was then put, and carried without a manifest dissenting sentiment to each of the different grades or quorums of church officers respectively and then to the congregation.2

Later in the service, Joseph Smith then presented the other Church officers in the same manner: each officer was presented to the several priesthood quorums in order, and then to the congregation as a whole.3 Naturally, this procedure took a long time, as each group of leaders was presented to each quorum and the congregation, then the next group was presented to each quorum and the congregation, and so forth.

In this special procedure, a person voted affirmatively by rising when that person’s quorum was called upon, if he assented to the proposal; if he disagreed with the proposal, he remained seated.

After Joseph Smith was killed, Brigham Young called for a solemn assembly for the Saints to vote on who should lead the Church—Sidney Rigdon or the Quorum of the Twelve. He asked the Saints to assemble at the meeting seated by priesthood quorums, to vote in the same way as was done in the Kirtland Temple. However, as the meeting progressed in which the vote was to be taken, developments in the meeting precluded voting by quorums.4

John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and Lorenzo SnowIn August of 1877, Brigham Young died after leading the Church for 30 years. In the first general conference after he passed, a solemn assembly was convened for the purpose of sustaining the Quorum of the Twelve as the presiding quorum of the Church. (At the time, it was called a general assembly.) This assembly followed the same pattern as the assembly in the Kirtland Temple: attendees were seated by priesthood quorum, and each group of leaders was presented to each quorum in succession (meaning the first group of leaders was presented to each quorum in order, then the next group was presented, and so forth). One change that was made (and has continued ever since) is that voting was done by standing and raising the right hand (instead of just standing).5

The current process of voting on a new Church President started with John Taylor.In 1880, the Quorum of the Twelve was ready to reorganize the First Presidency, and so in the October 1880 general conference, another solemn assembly was convened in order to sustain the new First Presidency. Again, attendees were seated by priesthood quorum and voted in the same manner as the 1877 conference. (During this voting, presidents of all priesthood quorums also voted as an additional separate group.) One major difference this time is that only the newly formed First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and the counselors to the Apostles6 were sustained using the special voting procedure. The vote on the counselors in the First Presidency and the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators, as well as the voting on all other Church officers, was done in the non-special manner (of the entire congregation voting at once while staying in their seats).7 This 1880 assembly effectively became the first solemn assembly for sustaining a new First Presidency.

The people who voted as a group were as follows:

Members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and their counselors
Patriarchs and members of stake presidencies and high councils
High priests
Seventies
Elders
Members of bishoprics
All Aaronic Priesthood holders (priests, teachers, and deacons)
Presidents of the quorums
The entire congregation, including non-priesthood holders

The procedures in the 1889 assembly for Wilford Woodruff were virtually identical as those of the 1880 assembly, with the exception that quorum presidents did not vote as a separate group (what had been group 8).8 The procedures in the 1898 assembly for Lorenzo Snow were virtually identical to those of the 1889 assembly.9

Joseph F. Smith and Heber J. GrantThe 1901 assembly for Joseph F. Smith is unique in that it has been the only assembly conducted during a special general conference. Lorenzo Snow died just a few days after the October 1901 general conference had concluded, and it was decided to hold a special conference immediately for the sole purpose of sustaining the new First Presidency. So in November of 1901, the Saints assembled for this special conference. Unlike the previous three assemblies, during this one all the General Authorities were sustained using the special voting method. As for the groups voting, because the First Presidency had already been organized, the First Presidency became the first group to vote. Also, the patriarchs of the Church now voted as their own group, before members of stake presidencies and high councils. Lastly, Joseph F. Smith himself, as President of the Church, conducted the sustaining vote.10

The 1919 assembly to sustain Heber J. Grant was virtually identical to the 1901 assembly.11

George Albert Smith through Spencer W. KimballThe 1945 assembly to sustain George Albert Smith reverted back to the principle followed in the 1880 assembly of using the special voting procedure only for the top leaders. Thus, in the assemblies from 1945 to 1975, the special voting procedure was used only for the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and Patriarch to the Church, as well as sustaining these officers as prophets, seers, and revelators. The most notable change from the 1919 pattern was the involvement of those not in the Tabernacle. Seating in the Tabernacle was still by quorum, and when each quorum was called upon to vote, only those in the Tabernacle participated. However, when the voting on each proposal reached the last group (the entire congregation), everyone listening by radio, wherever they were, was invited to stand and vote. The last notable change was that all high priests now voted together as one group. (Previously, members of stake presidents and high councils voted as a group, members of bishoprics voted as a group, and other high priests voted as yet a third group.)12

The assemblies for David O. McKay (1951), Joseph Fielding Smith (1970), Harold B. Lee (1972), and Spencer W. Kimball (1974) were virtually identical to the 1945 assembly.13

Ezra Taft Benson and Howard W. HunterThe entire congregation arises and votes to sustain Ezra Taft Benson as Church President.The 1986 assembly for Ezra Taft Benson14 saw the greatest changes to the procedure since it was introduced by Joseph Smith:

Standing for all proposals at once. Up to this point, each quorum would vote on one set of leaders (for example, the First Presidency), cycling through all the quorums voting for that group of leaders. Then the quorums would vote again on the next set of leaders (for example, the Quorum of the Twelve), and so on. This obviously took a considerable amount of time, and required a lot of up and down for everyone involved. Beginning with the 1986 assembly, each quorum stood only once to vote, and all the proposals were given at once for each quorum.
Proposals consolidated for everyone after the First Presidency voted. Previously, when each quorum stood, the person conducting would read through all the names of the group being presented, every time. Starting with the 1986 assembly, the person conducting would read through each proposal when the First Presidency voted. After that, for each quorum voting, the person conducting would simply say something like “It is proposed that [insert group voting] sustain the proposals as previously presented and voted upon by the First Presidency.”
Everyone everywhere participated for everything. Though starting in 1945 people not in the Tabernacle were invited to participate when the whole congregation was invited to stand, before 1986 only those in the Tabernacle could participate when each quorum was called upon. Beginning in 1986, everyone everywhere was invited to stand then their quorum was called upon.
Melchizedek Priesthood groups. All Melchizedek Priesthood holders outside of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve voted together as one group (instead of the voting being separated by priesthood offices).
Seating in the Tabernacle. Seating in the Tabernacle was no longer done by quorums.

These changes greatly reduced the amount of time required to conduct the special voting. Whereas the 1945 pattern took almost 30 minutes to conduct the voting, the 1986 pattern took less than 10 minutes.15

The only main difference between the 1986 assembly and the 1994 assembly for Howard W. Hunter was that the Seventies and the Presiding Bishopric voted as their own group. (They had been included with all other Melchizedek Priesthood holders in the 1986 assembly.)16

Gordon B. Hinckley through Russell M. NelsonBeginning in the 1995 assembly for Gordon B. Hinckley, two groups were added to the voting. Previously, once the Aaronic Priesthood had voted, the entire congregation was then invited to vote together. Beginning in 1995, the Relief Society and also the Young Women voted as separate groups before the entire congregation was invited to vote.17

The 2008 assembly for Thomas S. Monson was virtually identical to the 1995 assembly.18

Members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles vote to sustain Russell M. Nelson as Church President.The only major difference for the 2018 assembly for Russell M. Nelson was the Relief Society group voted after the Melchizedek Priesthood group and before the Aaronic Priesthood group.19

ConclusionThough the procedures have changed significantly since the pattern was first introduced by Joseph Smith in 1836, the special voting during a solemn assembly remains an important opportunity for Church members to join with their own quorums or groups, and then as an entire Church, to sustain a new President of the Church. For those who approach the proceedings with a reverential attitude, they can witness what has been described as “one of the most thrilling, inspiring, and humbling experiences in Church government.”20

David W. Smith has volunteered with FAIR since August 2019, and was the recipient of the John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award in 2020. He has had an article published in BYU Studies, and he presented at the Joseph Smith Papers Conference in 2019. He has a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and a master’s degree in public administration, both from Brigham Young University.

1 J. Reuben Clark Jr., Conference Report, October 1945, 3.2 “Minutes and Prayer of Dedication, 27 March 1836 [D&C 109],” p. 276, josephsmithpapers.org.3 See entry for 27 March 1836 in “Journal, 1835-1836,” p. 175-176, josephsmithpapers.org4 For a summary, see Ronald W. Walker, “Six Days in August: Brigham Young and the Succession,” in A Firm Foundation: Church Organization and Administration, ed. David J. Whittaker and Arnold K. Garr (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011). For an easy-to-read summary from notes of the time period, see entries for August 7 and 8, 1844, in History of the Church 7:230-231, 240. For original sources, see “Nauvoo, Illinois, stand, 1844 August 8,” in Historians Office general church minutes, 1839-1877, Church History Library; entry for 8 August 1844, in Wilford Woodruff Journal (January 1, 1843 – December 31, 1844), The Wilford Woodruff Papers. 5 See “General Conference,” The Deseret News 26, no. 36 (10 October 1877): 569.6 John W. Young was serving as First Counselor in the First Presidency and Daniel H. Wells as Second Counselor in the First Presidency when Brigham Young died. These two men had not been sustained to the Quorum of the Twelve prior to their service in the First Presidency, and it was decided that they thus be called to serve as “counselors to the Twelve” after Brigham Young died.7 See “Fiftieth Semi-annual Conference,” The Deseret News 29, no. 37 (13 October 1880): 588.8 See “General Conference,” The Deseret Weekly 38, no. 16 (13 April 1889): 486–487.9 See Conference Report, October 1898, 51–53.10 See Conference Report, October 1901, 80–81. This report included the proceedings of the special November 1901 conference that was convened for the solemn assembly.11 See Conference Report, June 1919, 2–3.12 See Conference Report, October 1945, 3–15.13 For the 1951 assembly, see Conference Report, April 1951, 136–147. For the 1970 assembly, see Conference Report, April 1970, 102–110; Jay M. Todd, “The Solemn Assembly,” Improvement Era 73, no. 6 (June 1970): 20–24. For the 1972 assembly, see N. Eldon Tanner, “Sustaining of Church Authorities and Officers,” October 1972 general conference. For the 1974 assembly, see N. Eldon Tanner, “The Solemn Assembly,” April 1974 general conference.14 Gordon B. Hinckley, “Solemn Assembly and Sustaining of Church Officers,” April 1986 general conference.15 Compare the videos of the 1974 and 1986 assemblies on Gospel Library.16 See Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Solemn Assembly [and] Sustaining of Church Officers,” October 1994 general conference.17 See Thomas S. Monson, “The Solemn Assembly [and] Sustaining of Church Officers,” April 1995 general conference.18 See Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “The Sustaining of Church Officers,” April 2008 general conference.19 See Henry B. Eyring, “Solemn Assembly,” April 2018 general conference.20 Jay M. Todd, “The Solemn Assembly,” Improvement Era 73, no. 6 (June 1970): 20.The post Procedural Developments in the Solemn Assembly appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Sustaining Church officers with the uplifted hand is a privilege and a responsibility.By David W. Smith

Note: This is the first in a two-part series about solemn assemblies to sustain Presidents of the Church. Part 2 is here.

With the passing of President Russell M. Nelson in September 2025, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will soon have the special privilege to participate in a solemn assembly to sustain a new Church president. Because this sustaining is a bit different than the normal sustaining process, it may be helpful to review the procedure and principles of the solemn assembly and sustaining Church leaders.

History of Solemn AssembliesSolemn assemblies were held in ancient Israel to remember the Lord during special times.1 In our dispensation, the first solemn assembly occurred in connection with the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. Today, members of the Church participate in solemn assemblies with temple dedications, to sustain a new Church President, and for other special occasions.2 This blog post focuses on solemn assemblies to sustain a new Church President.

Our current pattern for sustaining a new President of the Church originated with Joseph Smith during the Kirtland Temple dedication, when Church officers were sustained by a special method of voting. In its fundamentals, this procedure continues to be used today when we sustain a new Church President.

Note: A detailed history of the procedural developments of solemn assemblies to sustain a new Church President will be presented in the next blog post.

Method of VotingNormally during a general sustaining, Church members sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, as well as any releases and callings for general Church leaders that have been made over the previous six months. When voting on the proposals, the person conducting will present some names and call for a vote, with those in favor raising their hands and then any opposing indicating their dissent.

During the solemn assembly, members will stand to voteThe method of voting in solemn assembly, however, is unique. A vote is conducted by priesthood quorums and groups, which stand when invited to give their vote. Assuming the procedure will be the same as when President Nelson was first sustained, the pattern for the solemn assembly to sustain Dallin H. Oaks as President of the Church will be as follows:

The First Presidency will stand, and the members of the First Presidency will vote on the proposals for the new President of the Church, his Counselors in the First Presidency, the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Once the First Presidency has voted on these proposals, they will sit.
The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles will stand and vote on the proposals “as they have been presented and voted upon by the First Presidency.” The Twelve will then sit.
The General Authority Seventies and the Presiding Bishopric will stand and vote just as the Twelve did, then be seated.
All Area Seventies, ordained patriarchs, high priests, and elders will then stand and vote in the same pattern, then be seated.
All members of the Relief Society—that is, all women 18 years of age and older—will follow in the same pattern.
Those holding only the Aaronic Priesthood—that is, all ordained priests, teachers, and deacons—will follow in the same pattern.
The young women will follow in the same pattern.
Finally, the entire membership of the Church, including all of those who have previously voted, will arise and vote.

To better understand the procedure, you may consider watching the solemn assembly for President Nelson in the April 2018 general conference.

Principles of Solemn AssembliesBeginning with the solemn assembly for George Albert Smith in 1945, the person conducting the assembly usually began by informing the congregation that they were gathered in “a formal solemn assembly of the body of the Church to express the voice of the Church.”3 In the solemn assembly in which he was first sustained as President of the Church, Harold B. Lee reviewed the importance of the Church participating in this event. He explained that Doctrine and Covenants 107:22 gives four instructions on establishing the First Presidency, the last of which is that the members of the First Presidency are to be “upheld by the confidence, faith, and prayer of the church.” President Lee then remarked, “Today, as never before, have I more fully realized the importance of that last requirement: that this president, in the Lord’s language, must be upheld by the confidence, the faith, and the prayers of the Church—which means, of course, the entire membership of the Church.”4

In an article summarizing the solemn assembly to sustain Joseph Fielding Smith, one writer remarked that these solemn assemblies “are times of commitment and dedication, times identified with an outpouring of the Spirit upon those who participate, whether in person or through radio and television.”5

Reports of the early solemn assemblies all included comments on the significance of seeing quorums and groups and the entire congregation arise to their feet to sustain the First Presidency and the Twelve. During the 1898 solemn assembly, President George Q. Cannon remarked, “This is a very solemn occasion, and the spectacle from the stand is most impressive. It is difficult to repress emotion on seeing such an assembly.”6 A report on the solemn assembly in 1901 noted:

The scene at the afternoon session, when the Priesthood occupied the stands and the main portion of the floor of the Tabernacle was one which will remain impressed upon the minds of every man, woman and child present as long as they live. A more imposing scene than that when each distinctive body of the Priesthood arose, in due order and to a man, lifted the right hand and sustained the general authorities, could not be found the world over.7

When we understand the significance of the solemn assembly and its related procedures, we can also be spiritually edified as we observe and participate.

Principles of Sustaining the President of the ChurchElder David B. Haight of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained the importance of the sustaining vote during a solemn assembly and how we should approach it:

When we sustain the President of the Church by our uplifted hand, it not only signifies that we acknowledge before God that he is the rightful possessor of all the priesthood keys; it also means that we covenant with God that we will abide by the direction and the counsel that come through His prophet. It is a solemn covenant.8

Regarding the importance of the sustaining vote, President J. Reuben Clark Jr. (then First Counselor in the First Presidency) explained, “When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for who you vote.”9 This instruction has been frequently repeated over the years.

The Lord commanded early Church members to receive Joseph’s words.In the meeting when the Church was organized, Joseph Smith received a revelation from God in which the Lord instructed Church members regarding the place of the President of the Church:

Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveith them, walking in all holiness before me; for his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.10

The Lord also gave a promise if Church members follow this divine injunction:

For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory.11

ConclusionTo echo John Taylor when he was sustained as President of the Church in the First Presidency in 1880, a solemn assembly permits the Church to assent to God’s direction. In effect, vox populi (the voice of the people) unites with vox dei (the voice of God).12

The solemn assembly this conference will be a sacred occasion to participate in a unique method of sustaining our new President of the Church and thus renew with God our covenant that we will follow the direction of His chosen prophet, who holds and exercises all the priesthood keys. By so doing, the Lord will prosper our path.

1 See Leviticus 23:33–37; 2 Chronicles 7:8–9.2 See “Solemn Assemblies,” Church History Topics, Gospel Library.3 J. Reuben Clark Jr., Conference Report, October 1945, 3.4 Harold B. Lee, “May the Kingdom of God Go Forth,” October 1972 general conference.5 Jay M. Todd, “The Solemn Assembly,” Improvement Era 73, no. 6 (June 1970), 20.6 Conference Report, October 1898, 52.7 “Authorities of Church Sustained,” Deseret Evening News 52, no. 303 (11 November 1901): 5.8 David B. Haight, “Solemn Assemblies,” October 1994 general conference.9 J. Reuben Clark Jr., Conference Report, October 1945, 3.10 Doctrine and Covenants 21:4–5.11 Doctrine and Covenants 21:6.12 See Journal History, 10 October 1880, page 4.The post The Solemn Assembly appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Genesis 6–11; Moses 8 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Moses 7: Enoch’s Vision (Jennifer Roach Lees)The vision of Enoch in Moses 7 bridges the gap between ancient scripture and modern discipleship. We can absolutely see ourselves in it.

On the one hand, it’s a text of great scholarly interest. Go read Jeff Bradshaw’s paper. It’s very long, very dense and very scholarly. Moses 7 expands the kind of sparse biblical account of Enoch into this big sweeping narrative.

And on the other hand, it’s a profoundly practical guide for Latter-day Saints seeking to live faithfully in the present, not in some future idealized world on the actual street that you live on.

The dual significance makes Moses 7 a cornerstone for both intellectual exploration and spiritual transformation. Those two are not pitted against each other, right? Those are the same thing.

Ultimately, Moses 7 matters because it shows that scholarship and discipleship are not separate pursuits.

Understanding the text’s historical or theological depth, it enriches our faith so that we are able to live our lives based on its principles.

Welcome BackWelcome back to FAIR’s Come, Follow Me old testament year.

I am Jennifer Roach Lees and today we are talking about one of the most beautiful pieces of scripture, Moses 7. We’re going to look at both some scholarly insights into this passage as well as some of the practical applications.

This passage is one of the most expansive and theologically rich chapters in the Pearl of Great Price – or honestly, in any scripture.

In this vision, the prophet Enoch is transformed from this hesitant kind of slow-of-speech figure into a seer who beholds the entire cosmic drama of God’s dealings with humans.

And for Latter-day Saints, this chapter is remarkable for its doctrinal contributions such as:

a portrayal of God who has emotions, who weeps over his children,
the promise of Zion being taken into heaven,
the sweeping narrative of redemption.

It also has a lot of practical relevance in our modern day discipleship.

Zion as a Lived RealityOne of the most interesting things to me in this chapter is that Zion is not supposed to be just this distant hope or this past thing that Enoch got to experience. It’s supposed to be a lived reality, a community of unity and holiness that invites believers to come and to grow.

Now, it is not always that. And most of us do not live in a Zion-like experience all of the time. But it’s what we’re striving for, right? And I think that part is fascinating.

We will look at this chapter for its scholarly significance as a text and its devotional power as kind of a guide for:

how you even build Zion in your personal life,
your family, and
around the world.

By looking at Enoch’s transformation and God’s compassion, the translation of Zion, we can see how and why this vision is still so important to us today.

Ultimately, this chapter matters because it calls us to participate in God’s work of gathering, healing, and sanctifying. A work that isn’t about like the distant heavens, but about the ordinary choices that you and I make every single day.

Historical and Scriptural ContextSo, first we’ll talk a little bit about the history here and the scriptural context. The account of Enoch in Moses 7 occupies this very distinctive place within Latter-day Saints scripture.

Enoch is mentioned in the Bible, but really only briefly. It’s in Genesis 5.

He’s someone who walked with God and then was translated – taken out of this world – but there is no story beyond that. There’s no narrative given.

So, by contrast, Joseph Smith reveals Enoch’s story as this big, sweeping vision of cosmic scale. He gives us actually 110 verses across Moses 6 and 7 about Enoch’s story compared to less than a handful of verses in the Old Testament.

This expansion really situates Enoch not as just a righteous patriarch, but as a prophet who establishes Zion, right? So, slightly different than some of the other Old Testament patriarchs that we see.

And Enoch beholds the destiny of the earth. As grand as that sounds, that’s what happens with him.

For Latter-day Saints, what’s happening here is that restoring this scripture underscores the restoration’s claim to recover lost truths.

Parallels Between Moses 7 and Apocryphal WritingsNow, scholars have long noted the parallels between Moses 7 and the Jewish apocryphal writings.

The Apocrypha is a collection of pre-new testament works. Somewhere between when the Old Testament ends and when the New Testament begins, we get these writings from Jewish people and we call them the Apocrypha.

Many of them are collected into this translation they call the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. We call those the official Apocrypha. And there are also other apocryphal books outside of that, that are not in this defined collection. But we refer to all of these as apocryphal writings.

There’s a lot in common between Moses 7 and some of these writings. It is pretty fascinating. There are actually connections in other ancient books beyond the accepted Apocrypha.

And one of those books is called the Book of Giants. We’ll get to that one in a minute.

First, let me tell you about one that is in the Apocrypha. It’s called the book of Enoch. Enoch is a visionary.

He ascends to heaven.
He receives some divine secrets.
He intercedes for humanity.

Joseph Smith may or may not have been able to read the Apocrypha. It’s connected to the Catholic Bible still to this day. It’s printed in their Bible. Perhaps he was able to read that.

Ancient Parallels: Book of Enoch and the Book of GiantsThe thematic overlap is certainly there with the book of Enoch and with other ancient traditions. Most striking here is a depiction of a God who weeps over human suffering.

You see that in the book of Enoch and the Apocrypha. It’s very central to Latter-day Saint theology – this divine compassion. We don’t see that in a lot of other places.

The Book of Giants, another very interesting connection. This is the one that gets me.

Jeffrey Bradshaw has a paper called , Moses 6–7 and the Book of Giants: Remarkable Witnesses of Enoch’s Ministry. You can find it on the BYU website. You can download it for free.

It’s also on The Interpreter Foundation’s website. It’s a very long, dense paper. But it is absolutely worth the struggle to get through. If this intrigues you at all, I absolutely recommend you go download his paper.

It’s really, really good.

The Gist of Bradshaw’s ArgumentHere’s the gist of it though. (And Jeff, forgive me for the simplification of your work here, but…)

Bradshaw makes connections between Moses 7 and a book that had long been lost to history called The Book of Giants.

This book, the Book of Giants, was found again when they found the Dead Sea Scrolls. So, it existed, disappeared. We didn’t know of any copies of it. We didn’t know of its existence.

It pops back up along with the Dead Sea Scrolls. There’s a lot of things in those scrolls. The Book of Giants is one of them.

Why is this interesting?

Well, because if the worry is ‘Joseph Smith made up the book of Moses on his own,’ then it’s very hard to explain the similar names and phrases and themes that are found when talking about Enoch in the Book of Moses, and talking about Enoch in The Book of Giants.

There are a lot of similarities.

The Book of Giants was not available to Joseph Smith. It had not yet been rediscovered. And yet today you can go online actually and read the text of The Book of Giants if you want to. You can put that right next to Moses 6 and 7.

And it’s not a copy by any means, but:

There are similar names.
There are certainly similar themes.
There’s similar phrasing.

How did Joseph do that except for by the power of God?

That’s one of my favorite little academic tidbits about all of this.

Early Latter-day Saint Identity and Zion AspirationsHistorically, the Enoch material in Moses 7 really shaped early Latter-day Saint identity.

The vision of Zion taken into heaven inspired Joseph and his followers to pursue creation of Zion communities in Missouri and beyond.

The idea that a people could be so unified and righteous that they would be gathered into God’s presence gave them this really big blueprint for communal living. But also, it gave them some very practical ‘here is how that’s going to have to work out’ steps.

So Moses 7 is not only this expansion, but it’s also a foundational text for the church’s early social and religious aspirations.

Themes in Moses 7The historical and scriptural context of Moses 7 reveals its double significance. It connects us to this great vision and it kind of gives us a framework for how to live today.

We’re going to move into the next section. I want to talk about some of the themes in Moses 7. It unfolds around several interwoven themes and we’re just going to cover a few of them here.

Enoch’s transformation: him as a man, his own transformation;
The establishment of Zion and
The compassion of God.

Actually –

The translation of the city.

All of these, especially when looked at together, offer a framework for understanding how ancient scripture speaks to modern-day discipleship.

And we’re going to look at each one of those closely so you can see what I mean.

Theme 1: Enoch’s Personal TransformationFirst, Enoch’s own personal transformation.

The narrative begins with Enoch as this reluctant prophet. He’s described as slow of speech.

And yet through God’s empowerment, he becomes a mighty seer whose words cause mountains to flee and rivers to change course.

The transformation underscores this great restoration principle, which is: God magnifies the weak to accomplish his purposes.

And for Latter-day Saints, Enoch’s journey is a reminder that discipleship does not require innate brilliance or eloquence, but just willingness to act in faith. We all are standing on equal ground.

In daily life, this theme encourages believers to trust that God can strengthen them:

In their callings,
In their family responsibilities,
In their personal challenges.

Study and Prayer Are Not OppositesSometimes though, people maybe inside or outside of the church try to pit this idea (that God magnifies the weak to accomplish his purposes).

They try to pit that against the idea that it’s good to study and to learn as much as you can about the scriptures, and that intelligence is good. They want to pit these two against each other as if studying for guidance and praying for guidance were opposites.

But they’re not.

Study for its own sake probably doesn’t help very much. But when a scholar works to study all they can, that can be a form of prayer – as well as information that feeds back into how the spirit can speak to that person.

“Study to learn what God has for you” and
“Pray to learn what God has for you”

are not opposites.Those two things work together.

So when we say, “Enoch was this simple man. God magnified his weakness and made him great.”

We’re not saying, “Oh, study is bad. You just have to wait for God to miraculously zap this into you.”

It just isn’t that way. There’s no division between scholar and disciple when both parts have the same goal. Those are not two separate things.

So, that’s a little bit on Enoch’s own development.

Theme 2: The Vision of ZionTheme number two, the vision of Zion.

Perhaps the most defining feature of Moses 7 is its portrayal of Zion, a people united in righteousness, dwelling in safety, and enjoying the presence of the Lord. Sounds pretty good.

And at different times in history, Latter-day Saints have seen Zion as a specific place to gather to, and at other times, we’ve seen it as a theological ideal of covenant community.

Let me give you probably the best example I can think of. If you’ve read the Saints books that the church put out a couple years ago, you see this illustrated really nicely.

The first volume, it’s all about the establishment of the church, right?

The second volume is about the Utah period, establishing Zion here, and the struggles that people went through to get to that goal.

But you get to the third book and the church is beginning to build temples around the world. The writers of that book do a fascinating thing at the end of the third book.

I actually kind of had my jaw open when I read the end of this one and realized what they were doing: the narrative significance of this move. It’s pretty brilliant.

Spoiler alert! If you haven’t read it yet, I’m about to tell you how the book ends.

The Story of Max and Erica ZimmerThe book follows the stories of a lot of people, but it follows one couple who are living in East Berlin, Max and Erica Zimmer. The Berlin Wall has been constructed, but somehow the Zimmers have received permission to leave Berlin and go to the Switzerland Temple.

And while they’re there in Switzerland, they have a legitimate chance to defect to the west and be free. They’re living in East Berlin. The wall is up. They’re behind the Berlin wall. They don’t have freedom here. They find themselves in Switzerland. And they could run. (I’ve got to admit, if it was me, I would run.)

But they don’t. Instead, they decide to go back to East Berlin. Why? To build Zion there.

I wouldn’t make the same choice. Maybe you wouldn’t have either, to be honest. But their story illustrates how the historical changes in the church, how we see Zion, how those have played out.

For this couple, the Zimmers, Zion wasn’t about, “oh, you must go to Utah to get to experience this.” It was “No, we’re going to build Zion exactly where we are.”

This becomes both a theological concept for them and a place that they can inhabit without having to uproot their lives to the other side of the world. It becomes both a real physical place that exists as well as a theological concept.

For modern saints, Zion is both this future hope and present task.

We’re building our homes and our wards and our communities where hopefully love and holiness prevail. And it’s hard, right? It just is. If you spend any amount of time – even with your own family – things are hard. Yet it is the work of building Zion.

There isn’t a place we can go. There isn’t a neighborhood you can move into where Zion’s already established and if you found it your presence there would ruin it and it wouldn’t be Zion anymore, right?

We’re all like learning and growing our own development to bring this together as both concept and place.

Theme 3: The Compassion of GodThird theme, the compassion of God.

One of the most striking passages in Moses 7 depicts God weeping or suffering on behalf of his children. You might not realize this if you’ve kind of grown up in our church and don’t know very much about the theology of other churches. But this image seriously challenges traditional notions about God and if he has emotions at all and if he’s impacted by us.

Sometimes they call it divine impassibility or the idea that God does not feel human emotions and certainly is not swayed by them. That’s the standard non-Latter-day Saint belief. “God doesn’t have passions” is how they would say it.

As silly as it might sound to you to think of God as being kind of cold and distant like that, that’s how he is viewed outside of our church for the most part.

However, interestingly enough, in the last 20 years or so, that conversation has started to change even for Catholics and Protestants.

The theologian Jurgen Moltman was incredibly prolific. He actually died last year. One of the most prolific theologians of the last 50 years. He really started to push the conversation to say, “No, no, we’ve been wrong about this idea that God doesn’t have emotions. We should start reconsidering that.” And because of his status and who he was as a theologian, people listened to him.

And you will find today in some corners of the non-LDS Christian world people who believe, “Oh yeah, of course God has emotions. Of course God is moved by us.” But that’s a new development for them. That has not always been the case.

I think it’s delightful that at least some of them are starting to move toward that.

God Shares in Our PainFor us as Latter-day Saints, this idea that God feels for us and feels because of us offers profound comfort. God is not distant from human pain, but He shares in it.

Our daily discipleship involves seeing others through God’s compassionate eyes, right? Allowing them to move us just like we can move God. That we might suffer for other people just like God suffers for us.

As we work to alleviate suffering, we are doing the work of God the same things that he does for us. We are acting as his children to our brothers and sisters.

Theme 4: The Translation of ZionFourth theme: the translation of Zion.

Finally, Moses 7 describes the City of Zion being taken up into heaven. We call that translation, and it’s actually a really common theme in apocryphal writings.

Earlier I was telling you there’s a set of writings we call the Apocrypha. There are lots of other books beyond that, that we would just call “apocryphal writings”.

This is a really common theme: someone or something being taken from the earth and translated. They don’t die. They are just taken up to be with God. However, it’s usually just an individual that’s translated, not a whole city.

If you’re listening, I would love to hear if you know of any spots in apocryphal literature where a whole city is taken up and translated in that way. I don’t know of any. It’s usually just a single individual.

For Latter-day Saints, I think part of the message here is: we are redeemed together. All of humanity. All of us together, not just individuals.

We who are living, we care about the redemption of our dead. Because if there’s no redemption for them, there’s no redemption for us either. We are all bound together. If something is going to get saved, it’s not us just as isolated individuals. It’s us in the great chain of sealing all being sealed into the same system.

The fact that the whole city is taken up together, not just one holy individual, to me that really symbolizes the redemption of the entire world, of humanity together.

I think that’s really beautiful.

Practical Applications for Daily LifeA few practical applications for daily life.

Moses 7 offers profound theological insights and its enduring power lives and how it shapes our daily lives. So, it’s not just this big thing. It’s a small, little-step thing too.

Enoch’s vision of Zion is not simply this historical curiosity, a thing that used to exist. Or a future promise, something that will someday exist again. It’s a living invitation for us, for Latter-day Saints, for Christians everywhere to embody divine principles in their personal, family and community lives.

Your own personal version of Zion.

Enoch’s transformation from hesitant speaker to mighty prophet illustrates that God magnifies ordinary individuals. For modern saints, this means that discipleship begins with small, faithful acts.

Prayer
Study
Reading the scriptures
Service
Integrity

Right? Building Zion personally involves:

Cultivating compassion,
Resisting cynicism,
Resisting despair,
Trusting that God can strengthen your weakness.

These are all the little micro-building blocks of Zion. Zion isn’t something that’s going to happen to us, or that God is going to zap into us. It’s something we’re going to build with tiny little building blocks just like those.

Building Zion in the FamilyWe also have our families.

No family is perfect.
No family is perfect in unity all the time.
No family is perfect in love all the time.

But a family that’s striving to be like Zion is one where each member believes that no matter what happens,

They are still going to love each other.
They are still going to be moved by each other.
They’re still going to have compassion on each other the very best that they can.

Being a Zion family is not about being perfect.

It’s not about having children who behave perfectly.
It’s not about having adult children who make perfect gospel decisions.
It’s about having compassion for each other’s struggles.

Just like Heavenly Father has compassion on ours, he weeps for us. And sometimes, as sad and hard as it is, sometimes we weep for our other family members while not rejecting them, while still wanting to be there to support them to the degree that we can.

This model of Zion doesn’t require a family to live in some kind of false perfection. It allows lots of room for struggle because we can model the compassion that Heavenly Father has for us.

A Global ZionAnd then finally, a global Zion. Moses 7 expands Zion’s vision to encompass the entire world. God’s weeping over all of humanity calls believers to see all people as children of God. For Latter-day Saints, this means engaging in peacemaking, justice, compassion in and outside of the church. Right?

Daily discipleship may involve

advocating for fairness,
advocating for dignity,
loving your fellow man, and
serving where you can.

In this way, Zion becomes not just a local community as if you happen to just move into a really great ward, right? Or you happen to be born in a really great family. No! This is all of us together, the entire human race, learning to do this with each other. It’s a global ethic.

Moses 7 matters because it transforms this lofty vision of all eternity and redemption into really practical calls to action by building Zion personally. All those little, small building blocks within your family. How we treat each other with compassion and in our worldwide community. We are building Zion.

Latter-day Saints participate in this same divine work that Enoch and his people participated in. This chapter’s relevance lies not in some distant history, but in the choices that saints are making every single day to embody unity and compassion and holiness.

ConclusionThe vision of Enoch in Moses 7 bridges the gap between ancient scripture and modern discipleship. We can absolutely see ourselves in it. On the one hand, it’s a text of great scholarly interest. (Go read Jeff Bradshaw’s paper. It’s very long, dense and scholarly)

Moses 7 expands the sparse biblical account of Enoch into a big, sweeping narrative.

And on the other hand, it’s a profoundly practical guide for Latter-day Saints seeking to live faithfully in the present – not in some future idealized world – on the actual street that you live on.

The dual significance makes Moses 7 a cornerstone for both intellectual exploration and spiritual transformation. Those two are not pitted against each other, right? Those are the same thing. Ultimately, Moses 7 matters because it shows that scholarship and discipleship are not separate pursuits.

Understanding the text’s historical or theological depth, it enriches our faith so that we are able to live our lives based on its principles. In Enoch’s vision, we find this beautifully woven together, a reminder that building Zion is the work of both mind and heart.

Next WeekThank you for joining us today in this conversation. Come back next week! We’re going to look at the last chapter in the book of Moses, chapter 8, as well as Genesis 6-11.

We’ll see you then.

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Moses 7 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer Roach Lees holds a Master in Divinity as well as a Masters in Counseling Psychology. She is a licensed mental health therapist and lives in Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Genesis 5; Moses 6 – Jennifer Roach Lees appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The post Introducing a New Documentary Series about Brigham Young from the Interpreter Foundation appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

If God is so Powerful, Why Didn’t He Just Stop Their Enemies?by Autumn Dickson

I want to share something from the Official Declaration 1, the declaration that ended the practice of polygamy in the latter-days. This post isn’t specifically about polygamy, but the principle I want to teach is being taught through the polygamy example.

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

He then proceeds to ask the people what would be better: to comply with the law of the land and cease the practice of polygamy or continue to practice polygamy and lose the priesthood organization and temples and be forced to stop polygamy anyway?

I’ve heard people express the idea that the church supposedly believes in revelation but fold the second they receive outside pressure. I’ve heard it conveyed that it was so convenient for the Lord to stop the practice of polygamy when things got too difficult for the people to live it. Even as a teenager, I believed in the church but remember thinking, “Isn’t there a third option? Can’t the Lord enable them to continue practicing polygamy without losing all of the men and the temples?”

Though polygamy is unique in many ways, there is not really any new argument against God. These specific questions boil down to a question that is as old as religion, “If your God is truly so powerful, why doesn’t He enable you?”

The answer to that specific question varies because the circumstances of mankind vary, but I’ll do my best to teach the overarching principles by referring to this specific example of polygamy.

According to President Woodruff, the Saints were facing some pretty dire circumstances. He had a vision of everything that the Saints would lose if they continued the practice of polygamy. To put it shortly, they would lose everything that mattered. I don’t think Satan was worried about stopping polygamy as he was about utilizing polygamy to stop the work in general. If the Saints continued on, this would surely stop the work. They would lose temples and the men; if they lost these, apostasy would reign and Satan would have won (especially since the Lord has promised that we will not fall into a Great Apostasy again).

When we face dire circumstances, the Lord can react in a number of ways and He makes wise decisions based on what will bring about His purposes.

The Lord’s potential reaction #1:

Sometimes He asks us to continue on through difficulty and lose everything. I think of Abinadi. Abinadi was asked to continue preaching despite the fact that it put his life in danger. Abinadi died. Sometimes the Lord asks for the ultimate sacrifice. He could have asked the Saints to make the ultimate sacrifice, but He didn’t.

The Lord’s potential reaction #2:

The Lord can tell His people to keep going and then remove the difficulty. There are a million examples of this, the most obvious being Moses parting the Red Sea.

When it came to polygamy, the Lord could have responded in this way. He could have “parted the sea” and removed the difficulty. The Lord could have enabled His Saints to continue practicing polygamy. He could have wiped out the entire earth other than the Saints if that’s what it took, but He didn’t.

The Lord’s potential reaction #3:

Sometimes the Lord tells us to stop. I think of Alma and his people. They were threatened with death if they prayed, and so they only prayed in their hearts. The Lord could have commanded them to keep praying, but it wasn’t their time and so He didn’t. Technically they kept praying, but there are other instances. For example, there was Zion’s camp. An “army” of members left Kirtland to go win back Missouri for the Saints, but the Lord told them to turn around after they got there. I did a whole video on why the Lord might have chosen after this manner. There was also the time when the Lord excused His people from building the temple in Zion for a time.

Sometimes the Lord does tell us we can stop. People love to act like this is because our God isn’t real or that He isn’t powerful. The answer is neither.

Sometimes the Lord tells us to stop because He is wise.

Despite the fact that the Lord could ask His Saints to sacrifice everything and despite the fact that the Lord could have removed the obstacles they were facing, He chose not to. I emphasize the point that we do not always know why the Lord makes specific choices unless He tells us directly, but let’s think for a bit about why the Lord would have made this decision.

Despite the fact that the Lord reigns over all and despite the fact that He is tremendously powerful, sometimes He chooses to act in a certain way with mankind because of His purposes. The “limitations” are not true limitations; they are self-imposed limitations that enable Him to push His purposes along.

His purpose is to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man and because of His chosen purpose, He often works within the constraints of mankind so He doesn’t ruin His own plan. Let’s look at this principle in the context of polygamy.

The Lord’s potential reaction #1:

The Lord could have asked them to continue on in difficulty and sacrifice. They would have lost the temples and priesthood organization that kept His restored church on the earth. That doesn’t really fit His purposes so He’s not going to choose this option.

The Lord’s potential reaction #2:

The Lord could have asked them to continue on and then removed the difficulty for them. This answers the question that I’ve heard posed more than once in my life. Believe it or not, this would have also frustrated His purposes. He COULD have destroyed everyone except the Saints, but that doesn’t contribute to His purposes. He COULD have sent down miracles to stop the rest of America from being able to infiltrate Utah and take the temples and arrest the men, but it would have taken some large-scale miracles in order to keep the work moving forward.

In the history of the world, the Lord has performed some incredible large-scale miracles. We read about these miracles, and we rejoice in them.

However, the Lord does not often choose to work after this manner. He just doesn’t. Why? Because faith is an essential ingredient in His plan. I have studied the purpose of faith over and over and over. You can’t bring about the Plan of Redemption if you wipe out the principle of faith, and large-scale miracles run the risk of doing just that.

The Lord could perform large-scale miracle after large-scale miracle and fix everything, but He doesn’t. Why? Because removing faith from the mortal experience has far dire consequences than anything we could potentially face on earth.

So the Lord COULD have chosen potential reaction #1 or #2, but He didn’t because they don’t contribute to His purposes.

The Lord’s potential reaction #3:

He stops it.

And honestly, this makes sense. Temple work and the priesthood organization were more important. Faith was more important.

I believe that polygamy was a policy laid down by God. I do. I also believe that polygamy doesn’t make logistical sense on a grand scale so it was the wisest choice the Lord could have made.

There are a million arguments made against the church. One of them is the idea of, “If your God is so powerful, why doesn’t He enable you to xyz?”

I testify that God is real and powerful, and I testify that He is in this work. I also testify that God is wise and because He is wise, He has self-imposed limitations in order to bring about His purposes. He could easily interfere with evil on a daily basis, but He knows the cost would be too high. I testify that the Lord is wise enough to make the decisions necessary to bring about our eternal life.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – The Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 and 2 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In her October 2025 General Conference message, Sister Andrea Muñoz Spannaus taught that recognizing and trusting living prophets is essential for navigating “the many voices” of our day. Just like the woman of Shunem who discerned that Elisha was “a holy man of God,” we too can receive a personal witness of God’s chosen servants.

But a thoughtful question arises in our time: Why should modern believers place their trust in a living prophet?

“We too can receive a personal testimony of God’s prophets today and open our hearts and minds—our house—to the message that our Heavenly Father has for us.” – Andrea Muñoz Spannaus

Common Criticism: “Why should modern believers place their trust in a living prophet?”

Many question the role of prophetic authority in a contemporary world. They argue that moral reasoning, personal insight, or social consensus should outweigh the voice of a single religious leader. Some see prophetic guidance as unnecessary or outdated, wondering why God would speak through chosen servants today when information and opinions are so widely accessible.

Fallacy at Work: PresentismPresentism is the tendency to judge spiritual realities through strictly modern assumptions—expecting prophetic consensus to match popular opinion, or assuming divine authority must function like other forms of leadership in today’s culture.

Applied here, presentism views prophets merely as organizational figures rather than divinely appointed messengers. It overlooks the scriptural pattern that God has always worked through humble, imperfect servants and ignores the invitation to seek personal confirmation through the Holy Ghost.

Sister Spannaus’ Correction: Prophets speak for God.Sister Spannaus teaches that prophets are called and authorized to convey the Lord’s will. They are “seers and revelators” who receive commandments, prepare God’s children for future challenges, and testify of Jesus Christ. Continuing revelation is not optional—it is foundational to the restored gospel: “He will yet reveal many great and important things.”

Modern prophets work unitedly in councils established by Christ Himself. Their decisions are made through prayer, unanimity, and revelation to ensure “the Lord’s will will be done.” And, crucially, every disciple can receive the same confirming witness the Shunammite woman received.

Resolving this Fallacy: The criticism dissolves when we understand that prophetic trust is ultimately trust in God. Prophets are not followed because they are flawless, but because they are chosen. Their authority does not come from personal strength but divine appointment. Through the Holy Ghost, God invites each of us to confirm their calling and experience the blessings that come from heeding their voice.

Once we know they are God’s anointed ones, our lives will be easier… as we obey their voices with trust, faith, and hope.

Living Apologetics: Personal Revelation and Prophetic TrustA common concern today is the overwhelming number of competing voices—online personalities, commentators, influencers, and critics. In such a noisy world, some wonder how prophetic counsel can be trusted above all others.

Sister Spannaus reframes this beautifully: prophets do not compete with the world’s voices—they cut through them with heaven’s perspective. Like the woman of Shunem, we learn to “perceive” truth through the Holy Ghost. Trusting prophets is not blind loyalty; it is spiritually confirmed discipleship.

Practical Apologetic Use:

If someone says: “I do not see why modern believers should place particular trust in a living prophet.”
You can respond: “Throughout scripture, God has consistently chosen prophets to convey His will. Their authority does not rest on personal insight or popularity but on divine calling. Modern prophets continue that pattern today, offering revelation we can each confirm through the Holy Ghost. Trusting their counsel is ultimately an expression of trust in God, who directs them.”

Ways to Apply Today:1️⃣ Pray specifically for a witness. Follow Sister Spannaus’ invitation: kneel, ask God if the prophet is His messenger, and listen with real intent.
2️⃣ Notice how prophetic counsel blesses you. Keep a short list of how following their invitations impacts your peace or clarity.
3️⃣ Create a place for prophetic guidance in your life. The Shunammite woman built a room; we can build space in our schedule, study, and decisions for the Lord’s voice.

Keep This Talk With YouSister Spannaus’ message calls us to anchor our discipleship in the Lord’s pattern: God speaks through prophets. In an age filled with doubt, distraction, and shifting philosophies, disciples of Christ can stand steady by rooting themselves in revealed truth and personal testimony.

As we seek, listen, and follow with faith, we become like the Shunammite woman—quick to discern holiness and eager to welcome the Lord’s servants into our lives. Trusting prophets does not remove challenges, but it brings spiritual stability “to hold on to every good thing until the Second Coming.”

This week, try one small step:

Study one recent prophetic invitation and apply it literally for seven days.
Talk with a friend or family member about how you recognized a prompting recently.
Ask the Lord what He wants you to understand about continuing revelation. “Do I have a personal testimony of God’s living prophets?”

How will you invite the Holy Ghost to deepen your trust in the Lord’s chosen servants this week?

The Consider Conference series by FAIR offers an in-depth look at recent General Conference talks to help members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints navigate common questions, misunderstandings, and criticisms. Each post provides doctrinal insights, historical context, and practical ways to apply gospel principles in everyday conversations. Through this series, we hope to equip readers with faith-promoting resources that encourage thoughtful reflection, respectful dialogue, and a stronger foundation in gospel truths, fostering both personal conviction and meaningful discussions with others.

The post Prophets of God appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Martyrdom of Joseph & Hyrum Smith; Brigham Young led the Saints west (D&C 135–136)by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading and Videos

Alexander L. Baugh and Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, “‘I Roll the Burthen and Responsibility of Leading This Church Off from My Shoulders on to Yours’: The 1844/1845 Declaration of the Quorum of the Twelve Regarding Apostolic Succession,” BYU Studies 49, no. 3 (2010): 4–19.
Dallin H. Oaks, “The Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor,” Utah Law Review 9, no. 4 (Winter 1965): 862–903. Oaks argued that the Nauvoo city council’s action to destroy the Expositor press was legal within the understanding of the law in Joseph’s time. (This article was published twenty years before he became an apostle.)
Joseph L. Lyon and David W. Lyon, “Physical Evidence at Carthage Jail and What It Reveals about the Assassination of Joseph and Hyrum Smith,” BYU Studies 47, no. 4 (2008): 4–50.
Mark Lyman Staker and LaJean Purcell Carruth, “John Taylor’s June 27, 1854, Account of the Martyrdom,” BYU Studies 50, no. 3 (2011): 25–62.
D. Michael Quinn, “The Mormon Succession Crisis of 1844,” BYU Studies 16, no. 2 (Winter 1976): 187–233. Quinn argued that Joseph did not leave clear directions on who should succeed him and this spurred a crisis that was resolved only when the majority of the Saints threw their support behind Brigham Young and the Twelve.
Ronald K. Esplin, “Joseph, Brigham and the Twelve: A Succession of Continuity,” BYU Studies 21, no. 3 (Summer 1981): 301–41. Esplin countered Quinn’s article by arguing that the path of succession was clear from Joseph’s statements and the canonized revelations.
Russel R. Rich, “Nineteenth-Century Break-offs,” Ensign, September 1979, 68–71. Rich described some of the schismatic groups that broke away from the restored Church during the Prophet Joseph’s life and after his death.
R. Jean Addams, “Aftermath of the Martyrdom: Aspirants to the Mantle of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 62 (2024): 335–402. Addams examines the individuals who claimed the mantle of the Joseph Smith, their motives, and the churches or organizations they founded in the decade following the death of the Prophet.
Road to Carthage: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is an eight-part documentary miniseries that explores the history of the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith in 1844. The episodes focus on the historical events that led to the assassination of the Prophet and his brother by a mob, as well as the aftermath of that tragic event. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.
LaJean Carruth, “Brigham Young on Brigham Young: His Life, Conversion, and Faith, in his Own Words,” 2024 FAIR Conference.
Daniel C. Peterson, “Appreciating Brother Brigham,” 2024 FAIR Conference.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 135–136 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Choosing Faith Through Failure: God’s Timetable for Zionby Autumn Dickson

Because of an extermination order, the Saints were driven out of Missouri and into Nauvoo. In Doctrine and Covenants 124, the Lord excuses His people from building the temple in Missouri after they had been driven out.

Doctrine and Covenants 124:49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings.

The Saints were driven out and persecuted. They had been commanded to build Zion, and they had been commanded to build a temple, and it didn’t happen. The Lord explains Himself by saying that if people work really hard to do what they were commanded and they are stopped by enemies, He accepts their offering and doesn’t require it anymore.

Some might see this as rather convenient for Joseph when his prophecy didn’t work out, but what do you see?

What we choose to see is important because perspective is a choice. There are so many ways to look at any given scenario. Do we choose faith?

We can choose to look at what happened in Missouri, and say, “The Lord must not be in this. He commanded something, and it didn’t work out.” Didn’t Nephi say that if the Lord commands something, He will make it happen? Don’t we teach that all of the time?

Absolutely, we teach that. I reaffirm that. I also reaffirm that what the Lord declares can take a long time to come to pass. Let’s look at a couple of other scenarios.

First, there is the mortal ministry of Christ. Many of the Jews rejected Christ because they were looking for a different kind of savior. They wanted someone to come and throw the yoke of the Romans off their backs. They interpreted the scriptures incorrectly and because of that, they missed out on some of the greatest miracles that ever took place. They didn’t see. Their perspective was wrong.

Second, there is the death of Christ. The apostles were quite forlorn after Christ was crucified, and they were all immensely surprised to find Him alive again. One of them refused to believe that Christ had risen again until he personally saw Christ. Do we abandon our faith when things don’t look how we thought they were supposed to look?

Let’s look at some other examples.

One of the Old Testament stories that strikes me as important is that of Daniel and his friends. Babylon besieged and conquered the kingdom of Judah. As part of the conquest, they took the sons of Jewish nobility and put them into the Babylonian court to train and assimilate them. Daniel and his friends refused the food from the king’s table because it had not been prepared according to the Law of Moses. Daniel and his friends believed it would be a sin to eat it.

Think about that for a moment. Biblical scholars believe that these boys ranged from age 14-18. Their home had just been conquered. They had lost against a wicked, secular kingdom. It would have been easy for Daniel to think, “Is God really on our side? Do I really want to make the Babylonian king mad? He beat us. Why would I believe that we have the true God? Why would I keep following the religious laws of my defeated nation when it puts my friends and me in danger?”

But that is not the perspective that Daniel chose. Despite evidence that pointed to the contrary, David chose to believe. Despite religious beliefs that the Jews were chosen by an all-powerful God and still getting conquered, David chose to believe. Despite the fact that conquering nations paid homage to their gods in response to winning wars, David did not see His God as less powerful. He kept obeying.

Perspective is a choice.

Some may see a God who abandoned His people or was never there. Some may see the effects of a frenzied mind. Some may see a fallen prophet or a charlatan.

I see a God who is actually rather unconcerned with a location. Everyone is so caught up in wanting to know where Zion is or move there immediately, and Heavenly Father is like, “Okay. I see the future. I know where it is, but you’re missing the most important part…” I see a God who knows what mortality is actually for, and He delivers on His promises of growth and deliverance. I see a God who makes and keeps promises but also doesn’t have a pocket watch because time is only measured unto man. Sure, the Saints were driven out, and they didn’t build a temple. It took Nephi a couple of tries to get the plates. Let’s do this on God’s timetable, not our’s. We will build Zion, and we will build a temple there. Just because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it’s not going to. It doesn’t prove anything.

I testify of a Lord who was very aware of His Saints. I testify that He was powerful enough to win Zion over immediately and kick out all of their enemies, but I also testify that He has reasons for what He does. I testify that He has a plan and a timetable, and I testify that it is the best that we could ask for. I testify that trusting Him and choosing a perspective of faith brings blessings and hope and peace.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 124 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“Controversies in Joseph Smith’s Polygamy: New Evidences and New Observations Indicate Fawn Brodie Should Have Done More Research” by Brian C. Hales at the 2010 FAIR ConferenceWhy did Joseph Smith practice plural marriage? There are three different places we could go for answers.

We can go to the naturalists—like Fawn Brodie—and the cynics, which are kind of in the same group. We can go to Latter-day Saint apologists, who gave us their own set of reasons. And then we can go to Joseph Smith himself. I’d like to look at these three sources.

The first source is the naturalist—and what I mean by that is somebody who is sure God’s not involved. Okay? It’s all natural processes—hormones, libido, job one—and sex. That’s what’s driving polygamy. That’s their answer.

And Fawn Brodie kind of codified this idea in her 1945 biography, which unfortunately is still probably the most influential book ever written on Joseph Smith. Brodie totally botched the treatment of his sexuality in polygamy. She didn’t even want to get it right—that’s my frustration.

The purest naturalistic view is found in George D. Smith’s 2008 novel, which he called “Nauvoo Polygamy: … but we called it celestial marriage.” I doubt there will ever be a purer naturalistic view written of Joseph the man.

CONTINUED HERE

The post Classic FAIR – Why Did Joseph Smith Practice Polygamy? – Brian Hales, 2010 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What This MeansUpon the passing of a prophet, the First Presidency is dissolved. The senior Apostle—currently Dallin H. Oaks—is called as President. Two Apostles are chosen by revelation to serve with him as counselors, forming the First Presidency.

This sacred reorganization ensures continuity, divine direction, and stability in the leadership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Meet the Prophet and CounselorsPresident Dallin H. OaksPresident Oaks, the 18th President of the Church, has served as an Apostle since 1984. A former justice of the Utah Supreme Court and accomplished scholar, he is known for his clarity on doctrine, defense of religious freedom, and emphasis on covenant discipleship.

First Counselor: Henry B. EyringPresident Henry B. Eyring served as a counselor to President Russell M. Nelson from 2018 to 2025, to President Thomas S. Monson from 2008 to 2018, and to President Gordon B. Hinckley from 2007 to 2008. He was sustained as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on April 1, 1995. Prior to full-time Church service, President Eyring was president of Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho, from 1971 to 1977. He was on the faculty at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University from 1962 to 1971.

Second Counselor: D. Todd ChristoffersonPresident D. Todd Christofferson was called to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on April 5, 2008, and previously served in the Presidency of the Seventy. Before full-time Church service, he was associate general counsel of NationsBank Corporation (now Bank of America) in Charlotte, North Carolina. Previously he was senior vice president and general counsel for Commerce Union Bank of Tennessee in Nashville, where he was also active in community affairs and interfaith organizations. From 1975 to 1980, Elder Christofferson practiced law in Washington, D.C.

CONTINUED HERE

The post A New First Presidency: Called by Revelation appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

End of the Kirtland period; revelations in Missouri, 1838by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

BMC Team, “Why Was Martin Harris Cut Off from the Church?”, Book of Mormon Central, 1 June 2021. This brief article explains why Martin Harris, one of the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, was excommunicated from the Church in late 1837 during a period of mass apostasy.
Stephen C. Harper, “The Tithing of My People,” Church History: Revelations in Context, last modified 13 January 2016. Harper, a historian for the Church History Department, explains how the Saints in Missouri understood how to calculate “one-tenth of all their interest annually” as tithing. (D&C 119:4)
Dennis B. Horne, “Reexamining Lorenzo Snow’s 1899 Tithing Revelation,” Mormon Historical Studies – Fall 2013, Vol. 14, No. 2. President Lorenzo Snow did not prophesy an end to the southern Utah drought at the time he received his famous tithing revelation in St. George in 1899 (as portrayed in the church-produced movie “The Windows of Heaven”). The tithing manifestation was indeed true and real, but President Snow’s son LeRoi C. later created an accompanying fiction of a prophecy that if the locals paid their full tithing it would yet rain that very season and save their livestock and crops. President Snow uttered no such prophecy and there was no end to the drought for two years.
Elder Boyd K. Packer, “The Least of These,” General Conference, October 2004. “I remember my servant Oliver Granger; behold, verily I say unto him that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord.” (D&C 117:12)
Elizabeth Kuehn, “Finances and Faith in the Kirtland Crisis of 1837,” 2017 FAIR Conference.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 111–112, 114–115, 117–120 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

As prophet from 2018–2025, President Russell M. Nelson spoke again and again of the great work of gathering Israel on both sides of the veil. He taught that revelation, temples, repentance, and discipleship all converge in one grand purpose: binding God’s children to Jesus Christ through sacred covenants.

In truth, President Nelson testified that gathering Israel is the most important work on earth today, because it is how we prepare individuals and families to meet the Savior with joy. The increased number of temples built, the changes in how youth serve in the temple and the church and the focus on ‘gathering’ all lead to this end.

President Nelson preached and practiced gathering throughout his tenure as prophet, dispelling ideas that the Gathering of Israel is culturally or racially defined. The unprecedented building of temples is not about appearances, wealth or exclusivity. It is about making the ordinances of salvation available to all of God’s children.

“Anytime we do anything that helps anyone—on either side of the veil—to make and keep their covenants with God, we are helping to gather Israel.” — President Russell M. Nelson, Let God Prevail

Common Question: Are All of God’s Children of Equal Value?In today’s world, political and cultural voices often divide us, ranking people by race, wealth, nation, gender, or ideology. Sadly, some assume the Church does the same. They feel that it is exclusive, favoring some groups, cultures or races over others; or that it values members more than those outside the faith.

Fallacy at Work: Ranking FallacyThe assumption that if God (or an institution) gives special attention, blessings, or responsibilities to one group or individual, others must be less valued. It treats worth as comparative rather than intrinsic.

The ranking fallacy assumes that worth is comparative—that if some are chosen, others must be less. It mistakes God’s covenantal invitations as favoritism, when in reality His work is to unite all His children in Christ.

President Nelson’s Example: President Nelson taught and exemplified that the gathering of Israel is universal. Every man, woman, and child is invited to come unto Christ and receive His healing and power.

President Nelson traveled the globe more than any prophet before him—ministering in Africa, South America, Asia, Europe, and the Pacific—bearing witness that God “denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female” (2 Nephi 26:33). To gather Israel is to reach every soul, in every land, with equal love and urgency.

Resolving this Fallacy: The apologetic truth is that God’s kingdom is not built on rankings but on relationships: covenant relationships that make us one in Christ. Far from excluding, the covenant path is Christ’s way of bringing everyone home.

To say the Church elevates some and diminishes others is to misread the very heart of President Nelson’s ministry. His legacy is a call for us to honor the divine worth of all God’s children and to treat one another accordingly. In an age of division, his prophetic voice pointed us to unity, dignity, and peace in Christ.

Living Apologetics: Becoming Like Christ to Truly See Him President Nelson’s prophetic ministry centered on gathering Israel—not simply into congregations, but to Christ Himself. His repeated call was to choose Christ so fully that His image is written in our countenance. As John taught: “When he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2; see also Moroni 7:48).

President Nelson spent his ministry showing us how to become like Him—through covenants, revelation, temple worship, repentance, and peacemaking—so that ultimately, all may see Him face to face.

Practical Apologetic Use:

If someone says: “The Church is just about excluding people with rules and rankings. It divides people instead of uniting them.”
You can respond: “President Nelson’s ministry testifies the opposite: covenants and commandments are not barriers but bridges. They are how we learn to become like Christ, and how we prepare to see Him as He is. Gathering Israel is about unity in Christ, not division by man-made categories.”

Ways to Apply Today:

1️⃣ Choose to “Think Celestial.” Reframe daily decisions through the lens of who you are becoming in Christ.
2️⃣ See others as God sees them. When tempted to rank or dismiss someone, remember: they too are a child of God, invited to the same covenants.
3️⃣ Live for the presence of God. Let temple worship, repentance, and scripture study point you to the day when you will see Christ face to face.

Keep President Nelson’s Ministry With YouPresident Nelson’s legacy calls us to take the gathering of Israel personally: to gather our neighbors, our families, and (maybe especially) our own hearts to Christ. The best way we can honor his life and ministry is to let his teachings shape how we see others and how we prepare to meet the Savior.

This week, try one small step:

Pray to see one person the way God sees them—and act on the prompting that follows.
Take one deliberate step on the covenant path: temple attendance, repentance, or seeking revelation.
Record in a journal one way you felt God’s love for you personally this week.

“Whatever questions or problems you have, the answer is always found in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. Learn more about His Atonement, His love, His mercy, His doctrine, and His restored gospel of healing and progression. Turn to Him! Follow Him!” President Russell M. Nelson, The Answer is Always Jesus Christ

How will you honor President Nelson’s ministry this week—by helping one soul draw closer to Christ, even if that soul is your own?

On a personal note, I wish to express my gratitude for the life, example and teachings of Russell M. Nelson. His love, enthusiasm and optimism have blessed my life and helped me come closer to my Savior. I’m grateful for him. I testify that he was a prophet of our God. I’m grateful I’ve had the opportunity to look more closely at his teachings thru this series. – DeLayna Beck

The post President Nelson’s Legacy: Gathering Israel through Christ appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This book review was originally published here on December 12, 2021. It is being reposted now to help people get to know President Oaks better. It also contains information about the origin of the Proclamation on the Family, which is currently having its 30th anniversary celebrated.

Available from the FAIR BookstoreThis biography of Dallin H. Oaks was written by Richard E. Turley, Jr., who has been associated with Oaks throughout most of his (Turley’s) professional life. Turley has served as the Director of the Church History Department (originally selected to work for the department by Oaks), Assistant Church Historian, and Director of Public Affairs. He has previously written or co-written several other books, including Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hoffman Case and Massacre at Mountain Meadows: An American Tragedy.

The Beginning of Dallin H. Oak’s LifeDallin Harris Oaks was born August 12, 1932 in Provo, Utah. “Harris” comes from his mom’s side of the family, who was descended from a brother of Martin Harris. He grew up in Provo; Twin Falls, Idaho; Payson (where he stayed with his grandparents at times due to the death of his father when he was 7); and Vernal. As a child, he came close to dying several, beginning with his birth, with miraculous preservation of his life occurring each time.

Education, Marriage and MilitaryOaks eventually made it to Brigham Young University, where he met his first wife, June Dixon, and married her in his junior year. He was in the Utah National Guard, and the Korean War was going on, so he was unable to serve a mission. After BYU, he graduated cum laude from the University of Chicago Law School, worked as a clerk for the Supreme Court, and then began working at a law practice. During this time he also served as a stake missionary.

He then returned to the University of Chicago Law School as a professor (also serving in the stake presidency) until he was chosen to be the president of Brigham Young University. From there he went on to become a justice of the Utah Supreme Court. He was a potential candidate twice for the United States Supreme Court, but both times felt it wasn’t right. When asked about it once, he said: “That job is like being called to be a General Authority. Only a fool would aspire to it, but no one would turn it down” (page 168).

Called to the ApostleshipIn 1984 he received a surprise phone call from President Gordon B. Hinckley of the First Presidency, and he was called as an apostle, which he found to be shocking. “‘I feel so unworthy and so unprepared for this sacred calling,’ he confessed, ‘Yet I do know that there is nothing I cannot do if I am worthy of the help of our Heavenly Father. My challenge is to be worthy and to be in tune’” (page 180).

During his time as an apostle, he had many assignments and took very seriously his role as a special witness of the name of Christ. He became known for his doctrinal addresses. “He felt the heavy responsibility of spiritually feeding those who came–or tuned in–to hear him, and he wanted to align his will with God’s in selecting, developing, and addressing topics of importance in advancing the Lord’s purposes” (page 322).

Powerful Priesthood WitnessOne of his talks that is among my favorites was “Healing the Sick,” given in the April 2010 General Conference. Oaks gained faith in the power of the priesthood early in his life. His father was a doctor and someone once “asked him if he was going to grow up to be a doctor like his father and heal people. ‘No,’ he answered. He was going to be a ‘high priest like my father and bless babies’” (page 7).

Later, when he was ten years old, he had an experience that “has been a significant influence on my faith in the power of the priesthood” (page 15). When he was staying with his grandfather, his younger cousin fell unnoticed into an irrigation ditch and wasn’t found for 20 or 30 minutes. He had been floating facedown and was dead. His grandfather gave him a blessing and he was revived. “‘He suffered no after-effects, filling a mission to Australia, marrying a lovely girl, and living an exemplary life as a Latter-day Saint husband and father. I am witness,’ Dallin concluded, ‘to the miracle of his childhood death and restoration’” (page 17).

The Mark Hoffman CaseOne of his assignments was with Public Affairs, and this was when the Mark Hofmann case occurred. He was involved in responding to the media and encouraged transparency from the First Presidency in their dealings with Hofmann. After Hofmann was arrested and pleaded guilty, he wrote: “The outcome vindicates the Church in every particular! How blessed are we! The Lord truly looks after His work and His servants. We are buffeted by the world and afflicted with the consequences of our own mistakes, but when the stakes are large and the survival or significant momentum of the work is on the line, we are saved as by a miracle” (page 208).

When later reviewing the manuscript of Turley’s Victims, he wrote: “The facts are there, and his effort will set the record straight for purposes of history. Those who want to believe the worst about the Church and its leaders will do so, but those who want the truth and have ears to hear and hearts to understand will at last have the complete facts on the Church…involvement in the Hofmann affair” (page 209).

Travel AssignmentsThere were many travel assignments, including time spent as the Philippines Area President. As he got older, this became harder, and in 2006 during a trip to Africa, he wrote: “As I reflect on what I have been doing on this trip…I have been impressed with the fact that I am working so hard that I would not possibly do this for money. I love doing this for the Lord, and I love the people with whom I work and those I meet on these trips” (page 292).

The Family: A Proclamation to the WorldThe book gives us some information about the creation of “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” and Oaks’ role:

During the fall of 1994, at the urging of its Acting President, Boyd K. Packer, the Quorum of the Twelve discussed the need for a scripture-based proclamation to set forth the Church’s doctrinal position on the family. A committee consisting of Elders Faust, Nelson, and Oaks was assigned to prepare a draft. Their work, for which Elder Nelson was the principal draftsman, was completed over the Christmas holidays. After being approved by the Quorum of the Twelve, the draft was submitted to the First Presidency on January 9, 1995, and warmly received.

Over the next several months, the First Presidency took the proposed proclamation under advisement and made needed amendments. Then on September 23, 1995, in the general Relief Society meeting held in the Salt Lake Tabernacle and broadcast throughout the world, Church President Gordon B. Hinckley read “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” publicly for the first time.

During the period that the proclamation was being drafted, Church leaders grew concerned about efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in the state of Hawaii. As that movement gained momentum, a group of Church authorities and Latter-day Saint legal scholars, including Elder Oaks, recommended that the Church oppose the Hawaii efforts…. (Page 215.)

There has been a theory that the Proclamation began as a response to the legalization efforts in Hawaii, and was written by a team of lawyers, but this clearly shows that not to be the case. If it sounds like it might have been written by legal experts, it’s probably because two of its co-writers were Oaks (a former Utah Supreme Court Justice) and Faust (a former lawyer).

Widower and Second MarriageDallin’s wife, June, died in 1998. He later had an experience in the temple where he felt her presence and heard her voice in his mind. She told him “(1) she is busy and happy, and (2) she knows why she died at this time. I was comforted.”

Four months after she had died, he was in the temple again. This time he didn’t feel her presence, but “I did feel a thought she had left for me, somewhat like a written message: ‘Your needs are not so great now, so I will not visit you on a regular basis, but from time to time as you need.’…Elder Oaks wrote that he ‘went away strengthened for a new era in my life’” (pages 235-236).

After that, he began thinking of remarriage and received advice and help from Elder L. Tom Perry, who introduced him to Kristen McMain. After a brief courtship and with the consent of his children, they were married.

Written CorrespondenceAs an apostle, Oaks responded to many letters. There are portions of some of his responses in the book. Here are some excerpts from those that I found interesting:

On another occasion…Elder Oaks offered four suggestions. The first was about reading from varied sources in searching for truth. Sometimes, Elder Oaks observed, those who say they read broadly exclude reading sources “that will sustain and nourish faith.” Second, he explained, “while doubt can be a virtue when it moves people to seek knowledge, it is also an eternal principle that faith precedes the receipt of knowledge from above.” Third, knowing the Church is true does not require “the kind of transcendental experience the Prophet Joseph Smith had.” That knowledge can come from simply keeping the Lord’s commandments. Fourth, we must avoid judging godly things “according to what seems ‘godly’ according to our standards or culture or experience.” Instead, “we are to learn from Him, not teach Him or confine Him within our criteria.” Finally, Elder Oaks wrote, no one can pass the responsibility for personal conversion to another. “The whole case is in your hands…and its resolution is between you and your Heavenly Father.”

…To a man who wrote on reconciling science and religion, Elder Oaks responded, “Because our knowledge of the truths of the gospel is still evolving with continuing revelation, and because the ‘truths’ of science are also very dynamic, I am skeptical about bringing them together at present, though I know that they will each be gloriously consistent when all truths are known.”

A man wrote asking whether he should refrain from promoting new concepts that came to him about Christ’s Atonement. “The Lord has given us a prophet and his two counselors,” Elder Oaks replied, “and they are the ones to whom we look for ‘new concepts’ on our doctrine. The rest of us should refrain.”

…One correspondent was bothered that a family member talked openly about purported spiritual manifestations… “Have you noticed,” Elder Oaks asked in response, “that General Authorities, fifteen of whom are sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators, rarely speak about personal and sacred spiritual experiences?

“That cannot be a coincidence,” he taught. “It is also true that there are many miracles and sacred spiritual experiences among the Latter-day Saints, and we rarely hear of them across the pulpit or in classes. That cannot be a coincidence either.

“True,” Elder Oaks agreed, “some individuals speak of their personal and sacred spiritual experiences, but I have noticed that those individuals are cautioned not to do so, and if they persist, they are generally released from their Church positions or requested not to speak in Church meetings.

“What explains all of this?” Elder Oaks inquired of the writer. “A person has only to read the directions in the Doctrine and Covenants to see that the Lord has told us that our sacred experiences are personal and are not to be shown before the world.” He concluded, “If every person would be careful to limit the use of their spiritual experiences to their own personal benefit, instead of using them for other purposes, the adversary would have less occasion to mislead us by counterfeit spiritual experiences.” (Pages 336-341.)

Called to the First PresidencyIn 2018, Elder Oaks became President Oaks as he was called to be a counselor in the First Presidency. At this time, I observed that there were some that felt that the counselor under President Monson that he was effectively replacing (Dieter F. Uchtdorf) was being demoted. However, when Uchtdorf “met with President Nelson, he recommended two other men to be counselors in the First Presidency. ‘Elder Oaks was one of my recommendations,’ he later explained.

‘Through the course of those interviews,’ President Nelson recounted, ‘it became very clear to me, as I prayed about it, that Dallin should be First Counselor because, upon my demise, he’s the next President of the Church. That’s the kindest thing I could do to the Church and for him…to give that exposure” (page 345).

As a member of the First Presidency,

“My understanding of the power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ has increased enormously. As a judge, I applied mortal laws and penalties. In contrast, as I have reviewed the cases of persons who have sinned previously and now seek renewal in the Church, I have been awed by the love of God and His merciful forgiveness of those who repent and return to Him…. I have greatly increased in knowledge of and appreciation for the inspired service of the members of the Twelve, the Seventy, the Presiding Bishopric, our General Officers, and our local leaders…. I have grown in my testimony of the reality of revelation to our living prophet, President Russell M. Nelson” (page 368).

Describing the First Presidency meetings, he said they

“continue to be very revelatory for all three of us: open discussion of different points of view followed by sweet coming together in unity” (page 356).

On another occasion he wrote that

“The Lord is in charge, and with His direction we can make big changes” (pages 358-359).

Later he wrote, “President Nelson is receiving…inspiration, and it is always confirmed to President Eyring and me. Thrilling!” (page 359).

Changes in the ChurchSpeaking of the many changes that have been made by the First Presidency since it was formed, Oaks said to members in Arizona:

“Change is almost always exciting… But as I have thought about the many recent changes in the Church, I have felt some caution. The changes we have experienced in our Church meetings and policies should help us, but by themselves they won’t get our members to where our Heavenly Father wants us to be. The changes that make a difference to our position on the covenant path are not changes in Church policies or practices, but the changes we make in our own desires and actions” (page 361).

How the Book is OrganizedThe book goes through Oaks’ life chronologically until his calling as an apostle. At that point, it shifts into being arranged thematically. This includes a chapter devoted to his first wife. It’s followed by a chapter about his courtship and marriage to his second wife. The last three chapters cover his calling to the First Presidency and events leading up until the publishing of the book. A summary of the book can be found in the final chapter.

I would have preferred as much detail of his later life as there is of earlier parts of his life. But it’s understandable that many aspects of being an apostle and member of the First Presidency require confidentiality. (The author does explain this problem in the introduction.) The details that we are given are extremely interesting. I can see the value of arranging his apostolic ministry into themes. Many things would have been interwoven throughout multiple years otherwise.

I enjoyed this book so much that I gave a copy to my dad for his birthday. He read it and then bought a copy for his sister. President Oaks has truly lived a remarkable life. This book has inspired me to be a better person and increased my testimony of living prophets and apostles.

AuthorTrevor Holyoak is the Vice President of FAIR. He joined FAIR in 1997 and received the John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award in 2014. Trevor graduated magna cum laude from Weber State University with a BS in computer science and now works as a programmer and systems administrator. Currently, he is currently serving as a young mens advisor in his ward. In his spare time, Trevor is also involved in the leadership of the Utah Valley Amateur Radio Club. He and his wife have five children and live in Cedar Hills, Utah.

The post Book Review: “In the Hands of the Lord: The Life of Dallin H. Oaks” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evidence That God Still SpeaksEvery six months, millions gather to hear messages from prophets, apostles, and leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To some, this is just another conference; to believers, it is a sacred witness that God still speaks today.

Critics often claim that revelation ceased with the Bible, that modern prophets are unnecessary, or that faith is irrelevant in our time. General Conference provides a powerful answer to each of these doubts – it is continuing revelation in real time.

Common Criticism: Church members are told what to think instead of encouraged to seek truth for themselves.It would be easy to see General Conference as a time when leaders “tell members what to think,” leaving little room for individual thought or spiritual independence. Instead of noticing the repeated invitations to seek, ask, and act for themselves, they focus only on the authoritative voices at the pulpit.

Fallacy at Work: False Dilemma (or “All-or-Nothing Thinking”)A logical fallacy that presents only two options as if they are the only possibilities, when in fact other alternatives exist.

This fallacy frames the choice as either blind obedience to leaders or total independence without them. In reality, General Conference models a “both-and” pattern: prophets teach truth while encouraging members to seek confirmation and revelation for themselves. It’s a consistent pattern. Leaders teach; they invite listeners to pray, record impressions, and then act on personal revelation.

Correction: General Conference is designed to train disciples in spiritual self-reliance. President Nelson urged members to “hear Him”—to develop the personal capacity to recognize and follow Christ’s voice. President Eyring promised that if we trust God enough to listen, we will receive His message in every sermon, song, and prayer.

Conference strengthens independent thinking by connecting members directly to revelation.

Solution: Rather than being told what to think, members are shown how to think with the Spirit. General Conference is God’s gift to His children: a sacred setting where prophets declare truth and every disciple is invited to confirm that truth with heaven. The false dilemma hides the reality that Conference is not about controlling minds—it is about opening hearts to the living God who still speaks.

Living Apologetics: Prophets Are Just Sharing OpinionsIt’s easy to dismiss Conference messages as nothing more than advice.

President Eyring counters this by saying that “God sends messages and authorized messengers to His children”. Doctrine and Covenants 1:38 reminds us that when His servants speak, it is as if God Himself speaks.

Practical Apologetic Use:

If someone says: “That’s just their opinion.”
You can respond: “General Conference isn’t just advice—it’s God’s word through His chosen servants. Test it by living it, and you’ll see the promised blessings.”

Ways to Apply Today:

1️⃣ Act on one prophetic invitation, no matter how small. Watch for how God blesses you as a result.
2️⃣ Share a personal story of when following a Conference invitation brought unexpected strength or peace.

Keep This Talk With YouAs you prepare for General Conference this week, remember that the greatest evidence that God still speaks is when His voice continues with you after the sessions end. Don’t let the Spirit’s impressions fade—carry them into your week.

Here are some “small and simple” things to try this week as you prepare:

Write down one question before Conference and review it afterward to see how God answered.
Record one impression during Conference and act on it within 24 hours.
Share one quote or thought with a friend or family member as a witness that God is speaking today.
Pray specifically for the ability to recognize when a talk is meant for you.

How will you act in faith this week so that General Conference becomes your personal proof that God still speaks?

The post Preparing for General Conference appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What are Priesthood Keys?by Autumn Dickson

The Lord restored the priesthood to mankind some time ago, and yet, He did not reveal the structure in which He wanted everything to be organized. There were many who had received callings and knew their responsibilities, but putting it together in a structural whole would serve to provide organization so that the Lord’s house could be a house of order.

One of the organizational tools for the Lord’s priesthood is that of keys.

Doctrine and Covenants 107:8-9

8 The Melchizedek Priesthood holds the right of presidency, and has power and authority over all the offices in the church in all ages of the world, to administer in spiritual things.

9 The Presidency of the High Priesthood, after the order of Melchizedek, have a right to officiate in all the offices in the church.

These verses are talking about rights. Verse 8 explains that the Melchizedek Priesthood holds the right of presidency, and the Presidency of the High Priesthood (or in our day, the First Presidency) has a right to officiate in any capacity in the church.

Here is a quote that connects the idea of rights to keys. Joseph Fielding Smith taught, “While all men hold the priesthood who are ordained to any office, yet there are special, or directing, authorities, bestowed upon those who are called to preside. These authorities are called keys.”

I’m going to zoom out a bit so that we can attempt to understand different aspects of the priesthood and organize it all.

First, we have the priesthood. The priesthood, in its simplest definition, is the power of God. It is the power by which He created. It is the power by which rules.

Second, there is the Melchizedek Priesthood. As stated in my previous video from this week, the Melchizedek Priesthood stands independent of any office or calling. In its simplest definition, it is the power of God that is given to man to further the work of salvation on the earth. In other words, it’s a portion of the priesthood power that is held by our Heavenly Father. He only gave us a portion of the power that we needed for this life.

Third, there is the Aaronic Priesthood. This is actually not a separate priesthood from the Melchizedek Priesthood. It is an appendage of the Melchizedek Priesthood. It was another way of organizing the priesthood and delegating responsibilities.

Fourth, there are priesthood ordinations and offices. When men come of age, they are ordained to the priesthood and progress through priesthood offices. Different priesthood offices delegate different priesthood responsibilities. Quick tangent. Only men are ordained to the priesthood, but women can utilize the priesthood without being ordained. The Lord has still not answered why He has chosen this path or whether it’s doctrine or policy. There are plenty of theories, but the Lord has not chosen to explain it.

And the last thing I want to talk about today: priesthood keys. Priesthood keys take priesthood offices just a tiny step further. Priesthood keys are the right to govern. You can hold a priesthood office without holding any keys. You can hold the office of Elder or High Priest but not have any keys with which to direct the work. You simply have responsibilities to function underneath those keys. The church website teaches us which offices and leaders hold keys.

Members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles hold all the keys necessary for governing the Church. Only the President of the Church has the right to exercise all of those keys. He delegates these keys to others who preside in the Church—temple presidents, mission presidents, stake presidents, district presidents, bishops, branch presidents, and quorum presidents, including deacons and teachers quorum presidents.

Oftentimes these keys are to overlook specific responsibilities and geographical jurisdictions. They eventually trace back to the prophet, and ultimately, to the Savior, Himself.

When I think of keys, I think of unlocking rooms. Let’s pretend that God’s various works (including those not directly associated with the earth) are a giant castle. Different rooms hold different responsibilities and powers that the Lord governs.

The Lord has given a grouping of rooms to the President of the Church on earth, or the prophet. When the Lord gave the prophet the keys, a couple of things happened. He gave the prophet a stewardship. The prophet is now in charge of making sure that what occurs in those rooms are in alignment with what the Lord would have occurring in those rooms.

But as the church grew bigger, it became very difficult for one prophet to oversee so many rooms and consequent responsibilities so he started delegating keys. The prophet can still access any of these rooms and perform responsibilities associated with those rooms, but he often chooses, delegates, and allows other leaders to perform their responsibilities without too much interference.

A mission president is over a room of missionaries found within a geographical area. If a mission president is called over the Salt Lake City North mission, he has no jurisdiction over any other missionaries than the one in his mission. He also doesn’t hold authority over the members. His specific room is for the missionaries.

The same idea goes to temple presidents, stake presidents, bishops, and quorum leaders. Eventually these men get released from their callings and they hand their keys back to be given to a new leader.

As I said previously, the person who holds the key for a specific room is in charge of making sure that everything that occurs in that room aligns with the Lord. Are ordinances being performed correctly? Is the doctrine kept pure from apostasy? Keeping a massive, worldwide church on track is no easy task. Keys help to make sure that the Lord’s church is the same everywhere.

It is also important to note that you don’t need keys to help push the work further along. Though a leader is chosen to hold the keys, all of us have access to God’s priesthood power to make a difference. We can’t get caught up in the idea of leadership. Christ’s example of leadership should give us a real taste of what it means to govern. You don’t have to be a leader to access power or even change the world.

Interestingly enough, I don’t know if priesthood keys are doctrine or policy. If anyone does know, please feel free to comment. I don’t know if keys exist independently or if the Lord created the priesthood organizational system, and the keys were part of the system that He created. I don’t know if keys were just meant to help create a house of order or if they belong to the category of doctrine in which they don’t really get changed.

This post definitely was definitely more informational than some of my other posts, but being able to zoom out and understand some of the basic organizations of God’s priesthood has also helped me better understand my own priesthood responsibilities. It helps me understand the access I have to priesthood power, not just in the form of receiving blessings but also the power I am capable of wielding to further the work of salvation.

There is beauty in the fact that the Lord knows what He’s doing. There is beauty in knowing that there is truth, and I can trust that truth to remain pure no matter where I go and attend church services. The Lord has achieved an incredible amount of unity and continuity in a worldwide church that many world leaders only dream of.

As we come closer and closer to a knowledge of Christ’s character, we receive more and more salvation. We experience more happiness. That’s why the keys are so essential. It keeps our knowledge of Christ accurate and enables us to remain close to Him through the ordinances that He put forth.

I am grateful for a Lord who is wise enough to set up His church as He did. I’m grateful that despite all the imperfections of mankind, He has done a phenomenal job of keeping His truths and ordinances pure so that we can draw as close to Him as possible. I testify that the priesthood is ultimately His to delegate, and that He offers His power to anyone who is worthy and willing. I also testify that He set up a priesthood organization in which He delegated certain responsibilities to push us to become better and keep things as close to the truth as humanly possible.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 106-108 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Lord’s people & secular governmentsby Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

In March 1907, the First Presidency issued a proclamation affirming that the Church is politically neutral, and that the state should not control the church, neither should the church control the state: “An Address: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to the World,”, Improvement Era 10, no. 5 (May 1907): 492–93.
Today’s First Presidency has continued to reaffirm this policy; see “Political Neutrality,” Newsroom of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Spencer W. Kimball, “The False Gods We Worship,” Ensign, June 1976, 3–6. President Kimball’s First Presidency message, criticizing militarism among Latter-day Saints, was published one month before the commemoration of the United States bicentennial.
Rodney Stark, “The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History,” PBS Frontline: From Jesus to Christ, April 1998. Stark, a world-renowned sociologist of religion, argues that what made early Christianity unique—and one reason why it prospered and became a world religion—was because it “taught that mercy is one of the primary virtues—that a merciful God requires humans to be merciful.”

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 98–99, 102, 106, 108, 134 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2024 conference. If you would like to watch all the presentations from our 2025 conference held last month, you can still purchase the video streaming.

This audio podcast version has been made available for convenient listening. If you would like to watch or read the full presentation, it is available here.

Elder Ahmad S. Corbitt was sustained as a General Authority Seventy in April 2023. A former mission president, public affairs director, and trial attorney, he holds a law degree from Rutgers. Currently, he serves the Church with extensive experience in leadership, communication, and global outreach.

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #84 – Ahmad S. Corbitt, “Prophets of the Past, Faithfulness in the Present” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Destroying Angelby Autumn Dickson

There is a reference to an Old Testament record found in Doctrine and Covenants 89, and it can give us insight about the power of the Word of Wisdom in our day.

Doctrine and Covenants 89:21 And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.

When Moses was working to free the Israelites from Egyptian bondage, the last plague involved a destroying angel that would enter into the houses of man and kill the firstborn son. The Israelites were instructed to sacrifice a lamb, paint its blood on the doorposts, and remain home on the night of the Passover. If they did this, the destroying angel would not enter into their homes to hurt their child.

I noticed two parallels between the story of Moses freeing the Israelites and the Word of Wisdom in our day. Let’s talk about them.

When the Israelites were instructed to put blood on their doorposts, it was only to protect their oldest son. The destroying angel wasn’t coming for everyone; it was just coming for one of them. Even if the Word of Wisdom only protected one of your children, would you teach it? Would you apply it? Perhaps many of us could have lived without the Word of Wisdom and ultimately escaped nasty habits, compromising circumstances, and situations where you weren’t able to adequately protect yourself. However, I have enough friends who have been negatively impacted by alcohol alone (not even including drugs) to know that making a blanket commandment to avoid it is wise on the part of the Lord. I have no idea if I would have been the one destroyed if I had partaken in these substances, but I’m grateful I didn’t have to find out the hard way. I’m grateful that it provided protection to many of my loved ones.

Another parallel.

Sometimes I wonder what killed the firstborn son. Sometimes I wonder if the blood on the doorpost did something scientifically to protect the family. Does the Lord know something we don’t about how blood on a door might protect against a certain disease? Or, did the Lord simply choose something symbolic and performed a miracle so that it would not touch the Israelites?

Regardless of whether this was some kind scientific application, I hope I would have been wise enough to follow Moses and receive that blessing.

It’s easy to see how alcohol, tobacco, and drugs should be avoided. Even if you don’t think it’s a big deal, I feel like most people recognize that alcohol, tobacco, and drugs can be dangerous. Coffee is less dangerous, but it’s still easy to recognize how it affects our bodies and that it can be addictive. Tea is interesting. Numerous sources teach the benefits of tea. You can develop a caffeine addiction with tea, but even that is possible to avoid. So what’s the deal with tea?

The Lord taught Joseph Smith how dangerous tobacco was decades before scientific research followed. It wasn’t until the 1950’s or 1960’s that solid medical studies were being published about the potential harmful effects. The Lord warned His Saints to avoid it and protect themselves. This was really interesting since there were even doctors who promoted tobacco as a health cure through the 19th century. What I’m trying to express is the idea that the Lord knew the dangers of tobacco long before the health community did.

Is this also the case with tea? Is there a scientific reason that the Lord has banned tea? Is there something about tea that we do not yet know? Or, is it truly just a sign of obedience?

In the end, does it matter?

Whether it’s scientific or arbitrary on the part of the Lord, we have been given a specific promise that the destroying angel will pass over us. Really, it comes down to whether we believe in a modern-day prophet just as it came down to whether the Israelites believed in Moses as a prophet. Will we choose to place the blood on our doors despite all of the logical reasons to avoid doing so? Do we believe in a prophet?

I testify of a Lord who makes and keeps promises. I testify that the Word of Wisdom is not the first time the Lord has utilized a covenant to protect the health of His people. I testify that following a prophet, even when it doesn’t seem to outwardly make sense, will provide protection whether that’s through natural consequences or from pure obedience and blessings directly given by the Lord.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 89-92 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Word of Wisdom (D&C section 89)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Paul H. Peterson and Ronald W. Walker, “Brigham Young’s Word of Wisdom Legacy,” BYU Studies 42, no. 3–4 (2003): 29–64.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 89 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

For the Weakest Saintby Autumn Dickson

The Word of Wisdom is a gift. Some view this advice as ridiculous and unnecessary. Honestly, it reminds me of when my son thinks it’s ridiculous and unnecessary for him to wear shoes and a helmet when he rides his dirt bike. Sure, he may ride his dirt bike and never get seriously injured. Maybe it even feels better to ride his dirt bike without a helmet, but it is worth protecting yourself.

As I read the Word of Wisdom this week, this verse stuck out to me.

Doctrine and Covenants 89:3 Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.

The Word of Wisdom, our health law given from God, was “adapted to the capacity of the weakest of all saints.” If the Lord adapted it, it means that He “made something suitable for a new purpose.” The Lord modified the Word of Wisdom so that the weakest saints would be capable of following it. The Lord did this in a couple of ways.

The first interpretation was the fact that the Word of Wisdom did not originally come as a commandment. In 1833, it was given to the Saints as some strong advice, as a revelation filled with wisdom. In 1882, the Lord told John Taylor that the Word of Wisdom was to be formally recognized as a commandment. In 1919, Heber J. Grant made it a requirement for the temple recommend. The Lord could have come out and made it a commandment immediately, but there were many people who were addicted to these substances. So the Lord adapted the law for His vulnerable saints. He changed it to start out as advice so that the people could become prepared to live it before it would condemn them.

Though this section is about the Word of Wisdom, this idea of adaptation from the Lord has numerous implications. One of those implications is the fact that the Lord is willing to meet us where we’re at and work with us until we’re where He wants us to be. He knows we’re imperfect and weak. He adapts on a societal level such as when He installed the Law of Moses to give the Israelites a step up towards His higher law. He also adapts on an individual level where He chooses to look at the bigger picture, unafraid of our mistakes along the way.

I had a dear friend who was overcoming a serious, serious pornography addiction. Addiction is definitely a spectrum, and he was thoroughly enmeshed. He didn’t have much support at home and had started extremely young. If I remember correctly, he found himself entrapped in pornography even before the age of accountability. In many ways, he was on his own to overcome it. And without support, especially as a young kid, overcoming it was going to be difficult (to put it lightly).

He had some wonderful youth leaders who took him in. One of those leaders was inspired by God to help him change his goals in relation to pornography. Because he was so deeply addicted, she recommended taking baby steps. Instead of trying to cut everything out and move on, she recommended starting with smaller goals that would eventually build to that ultimate goal.

His first goal was to make it an hour without looking at some version of pornography. That goal would build to 24 hours. Eventually he would make it to a week, a month, a year. She didn’t worry about what he would pull up at the end of that hour when he had reached his small goal. Rather, she gave him baby steps to work towards that law.

As we speak of adapting, I worry that this could sometimes get taken out of context and used as justification. Adaptation and justification are not the same thing. The entire point of adaptation on the part of the Lord is to help us step towards exaltation. The Law of Moses was definitely a step down from the law Christ wanted to give the Israelites, and yet, it was a step in the correct direction. This is not about justifying our sins or changing the law because we think we’re too weak. It’s about setting ourselves up for eventual success in following the Lord.

The Lord did not give the Word of Wisdom as a full-on commandment in the beginning because He needed to adapt it for those who were already addicted.

There is also a second interpretation of adaptation that I find important. I want to teach this second perspective by jumping back to that original analogy I used with my son and his helmet.

We have a rule in our home that you wear your helmet when you go out on the dirt bike. Imagine if our house rule was actually, “You don’t have to wear a helmet if you’re really strong and talented. Only the weakest family members need to wear a helmet.” There are a few problems that could arise.

First of all, none of my kids would classify themselves as weak riders, not even the four year old. I might as well not bring up the helmets at all. Secondly, even the strongest riders can make mistakes. No matter how strong and talented you are, a blow to the head can cause serious and permanent damage.

The Lord created the Word of Wisdom to protect the weakest of Saints, but He asked all of us to live it because He’s wise enough to know that none of us would classify ourselves as weak. We all think we would be strong enough to use dangerous substances wisely, and there would be significantly more problems. I’m not just talking about addiction. I’m also talking about the kinds of problems that arise within families when inhibitions have been dampened and lines are crossed.

This concept also extends to the idea of the strongest members running into issues. Even if you’re spiritually strong and only utilize substances at certain times, you are still leaving yourself incredibly vulnerable to others with bad intentions. Even the strongest can take a “blow to the head” when they are not adequately mentally present to protect themselves.

The Lord knows that experiences with substances do not always lead to destroyed lives, but the Lord is also wise enough to know that it causes enough pain and destruction to just avoid it altogether. He adapted these principles for the weakest of saints, but these principles protect all of us.

I testify of a Lord who is wise enough and cares enough to get involved and help us stay away from compromising and dangerous situations. I testify of a Lord who wants us to be safe and even though He desires a world where the most vulnerable are protected, I testify that He’s smart enough to know that’s not the world we live in yet. For now, we need these rules to keep us safe and help us protect ourselves more fully. Some see the Word of Wisdom as a desire to control. I see a wise and loving Father who is just trying to help His children live life more fully and healthy. I’m grateful for His protections and sage advice.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 89-92 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Steadying the Arkby Autumn Dickson

There is a reference to an Old Testament story found in the sections for this week. Let’s talk about the background and then read the verse.

In 2 Samuel, the Israelites are bringing the ark of the covenant back into Israel after an enemy nation had captured and released it. An oxen shook the ark of the covenant while they were crossing a river, and Uzzah touched it and tried to steady it even though no one was allowed to touch the ark. He was struck dead immediately next to the ark of the covenant.

Here is the verse in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Doctrine and Covenants 85:8 While that man, who was called of God and appointed, that putteth forth his hand to steady the ark of God, shall fall by the shaft of death, like as a tree that is smitten by the vivid shaft of lightning.

Around the time this verse was given, Edward Partridge and Joseph were disagreeing. Partridge thought the quality of land in Missouri was poor and didn’t want to buy it, and it took a while for him to reconcile with Joseph over the matter. This warning would have been to Partridge had he not repented. In 1834, Oliver Cowdery recorded that Joseph clarified that this verse didn’t apply to any individual. It was a warning to anyone.

So what is the warning?

Just like with any scripture story, there are a few different lessons. Elder Neal A. Maxwell taught that trying to direct God’s work without authority can bring spiritual death. We learn that good intentions aren’t sufficient to protect us. It teaches us that approaching God with a lack of immense reverence is dangerous. The ark of the covenant was a representation of God, and only the high priest (as a type of Christ) could approach that ark and only after a series of cleansing rituals.

This can be a tender spot for some who are struggling in the church. Our belief in a prophet who is led by God can create a sense of all or nothing when attempting to follow the church. And while I desperately hope for everyone to continue working out their salvation within the church, this is a legitimate warning. When we try to change things without authority or try to steady the ark when we think it’s out of balance, it really can bring spiritual death.

I have a friend who has left the church over the past few years. As I’ve had conversations with him about it, I have repeatedly heard the phrase, “I just don’t think God would do something like that.” This sentiment was repeated over and over. I often found myself internally asking, “Well, have you asked Him if He would do something like that?”

With the way the church is set up, it really boils down to whether it’s true or not. It’s hard to find a way around that sticking point. Either the prophet is led by God or he isn’t. Sure, we all receive personal revelation and the Lord can guide us about specific principles and policies in our lives. But, we also believe that the Lord only gives revelation to the prophet if He is trying to direct His church. Just like in the New Testament, the Lord didn’t teach every individual that the Law of Moses was completed and done away. He sent that revelation to Peter, the head of the church, and then people got to decide whether they would follow.

Just like with most people in the church, I have found myself struggling with doctrine, policy, and history. While I was growing up, I would often choose to ignore it and just keep going. As I got older, I decided I didn’t really want to do that anymore. If I couldn’t face these doubts head on and work it out with God, then I didn’t want to be a part of this. If these issues couldn’t stand up in the light, then why am I working so hard to follow the church?

When we are trying to figure out whether the prophet and church are led by God, we have to be ready to follow. That is one of the major keys here. If you want Him to answer you about the truthfulness, you have to be ready to lay aside your own thoughts and opinions in favor of His greater knowledge and wisdom. You have to be prepared to say, “I don’t understand, but I will trust that God does and I will follow Him until I do.” You have to be prepared to follow regardless of whether He tells you why He is working in a specific manner.

And so I often approach my struggles in this manner.

I work it out in my head first. When I run across something that I struggle with, I try to approach it head on. I try not to hide from that discomfort. I try to write everything I understand about God and eternal realities. I try to place what I don’t understand into the context of those eternal realities. Sometimes that has been enough to soothe the disquiet. Other times, I just feel more and more troubled.

This is when it’s time to go directly to the Lord.

I lay it all out for the Lord. I tell Him everything. I tell Him why I think it’s wrong or skewed or incorrect or faulty. I try to get to the root issue of what I’m really struggling with, and I take it all to Him.

And then I tell the Lord that I don’t know as much as He does. I tell Him that even if I don’t understand, I tell Him that I will choose to follow Him in faith and rejoicing. Sometimes He will help me understand, and sometimes He just tells me to keep following. Either way, I know that He’s got this. Maybe the time has not come for Him to change things. Maybe He will never change things because there are aspects that I do not understand with my limited knowledge. Maybe, maybe, maybe.

But there are two aspects that are not a “maybe.” God knows all, and He loves His children. I feel this in my bones. So if He says that I’m on the right track and if He tells me that this is where I need to be, I feel safe enough to do so. I have gotten to know God, and though I don’t understand all of His decisions, I understand His love and omnipotence and I am not afraid. I am excited for Him to show me all that He sees when He deems that it’s the right timing.

So when I feel that the ark is off balance, I have learned to steady myself rather than the ark. I have learned to let the Lord do His own work, and I’ve learned that the ark will be just fine. If I follow, I’ll make it across the river and home someday.

You don’t have to follow blindly. You don’t have to hide from scary doubts. You can work them out in your mind and do your best to understand them. But you can also get to know God. You can deeply internalize His love and omnipotence, and then you can go to Him. You can tell Him that you’re willing to follow where He leads because you have come to trust Him deeply. You can be willing to let go of what you don’t understand because you trust that He understands.

Everyone is going to have to work this out in their own lives. You have to receive that answer for yourself. Is the prophet truly being led by God? This can feel like a difficult answer when it seems like it conflicts with some deep part of you, but the conflict only exists because we do not see all that He sees. I can testify of His God’s love and omnipotence. I can testify that He isn’t betraying you or setting you aside. I can testify that He sacrificed everything so that no hurt would go unhealed. I also testify that He leads His prophet and church today.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 85-87 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Vision of the three degrees of glory (D&C section 76)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Philo Dibble, “Recollections of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” Juvenile Instructor 27, no. 10 (15 May 1892): 303–04. Dibble recalled his firsthand experience being in the room when Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon experienced the Vision now canonized as section 76.
Joseph Smith, “A Vision,” Times and Seasons 4, no. 6 (1 February 1843): 81–85. William W. Phelps wrote a letter in poetic verse to the Prophet Joseph about the celestial kingdom, and Joseph responded with a poetic form of section 76.
Elder Russell M. Nelson, “Perfection Pending,” General Conference, October 1995. Then-Elder Nelson offered a suggestion on the meaning of the word telestial.
Kevin Barney, “The Etymology of ‘Telestial’,” By Common Consent, 27 January 2010. Barney takes a scholarly approach to the origin of the word telestial.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 76 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Testimony of the Revelationsby Autumn Dickson

Joseph Smith and various elders gathered this week to decide whether they would publish the revelations that Joseph had thus far received. Many of the elders were prepared to write their testimonies to be published right alongside the revelations, but others were hesitant. Joseph was not always eloquent, and he was not incredibly educated. Several of the elders did not yet believe that the revelations had come from the Lord.

In Section 67, the Lord issues a challenge. He tells the men to select the “least” of the revelations and then to take their wisest man and have him try to write a revelation like it. William McLellin, a school teacher, took up the challenge. According to the institute manual, this is how things played out.

Joseph Smith described the outcome of William’s attempt to write a revelation: ‘[William] E. McLellin … endeavored to write a [revelation] like unto one of the least of the Lord’s, but failed; it was an awful responsibility to write in the name of the Lord. The elders, and all present, that witnessed this vain attempt of a man to imitate the language of Jesus Christ, renewed their faith in the fulness of the gospel and in the truth of the commandments and revelations which the Lord had given to the church through my instrumentality; and the elders signified a willingness to bear testimony of their truth to all the world

Since we’re talking about how the Lord’s words are more powerful than man’s (even when it is filtered through a man), let’s look directly at some of His words. I want to talk about three different principles found throughout the chapter.

To gain a testimony

Here is how the Lord starts out the revelation in response to this situation we’ve been discussing.

Doctrine and Covenants 67:1 Behold and hearken, O ye elders of my church, who have assembled yourselves together, whose prayers I have heard, and whose hearts I know, and whose desires have come up before me.

Does the Lord sound angry with these elders because of their unbelief? I don’t think so. He’s literally telling them, “I’ve heard your prayers, and I know your hearts and desires.” The hearts of these elders are apparently soft enough that they don’t need rebuking. Rather, the Lord, in His infinite wisdom and perfect knowledge of us, knew that these elders simply lacked the testimony they needed as of yet.

It could have been easy for Joseph to get offended that these men felt his words were insufficient, but this wasn’t coming from Joseph. It was coming from the Lord, and the Lord knew His children enough to know that they simply needed more opportunities to practice faith and see Him in this work.

And so He set them up to gain a testimony of the revelations received by Joseph Smith.

The Lord does rebuke His children sometimes, but that is usually the result of hard hearts. If the Lord is calling someone out and forcefully calling for repentance, it is usually because a softer approach will be ineffective. For this particular chapter, I picture the Lord being very matter-of-fact about it.

So what do we learn from the Lord’s relaxed tone?

We learn that we don’t necessarily have to be afraid or ashamed if we have doubts. We don’t have to worry or put immense pressure on ourselves to “already know” or “just have faith already.” Rather, we can work to make (or keep) our hearts soft and give the Lord an opportunity to lead us along and show us. He knows our hearts, and He knows if you’re sincerely trying to find Him. He can work with that. It reminds me of the father in the New Testament who asked the Lord to “help Thou mine unbelief.” The Lord can give us eyes to see reality, and He can give us reasons to trust Him. We merely need to seek Him out and be willing to experiment upon His words, just like these men experimented.

Missing out

Here is another tidbit from the Lord.

Doctrine and Covenants 67:5 Your eyes have been upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and his language you have known, and his imperfections you have known; and you have sought in your hearts knowledge that you might express beyond his language; this you also know.

There is at least one general principle here that we can pull out and apply it many different ways. It is this: when we hyperfocus on the mistakes and supposed flaws of others, we miss out on so much goodness. When we scoff or mock, we’re voluntarily skipping over blessings.

This actually makes me think of Christ’s mortal ministry. Christ’s words and actions were obviously perfect, but I’m not sure they were perfect in the sense of how we sometimes picture the meaning of that word. He was a traveler. He was likely dirty from walking everywhere. He didn’t wear priestly robes or hold any worldly authority or education except in carpentry. Think of what the Pharisees and Sadducees missed out on because they couldn’t see past what they perceived as beneath them.

Think of what these elders might have missed out on had they continued on that path where they perceived the revelations of God as beneath them.

What are we perceiving as beneath us? What are we missing out on? The list could be endless: sacrament talks, good people, wisdom from parents.

Set aside our fears

In verse 3, the Lord tells His elders that they tried hard to believe that they would receive a blessing, but fear prevented them from actually receiving it. He also said this.

Doctrine and Covenants 67:10 And again, verily I say unto you that it is your privilege, and a promise I give unto you that have been ordained unto this ministry, that inasmuch as you strip yourselves from jealousies and fears, and humble yourselves before me, for ye are not sufficiently humble, the veil shall be rent and you shall see me and know that I am—not with the carnal neither natural mind, but with the spiritual.

There are a lot of things that we could talk about in this verse. How might jealousy have played into the elders not being able to recognize the revelations for what they were? There are so many phrases we could pull out and talk about, but I want to talk about stripping yourself of fear instead.

One of the steps for preparing to “see” the Lord is to remove fear.

I always try to put the Lord into the context of parenting because that is when I best understand Him. In this instance, it reminds me of when my son comes down and tells me that he’s too scared to go to bed. There are times when it’s appropriate for me to go up and comfort him, but usually he just gets scared again the second I leave the room. I have often found myself saying, “There is no way that I can make you any safer than you are now.” I assure him of all the reasons he is safe. We’re downstairs, dad has adequate means of self-defense, and we’ve got a dog that has protected my family before. Unfortunately, sometimes my son doesn’t believe in that safety. It’s a process to learn that kind of trust, but as we actively engage in choosing that trust, we’re going to find enough peace to rest.

The Lord is even more capable of protecting us than I am of protecting my son.

After over four years of trying to settle out on the east coast, things have finally lined up and we’re moving forward on a house. We did a lot of research in order to decide if this is what we wanted. We put in a lot of time to make sure this was a good move for our family. We prayed about it, and we felt good about the house, or at the very least, we didn’t feel bad about the house. When we were moving through this process, I felt like this is where we had been led after four years of searching.

But it’s easy to backslide and get scared again. I was so scared that we had chosen wrong or that the Lord had washed His hands of us and left us to fail. Logically, I know that the Lord doesn’t work that way, but that’s what my fear was saying. My husband is an entrepreneur which means that things can go really well, but they can also go really wrong. The risks of life suddenly seemed tremendously overwhelming. What if I had missed His warnings? What if we expected more than the Lord was willing to give at this time?

I’ve prayed for reassurances so many times, and the Lord has often answered. But even after the Lord answered, the fear remained or came back again. I was scared that I misunderstood Him or that I was seeing revelation where it wasn’t.

The Lord isn’t going to force me to lay down my fears. He is not going to constantly whisper in my ear that we’re going to be fine because that’s not what is best for me. He wants me to choose to trust Him. If I want to feel better and find rest, I have to choose to believe that the Lord is making my family as safe as we need to be.

The Lord promises His elders that if they can strip themselves of fear (alongside a few other things), the veil will be rent and they shall see Him.

As I hush my fears, as I remind myself of all the times He’s never abandoned me, I start to “see” Him again. This past week, the fears did come up and try to overwhelm me and there were moments when those fears were successful. But as I consciously remembered my experiences with the Lord and who I’ve come to know Him as, it was as if I put on spiritual glasses. Not only was I able to remember old experiences, but I started to have new ones. He started to whisper insights that helped me believe I was on the right track. I could “see” Him again.

I testify of a Lord who is willing to help us have the experiences we need to build trust in Him. If we keep our hearts soft and seek to trust Him and His prophets, He will give us what we need to know that we’re on the right track. If we push back against our fears, we will be able to see Him in our lives.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 67–70 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Joseph Smith’s first visit to Missouri; Zion & the temple (D&C sections 57–62)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Aaron L. West, “Questions and Answers about the Temple Lot in Independence, Missouri,” Church History, 14 March 2019. West answers common questions about the temple lot dedicated by Joseph Smith, including who the present owners are of various portions of that parcel of land.
Examine the two City of Zion plats prepared by early Church leaders on the Joseph Smith Papers website:
- Plat of the City of Zion (June 1833). The first plat, drawn by Frederick G. Williams (with north pointing to the left) has marginal notes surrounding the diagram on all four sides.
- Revised Plat of the City of Zion (August 1833). The second plat, also by Williams, contains no marginal notes, but an attached letter from Oliver Cowdery explained the plat and the plans for the temples to be built at the center of the city of Zion. Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 57–62 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Recognizing Prophetic Fulfillment and Rejecting False Traditions

Have you ever paused to consider what spiritual miracles are unfolding right before our eyes—and whether we might be missing them?

In his General Conference message, Right Before Our Eyes, Elder Ronald A. Rasband invites us to recognize the majesty of this moment in the Restoration. The growth of the Church in temples, missionaries, and faithful disciples isn’t just impressive—it’s the literal fulfillment of prophecy. Yet alongside that divine acceleration, Elder Rasband warns of ongoing opposition, distractions, and “naysayers” who seek to obscure or diminish the Lord’s work.

As we study Doctrine and Covenants 49–50, we see a parallel challenge: early Saints struggled to let go of inherited false traditions and distinguish the light of true revelation from counterfeit spiritual excitement. In both the 1830s and today, the Savior lovingly calls us to grow in grace, embrace light, and let go of ideas that are not of God.

Elder Rasband’s message becomes a powerful modern companion to these revelations — testifying that the Restoration is not just something we believe in. It’s something we are watching unfold in real time.

Apologetic Issues: Fulfillment of Prophecy and Letting Go of False IdeasCriticism: Church growth is just coincidental—it doesn’t prove divine origin. The Church’s global expansion is simply the result of organizational strategies or cultural momentum.Response:Elder Rasband powerfully counters this claim by showing how specific prophecies—like Joseph Smith’s declaration that the Church would “fill the world”—are being fulfilled right before our eyes. The unprecedented growth of temples, missionary work, and education was foretold in scripture (see D&C 88:73) and is now observable in tangible ways.
This isn’t random expansion; it is evidence of divine orchestration.

Common Fallacy: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc This Latin phrase means “after this, therefore because of this.” Critics wrongly assume that because Church growth follows logistical efforts (e.g., creating new missions), that those efforts are the only cause.

Correction: A faith-based lens recognizes both divine and human participation—God inspires the leaders and the members who carry out His work. Fulfillment of prophecy doesn’t exclude planning; it includes it as part of God’s hand.

Apologetic Application: Fulfillment of Prophecy in a Living ChurchCore Doctrine: God continues to fulfill prophecy through living prophets and the ongoing Restoration of the gospel.The doctrine of continuing revelation teaches that God has not ceased to speak. The Restoration was not a one-time event—it is an unfolding process. The Lord’s hand is evident in the Church’s worldwide growth. Elder Rasband reaffirms that we are witnessing “the majesty of this moment” as temples rise, missions expand, and millions respond to the Savior’s invitation.

Defending Core Beliefs1⃣Prophecies in the Restoration are not symbolic platitudes—they are specific and testable. Joseph Smith declared in 1834 that the Church would fill the Americas and the world. At the time, this seemed implausible. But today, with over 367 temples and a presence in nearly every nation, we can see the literal fulfillment. Prophecy in this context offers verifiable evidence of divine involvement.

2⃣ The Church’s growth is not just smart logistics and marketing. While organizational efforts matter, divine foresight and prophetic vision give the Church its spiritual momentum. Elder Rasband’s talk illustrates that growth is happening in harmony with prophecy—not just strategy. When we view numbers, temples, and conversions through the lens of prophecy, we see not just human effort, but God’s plan unfolding in real time.

Clarifying Misunderstandings & Strengthening FaithWhen critics dismiss the Restoration as emotion-driven or human-engineered, this doctrine provides a faith-anchoring response:
Fulfilled prophecy = divine fingerprints. Ongoing growth = evidence that the Church is guided by more than men. Prophetic vision = reassurance that God is not silent.

Practical Apologetic Use: When someone questions whether the Restoration is credible, point to specific fulfilled prophecies. For example, Joseph Smith’s 1834 claim about worldwide expansion wasn’t aspirational—it was prophetic. Encourage seekers to consider what kind of 24-year-old farm boy could predict global outcomes—unless he was guided by God.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsIn the early 1830s, converts to the restored Church in Ohio came with sincere hearts—but also with false spiritual ideas and traditions inherited from their diverse religious backgrounds. This influx of spiritual enthusiasm, described in Doctrine and Covenants 50 and historical records like the experience of Levi Hancock, led to confusion and counterfeit manifestations of the Spirit.

Joseph Smith was commanded to “set in order” the Church by receiving divine revelation that would distinguish true light from false spirits. Just as the Lord gave the Saints in Kirtland tools to discern truth in the midst of chaos, He continues to guide us today through living prophets.

Doctrine and Covenants Connection:

In both the early Restoration and today’s worldwide Church growth, the Lord invites us to let go of traditions that are not of Him and embrace the increasing light that comes through covenant living, temple worship, and prophetic guidance.

By drawing attention to the fulfilled prophecy of Church expansion, Elder Rasband builds on the same principles taught in D&C 49–50:

Let go of false or incomplete traditions (like the Shakers did in D&C 49)
Discern truth by its fruits and light (D&C 50:23–25)
Follow the Good Shepherd, who patiently leads us from confusion into clarity (D&C 50:40–46)

Living Apologetics: How to Apply This Today How can we help others recognize the fulfillment of prophecy and let go of spiritual confusion or outdated traditions?

1⃣ Connect Church growth to prophecy in casual conversations.

If someone comments on how many missionaries or temples there are today, respond with: “It’s actually a prophecy being fulfilled. Joseph Smith said the Church would fill the world—and now it is. Pretty incredible, right?”Simple, natural comments can plant powerful apologetic seeds.

2⃣ Gently challenge false traditions with scriptural clarity.

When someone expresses confusion about modern revelation or resists change in Church practices, refer to D&C 50:24:
“That which is of God is light”—if a teaching brings peace, clarity, and Christlike focus, it’s from Him. False traditions might sound familiar, but they don’t always bring light.

Top Apologetic Facts Historical Context: In 1834, Joseph Smith prophesied in a 14×14 foot schoolhouse that the Church would fill the Americas and the world. That prophecy is unfolding today.

Doctrinal Insight: Doctrine and Covenants 50 was given to help early Saints distinguish true spiritual manifestations from false ones—a lesson still needed today in an age of confusion and counterfeits.

Practical Application: With 367 temples announced, under construction, or operating, Church members can see tangible evidence of a global, living Restoration.

Conclusion: Witnessing the Restoration in Real TimeElder Rasband’s powerful testimony invites us to see the Restoration not as a past event, but as an active, unfolding reality—one we are meant to participate in. As we give the Lord “equal time,” we gain the spiritual clarity to discern what is true, what is light, and what is real.

We are not passive observers—we are eyewitnesses of prophecy. The question is: Are we paying attention?

As we study D&C 49–50, may we let go of outdated traditions and embrace the true doctrine that brings light. Like the early Saints in Kirtland and the missionaries in Lima, we too can shout “Hurrah for Israel!” and take our place in this majestic moment of the Restoration.

“We are hastening our holiness as we live temple worthy, as we worship in the house of the Lord, and as we make covenants with God.” —Elder Ronald A. Rasband

The post Right Before Our Eyes appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Finding Safety and Strength Through Christ’s Atonement, Prophetic Order, and Consecrated ServiceHave you ever felt caught in a storm—not just in the weather, but in life itself? Trials, grief, injustice, confusion, or even the weight of others’ harmful choices can leave us stranded, unsure where to turn.

In his powerful General Conference address, The Atonement of Jesus Christ Provides the Ultimate Rescue, Elder Quentin L. Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles testifies that Jesus Christ stands ready to rescue each of us through His infinite Atonement. But Elder Cook’s message doesn’t stop there. Drawing on the moving history of the Willie and Martin handcart companies, he reminds us that prophetic leadership and covenant discipleship are vital parts of the Lord’s rescue plan.

As we study Doctrine and Covenants 41–44 this week, we see these same principles in action:

The order of revelation through a living prophet protects and unifies the Saints (D&C 43:1–7).
The law of consecration invites us to participate in Christ’s rescuing work—not through compulsion, but through love and covenant commitment (D&C 42:30–42).

In a world that often questions the need for prophetic authority or dismisses commandments as restrictive, Elder Cook’s testimony offers a bold counterpoint: these divine patterns are not control—they are the very means by which Christ’s rescue reaches us.

So how can we better understand the Atonement’s power, recognize the blessing of order in revelation, and willingly join Christ’s mission to lift and rescue others?

Let’s explore.

Apologetic Issues: The Atonement, Prophetic Leadership, and Covenant RescueQuestion: “Why does the Church claim that only the President of the Church can receive revelation for the whole Church? Shouldn’t everyone be free to receive revelation for the group, just as they do for their own lives?”

Response: The doctrine of prophetic authority protects against confusion and division within Christ’s Church. The Lord revealed in Doctrine and Covenants 43:1–7 that only the designated prophet receives revelation for the entire body of Saints, ensuring unity, order, and clarity. Elder Quentin L. Cook’s recounting of the Willie and Martin handcart rescue illustrates this principle in action: it was Brigham Young’s prophetic leadership and timely call to action that saved hundreds of lives.

This divine pattern mirrors biblical precedent (e.g., Moses leading Israel, Peter guiding the early Christian church). It is not about silencing personal revelation but about recognizing different stewardship roles: personal revelation for individual lives and families, prophetic revelation for the Church at large.

Common Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion (Emotional Reasoning)

This argument often appeals to feelings of fairness or personal offense (“Why can’t I receive revelation for the Church too?”), but emotional discomfort is not evidence against true principles. Feelings alone cannot substitute for the divine order established by Christ. Correct reasoning recognizes that unity requires clear channels of authority, which in this case are established by revelation, not human preference.

Solution: Prophetic leadership is not about limiting revelation—it is about providing order to revelation. It ensures that the Church can act decisively and in unity, especially when lives (physical or spiritual) are at stake.

Question: “Doesn’t the law of consecration mean the Church controls people’s money and resources? Isn’t this just religious socialism?”

Response: The law of consecration is not about control—it is about voluntary covenant partnership in the Lord’s work. As taught in Doctrine and Covenants 42:30–42, consecration allows members to willingly dedicate their resources to help care for the poor and advance the Lord’s purposes.

Elder Cook’s talk highlights how the rescue of the handcart companies required the Saints to give freely of their resources—mule teams, wagons, flour, time, and labor. This was not imposed by force but invited by prophetic call and met with love and generosity. Likewise, consecration today is about choosing to be part of the Savior’s mission to rescue, lift, and bless others.

Common Fallacy: Straw Man

This criticism misrepresents the law of consecration as coercive socialism (the Straw Man Fallacy) by ignoring its voluntary, covenantal nature. The truth is that consecration respects agency and emphasizes willing sacrifice out of love, not forced redistribution. Correct understanding restores the principle’s beauty and sacred intent.

Solution: Rather than exploitation, consecration reflects Christlike love and stewardship. It offers an antidote to selfishness and inequality, creating opportunities for collective care and shared spiritual growth.

Apologetic Application: The Atonement of Jesus Christ and the Law of Consecration—Rescue Rooted in Covenant LoveElder Quentin L. Cook’s talk powerfully teaches that the Atonement of Jesus Christ is the ultimate rescue—but the Lord’s rescue plan also calls on us to participate through covenant living.

Core Doctrine: The Atonement of Jesus Christ empowers both personal salvation and covenant community rescue. Through the Atonement, Christ rescues us not only from sin and death (see Mosiah 15:8–9; Alma 34:16) but also invites us into His work of healing and lifting others (see Doctrine and Covenants 42:30–42). The law of consecration is a covenantal expression of this doctrine—it aligns our hearts with the Savior’s mission to “remember the poor” and to be His hands in the rescue.

Defending Core Beliefs:1⃣ Misconception: The Church uses commandments like consecration to control its members. Clarification: The law of consecration is not coercion—it is an invitation to Christlike partnership. As Elder Cook describes the handcart rescue, no one was forced to give wagons, food, or labor. The Saints responded to prophetic counsel willingly because they understood that participating in rescue is part of discipleship. Likewise, the Atonement calls each of us to act, not merely to receive.

2⃣ Misconception: Revelation doesn’t need to be centralized in one leader. Clarification: Without order, the rescue would fail. The Willie and Martin rescue succeeded because the Saints responded to the prophetic call of Brigham Young, following the divinely appointed process revealed in Doctrine and Covenants 43:1–7. This pattern mirrors the Atonement itself—Christ is the one authorized Mediator between God and man (see 1 Timothy 2:5). Likewise, prophetic leadership ensures unity and direction in the collective work of salvation.

Application for Clarifying Misunderstandings:This doctrine helps correct the narrative that commandments and prophetic guidance are about control. Instead, they are how Christ organizes His rescue mission—they empower us to act in harmony, with purpose, and in love. Rather than limiting agency, covenant commitments like consecration amplify our ability to serve meaningfully, making us partners in Christ’s redemptive work.

Practical Apologetic Use:When questions arise about prophetic authority or commandments being “too controlling,” this doctrine offers a simple, powerful reply:

The Lord’s rescue is both personal and collective. Commandments like consecration and the pattern of prophetic leadership are not control—they are how Christ extends His Atonement into the lives of others through us.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsThroughout scripture and the history of the Restoration, the Lord’s rescue of His people has followed a consistent pattern: divine authority, covenant commitment, and collective action under prophetic leadership. Elder Quentin L. Cook’s message in “The Atonement of Jesus Christ Provides the Ultimate Rescue” echoes these sacred patterns, reminding us that the Savior’s Atonement empowers both personal deliverance and community rescue—and that such rescue is always organized by divine law.

Contextual Background:In 1856, the Willie and Martin handcart companies found themselves stranded on the plains, facing starvation and death. Their survival depended on timely rescue, inspired by prophetic direction. Brigham Young’s leadership, calling on the Saints to consecrate their resources and act immediately, reflected the same divine order the Lord established in ancient Israel under Moses, and later in Christ’s early Church under Peter.

Elder Cook emphasizes that the pattern of prophetic leadership and willing discipleship is not a relic of the past—it is the way the Lord continues to govern and care for His people today.

Doctrinal Connections:This week’s Come, Follow Me lesson in Doctrine and Covenants 41–44 reinforces the same principles Elder Cook highlights:

The Lord declares that “he that receiveth my law and doeth it, the same is my disciple” (D&C 41:5).
Revelation for the Church is to come through one appointed—to prevent confusion and maintain unity (D&C 43:1–7).
The law of consecration, taught in D&C 42:30–42, calls each Saint to willingly dedicate time, talents, and means to lift the poor and carry forward the Lord’s work.

These doctrines affirm that the Atonement is not only about being rescued—it is about being called to participate in the rescue.

By aligning ourselves with prophetic counsel and covenant living, we become instruments in Christ’s hands, part of His loving and ordered plan to redeem, heal, and save.

Living Apologetics: Becoming Part of the Rescue Principle: How can we help others understand that commandments, consecration, and prophetic leadership are not about control—but about participating in Christ’s rescue mission?

Key Principle:Elder Quentin L. Cook teaches that the Atonement of Jesus Christ provides the ultimate rescue—and we are invited to assist in that rescue through willing sacrifice, covenant commitment, and heeding prophetic guidance.

Practical Application1⃣ Reframe Criticism as a Question of Purpose, Not Power: When someone asks, “Why does the prophet have to make the decisions?” respond with:

“In any rescue operation, success depends on clear leadership and willing hearts. Prophetic leadership is how the Lord ensures that the rescue happens—on time and in order.”Draw on Elder Cook’s example of the Willie and Martin handcart rescue where Brigham Young’s call was essential.

2⃣ Clarify the Covenant Nature of Consecration: When faced with, “Isn’t consecration just a religious form of socialism?” explain:

“Consecration is about love, not control. It’s not about being forced—it’s about choosing to join Christ in blessing and rescuing others.”Use the handcart rescuers as a real-life analogy of consecration in action.

Faith in Action: Share the Message 1. Family Conversation: Talk with your family about what it means to “join the rescue.” Discuss how commandments like consecration and prophetic guidance are invitations to partner with Christ—not restrictions.

2. Teaching Moment: When teaching Come, Follow Me or giving a talk, use the handcart rescue as a parallel to D&C 42–44. Emphasize the importance of order, revelation, and covenant service in both personal and collective salvation.

3. Personal Testimony in Conversations: When questions arise about Church leadership or commandments, share your own experience of finding peace, purpose, and joy through following prophetic counsel and participating in consecrated service.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses and Facts The Atonement of Jesus Christ is the ultimate rescue—commandments and covenants are how we participate in that rescue. Commandments like consecration are not control—they are Christ’s invitation to join Him in lifting others. (D&C 42:30–42)

Prophetic leadership ensures unity and effective action in the Lord’s work. Revelation for the Church comes through one appointed (the prophet), providing clarity and order in Christ’s rescue mission. (D&C 43:1–7)

Willing consecration reflects covenant love, not coercion. The handcart rescue demonstrates how prophetic direction and freely given sacrifice work together to save lives—physically and spiritually. Elder Cook’s message ties this historical example to modern discipleship.

Conclusion: The Rescue Is Real—And You Are Called to Be Part of ItElder Quentin L. Cook’s testimony in “The Atonement of Jesus Christ Provides the Ultimate Rescue” offers more than reassurance—it offers an invitation. The Savior’s Atonement is not distant history or abstract doctrine. It is the living, active power that rescues, redeems, and restores.

But Elder Cook reminds us that this rescue is not meant to be a solo mission. The Lord calls us—through prophetic leadership and covenant commandments like consecration—to participate in the rescue of others. Whether offering spiritual strength, emotional support, or physical aid, we are invited to reflect Christ’s love through action.

As we study Doctrine and Covenants 41–44 this week, we see how the Lord governs His Church with order, unity, and purpose—so that His work of healing can move forward without confusion. Prophetic guidance and covenant discipleship are not restrictions—they are the structure through which Christ’s rescue reaches hearts, homes, and the whole world.

So the question remains: How is the Lord asking you to join His rescue mission today? Whom might He be calling you to lift, to love, to remember?

“The Atonement of Jesus Christ provides the ultimate rescue from the trials we face in this life.” (Elder Quentin L. Cook, April 2025 General Conference)

The post The Ultimate Rescue: How the Atonement, Prophetic Leadership, and Covenant Living Work Together to Save appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The second coming of Jesus Christ (D&C sections 29, 43, 45, 116, 133)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Elder John A. Widtsoe of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave some important cautions on interpreting prophecies of future events; see “Evidences and Reconciliations XXXII: To What Extent May Prophecy Be Interpreted?,” Improvement Era 43, no. 12 (December 1940): 737, 765, 767.
In his October 1992 General Conference address, “To Be Learned Is Good If…,” Elder Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve warned against those within the Church who preach of an impending gathering of the saints due to some catastrophe. Such people persist in the Church today, and many recent, popular books continue to teach these types of false messages.

(Skip to the 13:30 mark in Elder Packer’s talk.)

Elder Packer taught:

“There are some among us now who have not been regularly ordained by the heads of the Church and who tell of impending political and economic chaos, the end of the world—something of the ‘sky is falling, chicken licken’ of the fables. They are misleading members to gather to colonies or cults.

“Those deceivers say that the Brethren do not know what is going on in the world or that the Brethren approve of their teaching but do not wish to speak of it over the pulpit. Neither is true. The Brethren, by virtue of traveling constantly everywhere on earth, certainly know what is going on, and by virtue of prophetic insight are able to read the signs of the times.

“Do not be deceived by them—those deceivers. If there is to be any gathering, it will be announced by those who have been regularly ordained and who are known to the Church to have authority.”

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 29, 43, 45, 116, 133 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

An Act of Faithby Autumn Dickson

This week, we run into a big announcement for the Saints.

Doctrine and Covenants 37:3-4

3 And again, a commandment I give unto the church, that it is expedient in me that they should assemble together at the Ohio, against the time that my servant Oliver Cowdery shall return unto them.

4 Behold, here is wisdom, and let every man choose for himself until I come. Even so. Amen.

The Lord asks His Saints, many of whom are gathered in New York, to pack up and move to Ohio.

I think it’s hard to fathom what a big deal this is. Joseph is a very young man, and he’s imperfect. Even if you believe he’s the prophet, it can be difficult to wonder whether this is truly a commandment from the Lord. In fact, John Whitmer recorded that some people believed Joseph had made it up in order to take advantage of them. Imagine packing up as much as you can, potentially not being able to sell your home, and moving to a place where you’re going to have to build a house and hopefully be able to grow food for your family (because there certainly wasn’t any welfare yet).

This was a really big deal. It was an immense test of faith. These people were being asked to dive headfirst into a body of water that they hadn’t been given many opportunities to test out. The church was so new that there had been relatively few opportunities to exercise your faith up to this point, and going to Ohio was going to take a herculean amount of faith.

Faith experiences

There are different kinds of experiences associated with faith in mortality. I want to look at the experiences of David from the Old Testament in order to differentiate between two specific directions through which we experience faith. By exploring the different ways we can choose to exercise faith, I believe that we can more consciously grow our faith.

In the Old Testament, the Israelites are facing a very scary army. Goliath steps forward as an individual on behalf of this very scary army, and he wants to battle an Israelite. Unfortunately, none of the Israelites want to challenge him. David, a teenage shepherd who came to bring lunch to his brothers, has come forward to King Saul, and he wants to go against Goliath. Saul responds to David with, “You’re really young, and this guy has been a soldier for a really long time.” This is how David responds.

1 Samuel 17:34-35

34 And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father’s sheep, and there came a lion, and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock:

35 And I went out after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his mouth: and when he arose against me, I caught him by his beard, and smote him, and slew him.

In lay terms, David tells Saul that he’s a shepherd who protected his father’s sheep against a lion and a bear. David has fought great battles and been protected by the Lord, and he believes it would be no different in this situation.

In reality, facing the bear and facing Goliath require different approaches to faith.

A low-risk faith

In verse 34, we learn that the lion and bear came to David, and he fought them. I think it’s really key to understand that in this situation, the trouble came to David. He didn’t go out asking for it. He fell into a situation and pleaded with the Lord to save him.

Has difficulty ever come upon you and your need for the Lord was made very apparent and you pleaded for deliverance? Have you ever found yourself in a situation where all of a sudden you were paying really close attention to your prayers and the Lord? The foremost modern day equivalent that I can think of is getting some sickness like cancer.

When I describe this as a “low-risk” faith, I’m not trying to say that bears, lions, and cancers aren’t serious. What I’m trying to say is that in situations like this, it never hurts to try and reach out to a higher power. Having a deep, steady faith can bring you an immense amount of peace in a situation like this. However, there’s not a lot on the line if whatever higher power you believe in doesn’t answer. You’re not going to be any worse off than you were before.

I call this a low-risk faith. Surely you’re showing faith by turning to the Lord, but it’s not requiring much of you because you have nothing to lose in turning to Him. David didn’t ask for the lion and bear to come, but he pleaded with the Lord when they did show up.

A high-risk faith

The situation with Goliath was totally different. David could have gone home and some other Israelite would have been sent in his place to fight Goliath. Stepping up to fight a seasoned soldier of your own accord is different from being forced into a scary situation with wild animals. If Goliath had shown up at David’s doorstep spoiling for a fight with David (and David only) then showing faith and pleading for help would have been low-risk. It wouldn’t have left David worse off to look to a higher power. The level of faith it required to step forward of his own accord was far more immense. People can go their whole lives, pleading with the Lord when it’s low-risk, but never actually stepping forward in an act of higher faith that brings higher rewards.

When David stepped forward to fight Goliath, without anything compelling him to do so, his faith was speaking volumes. His faith was saying, “I know that it was the Lord who delivered me from the lion and bear and not just dumb luck or my immense skill with a slingshot. I know that the Israelites are the Lord’s people and that the Lord wants to protect them. I know that the Lord wants me to step forward to fight him, or at the very least, I know that the Lord will protect me if I choose to do so when no one else will.”

Joseph Smith taught that true faith requires a knowledge of God’s character, and I believe that teaching is so evident here.

It would have been easy for David to wonder if the Lord really wanted to protect His people or whether David was going to end up as collateral damage in a war that the Israelites were meant to lose. It would have been easy to wonder if the Lord was busy doing something else. It would have been easy to wonder if the Lord truly wanted David to do this thing or if David was doing something stupid by stepping up.

But David knew the character of the Lord, and he stepped forward in faith of his own accord.

Let’s pull it back into the situation of the Saints. The difference would be equivalent to one of the Saints losing their home and trusting the Lord to help them find something new in comparison to voluntarily leaving behind a good thing for the unknown because the prophet told you to. The potential for doubts is staggering. Is Joseph really a prophet? Did Joseph get the revelation wrong and only Joseph is supposed to go to Ohio or do they really all need to go? Does God really care about them and will He truly take care of them?

There are going to be situations in your life where darkness comes upon you and you reach out to the Lord for help. These kinds of faith-situations are really important. These kinds of situations help you build your faith as you choose to see the Lord’s hand stepping in to help. These kinds of situations also call upon you to believe that the Lord still loves you and is going to make things okay, even if it’s not in the direction that you want it to be.

On the flip side, there will be situations where the Lord is going to ask you to step into the dark. Maybe others have had different experiences, but for me, these can feel scarier. Even when I truly believe that the Lord loves me, I wonder whether I’m hearing Him correctly or whether I’m just putting myself into a bad situation for funsies.

When I chose to get married, I wasn’t sure the path was going to bring me happiness and I felt like the Lord was rather quiet on the subject when I wanted undeniable confirmation that I was making a choice that would bring me joy. When we moved to Virginia, it was easy to wonder whether we had left something really good behind in favor of living in a hotel for three months with three kids. Had the Lord asked us to do it or was it all made up in my mind? When I chose to do this blog because I thought He was asking me to, it was easy to wonder whether this is really what He wanted or whether I was simply investing immense amounts of time into something that the Lord hadn’t actually asked for.

We have different lessons to learn here on earth that call for different kinds of faith. Sometimes the Lord quietly presents us with opportunities to step forward into the dark, trusting that He will be there, and when we choose to jump, the rewards are immense. David defeated a mighty soldier, saved the Israelites, and set himself up to become king. That’s no small thing.

They say that higher risks can reap greater rewards. There have been plenty of times in my life where I felt like I was taking great risks in trusting the Lord, but I have learned that with the Lord, it’s not really a high risk. I’ve learned that even when I’m mistaken in my understanding of what He wants me to do, He’s not going to respond with, “Whoops. That sucks for you. That wasn’t what I was asking.” He loves me. I may find myself in greater difficulty, but I will never truly lose if I’m actively trying to follow Him. He knows my heart. He knows I want to do what He wants me to do, and that’s enough for Him.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 37–40 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Left to Inquireby Autumn Dickson

David Whitmer, one of the three witnesses of The Book of Mormon, is chastened in one of the sections that we read for this week. He had listened to Hiram Page who had been receiving false revelations, and the Lord spoke with him regarding this. His response can be helpful because we have all been in David’s shoes to one extent or another.

Doctrine and Covenants 30:2-3

2 But your mind has been on the things of the earth more than on the things of me, your Maker, and the ministry whereunto you have been called; and you have not given heed unto my Spirit, and to those who were set over you, but have been persuaded by those whom I have not commanded.

3 Wherefore, you are left to inquire for yourself at my hand, and ponder upon the things which you have received.

Though many of us aren’t currently tempted to fall prey to the false revelations given by Hiram Page, we do often find ourselves in situations that are similar enough to David. I want to go through some experiences that I’ve had that are similar to David, and I want to tell you about this experience by exploring phrases taught in these verses. Though I’m giving a specific, personal example, the principles are what matter and they can be widely applied to many different circumstances.

One modern equivalent

Lehi’s dream has been on my mind recently. There are many interpretations of the great and spacious building, the foremost being pride. I’ve been pondering an additional interpretation. Let’s look at details surrounding Lehi’s dream so that we can explore parallels. The building resided above the earth, in the air, suggesting that it’s not a physical place on the earth. There were a ton of people in the building, and they were well-dressed and mocking and pointing their fingers at those who were partaking of the love of God. Those who paid attention to the mocking became ashamed and fell away, and those who “heeded them not” continued partaking of the love of God.

I’ve been thinking about what a great metaphor the great and spacious building is for social media. Social media is not a physical place. Though the social media culture has partially changed, we still find a majority of people dressed in their best, showcasing the most glamorous parts of their lives. We obviously find plenty of mocking and pointing of fingers. I’ve also noticed that social media can sometimes bring my mind down to an earthly level as well as persuading me to listen to those who aren’t called by the Lord.

And therein lies my experience that can leave me in a similar position to David. Because I post LDS content, the algorithm for my instagram often sends me into LDS accounts as well as anti-LDS accounts. Sometimes I don’t even have to be exploring instagram to find the anti-material. It finds me as people comment on the posts that I make. There were two phrases the Lord used to describe David that also apply to me when I find myself paying heed to the negative on social media.

Whenever I find myself paying too much attention to social media (specifically the negative), I find myself relating quite closely to David.

your mind has been on the things of the earth more than on the things of me

you have not given heed unto my Spirit, and to those who were set over you, but have been persuaded by those whom I have not commanded

Heaven knows social media can be a terrible influence on me. It pushes me to focus on things of little consequence, and I have very consciously observed my overall life-satisfaction dipping. Social media also takes eternal realities and tries forcing them into earthly perspectives where they don’t belong. I also find plenty of people who haven’t been commanded by the Lord, and it gets confusing.

So what do we do when we have found ourselves in a similar situation to David? Let’s look at the rest of the Lord’s response.

Left to inquire

The Lord warns David of some of the patterns that David has fallen into, and then the Lord responds to it.

Wherefore, you are left to inquire for yourself at my hand, and ponder upon the things which you have received.

When viewed from an earthly perspective, this response can seem dismissive or potentially even angry. After becoming a parent, I have learned that it’s anything but.

This is an extremely simplistic example, but I’m going to share it anyway. My son hates wearing shoes. This doesn’t tend to be a problem in the summer as his feet grow accustomed to burning hot concrete, but he can’t seem to get his bare feet accustomed to snow insert sarcastic surprise. He has a little friend who lives one house down from us, and we usually let the kids run wild between the two houses. I’ve told him to put shoes on, but I don’t force him to. He usually does okay running back and forth in the winter because it doesn’t snow often. However, one day he decided to run to his friend’s house with no shoes on even though the ground was covered in snow. I was upstairs tending to some other kids when I heard screaming outside. I ran downstairs, opened the door, and he was painfully walking back to our house (friend wasn’t home) through the snow with bare feet. I threw on my own shoes, picked him up, and brought him inside.

I have told Warner to put shoes on, and he has had a lot of experiences where he’s ignored me and regretted it and listened and found favorable outcomes. He’s also had experience with snow. He has received information. I could try to force his hand by getting a deadbolt on the front door, but that would take away from other conscious parenting choices I’ve made to let the kid play outside when he wants to.

So I leave him with the information I’ve given him, and he can think about it and come and ask me if he has questions. Sometimes that means a tough lesson, but that lesson is pretty powerful.

It’s not a perfectly parallel analogy, but I do think enough of the details line up.

Heavenly Father has told us to not pay heed to the mocking and finger-pointing. In this particular section, He admonishes David for getting caught up in the world and listening to those He hasn’t called.

Unfortunately, social media is less simplistic than snow. Social media and snow both have their pros, cons, and wise utilization, but unfortunately, social media also has a confusion factor. When we get caught up in social media, we often find ourselves asking, well who has really been commanded by the Lord? Who has the truth?

I’ve had experiences with social media. Not all of them are bad, but there have been times when doubt and confusion have felt overwhelming. And so as the Lord suggests, I ponder. As I ponder and try to include the Lord, my mind is lifted above the earthly things and I remember that my experiences with the Lord have been every bit as real as the fear I’ve experienced coming across things that don’t make sense. As I keep pondering, sometimes the Lord lifts my vision and shifts my perspective to where things make sense. Other times, He doesn’t. But that doesn’t make any of the other experiences I’ve had with Him unreal. Having a limited understanding or coming across accounts of history that can’t be unequivocally resolved does not invalidate the experiences you’ve had with the Lord.

And if you don’t know whether you’ve had an experience with the Lord, then there’s no reason you can’t seek out that relationship now.

I testify that the Lord works through His prophets. I testify that this is a system He has utilized to work with His children throughout the history of the earth. I believe this because I have been able to speak with my Heavenly Father and receive answers from Him through the words of modern day prophets. Those experiences are tremendously real and valid; those experiences are the reason I stay.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 30-36 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

I Am In Your Midstby Autumn Dickson

There is a lot of doctrine covered in Doctrine and Covenants 29. I absolutely love it. It ranges from the Millennium to agency and all over the board. There are so many things that caught my attention that are meaningful to me but alas, let’s talk about just one of the principles. Before I jump into the verse, I want to give some background to explain why it caught my attention.

I remember going to this HUGE regional youth conference as a senior in high school. It included a big cultural celebration, and we rented out a big stadium to perform in. There was dancing and singing. It was all a ton of fun.

I also remember a little rumor going around about the prophet coming because it was such a huge conference, and I remember lots of people whispering excitedly about it. I’m not sure if the prophet had ever planned on coming or if someone had just gotten a little ahead of themselves and it got spread around as a rumor. If I am remembering correctly, I feel like it was a real possibility; I feel like we were waiting to get word on whether he would actually be able to make it, but I could be wrong. It’s been over a decade since that time and I’ve had five kids so pardon my memory. I do remember that people started praying for him to show up, and I remember whispering excitedly about how cool it would be if he did.

I also remember the moment we learned that he wasn’t going to be coming and the general feeling of disappointment that followed.

Now, I had the unique opportunity of welcoming the youth to the conference and giving the opening prayer for the conference, and I was told about this unique opportunity right before actually doing the welcoming. I didn’t know what to say, but I did know that everyone was feeling pretty disappointed that President Monson wasn’t going to make it. Luckily, the Spirit stepped in and helped me know what to say; I also learned something pretty significant from this little experience.

I acknowledged the disappointment that we all felt over the prophet not being able to come, and then the Spirit helped me testify that even though he couldn’t make it, the Savior would be there to watch us perform and be with us. The following verse reminded me of this experience.

Doctrine and Covenants 29:5 Lift up your hearts and be glad, for I am in your midst, and am your advocate with the Father; and it is his good will to give you the kingdom.

Doctrine and Covenants 29 was given in the company of six other elders. It wasn’t some huge conference, but the Savior told these men that He was in their midst. The Savior claims to be with His saints frequently throughout the Doctrine and Covenants. Do we believe that or do we mentally skip over phrases like that because they feel trite? When He claims to be in our midst, what does that mean to us?

Excitement over the prophet

I want to momentarily jump back to the excitement that all of us felt over the prospect of the prophet visiting our gigantic youth conference.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to meet the prophet and wanting to be around him. There is a reason we love our prophet. In so many ways, it’s not really about President Hinckley or Monson or Nelson. It’s about what they represent. They represent the fact that the heavens are opened again, the priesthood power to perform binding ordinances are on the earth, and the Lord is directing His church. We love our prophet because of the symbol that he is to our faith.

We get excited about General Conference and the revelation we’re going to receive. When my companion and I walked out of the MTC cafeteria, we saw Elder Holland and literally froze in our tracks. He shook our hands before rushing on to get to his next appointment, and we were so excited about it. If I saw President Nelson tomorrow, I would be super excited even as an adult.

And yet, when the Savior claims to be in the presence of His Saints, what does that mean to us?

I think the main reason it’s easier to get excited about shaking the hand of a prophet vs. picturing the Savior near us is the difficulty level. It requires far more effort to get to the point where you truly believe He is with you. And once you reach that point, it still takes effort to feel Him and hear Him and engage yourself in speaking to Him.

But oh my goodness…it’s so worth it.

The primary answers

So how do we bring Him into our midst? How do we trust Him when He says that He is already there? How do we start to take advantage of the fact that the Savior really is here with us?

Honestly, I think the most powerful tools we have are the basic tools He gave us. We do the primary answers of praying, reading your scriptures, and going to church.

We often talk about how it can be hard to make sure you’re reading your scriptures and praying. We talk about how it’s hard to develop those habits, and I’ve heard it expressed that we should stop putting so much pressure on people who are already feeling a ton of pressure to accomplish everything. I agree that pressure is often unhelpful, but I don’t think I agree with the sentiment that we should stop striving for daily habits. They are simply too valuable.

Sometimes I shy away from pushing those habits because I know that those kinds of things are easy for me. I’m good at habits. I love reading and writing. I grew up in a family where those habits were emphasized. One of my biggest time consumers other than my kids (i.e. blog, podcast, YouTube) is literally pushing me to seek Him out on a daily basis. It occasionally feels insensitive for me to advocate for it when it’s not as easy for other people.

But I can’t not testify of these things. They hold too much power. I know exactly what you get when you invite the Savior into your midst regularly with scripture study and prayer.

Because it’s not going to be enough to just do them. Eventually, we have to get to the point where we’re doing it in a manner that effectively fulfills our purpose – being with the Savior. It’s not about reading for long enough or praying for long enough; it’s about whether you truly communed with Him.

Communing with Him can be even harder than crossing these small things off of a checklist. It’s harder to spiritually strive for those things. It’s harder to constantly re-engage when it feels like the whole world is trying to distract you from it. It’s harder to keep spiritually engaging when you feel like you’re not getting much in return, but if you do the primary answers while neglecting their purpose, then you’re much less likely to find the rewards and you will most definitely find yourself prioritizing them less and less.

He can tell us that He’s in our midst all He wants. He can sit with us while we take the sacrament. He can place His hand on our shoulder in our darkest moments. He can enjoy the simple moments in life right alongside us, but it won’t matter if we don’t believe it.

Utilizing the primary answers to practice communing with Him enables us to believe Him when He says He’s in our midst. And when you believe that you have the Savior with you, it changes everything.

I remember a time on my mission when things felt incredibly heavy. My companion was in the shower so I had some very rare alone time. I sat in the dark living room of our apartment, prayed, and I felt Him with me. He didn’t try to “fix” things. I didn’t get any answers. He wasn’t telling me to have more faith. He mourned with me.

I think about getting caught up in the daily stresses of my life. I wonder about where my family is going to end up, how to protect my kids from the scary influences in the world, the list goes on and on and on. But (almost) every day, I sit down and I type out a prayer and when I do it right, I remember how the Savior and His promises touch everything I write down. I’m worried about where we’re going to end up? When I picture Him with me, it’s much easier to remember that it doesn’t really matter. I have a beautiful, perfect, eternal home where I can stay forever. I’m worried about my kids? He can guide me to protect them and heal them. He can remind me to be grateful when they’re challenged because it’s so healthy to be challenged. He knows where they’re at and how to help them.

Investing in primary answers, to the extent that you open your eyes to how the Savior is in your midst, will remove so many mental obstacles from your path. It will lift you. It will help you feel legitimately grateful for where you’re at in life. It will help you feel secure when the world is scary. It will empower you to accomplish so much more. Truly investing in primary answers with purpose brings the Savior into your midst, and that changes everything.

I testify of a Savior who wants to be with you. He wants to lift you. He wants you to feel powerful enough to overcome obstacles. He wants to help you believe in yourself when the obstacle feels too big. I testify of a Savior who gave us very simple tools to open our eyes so that we can see Him with us.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 29 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Embracing Prophetic Leadership and Our Divine ResponsibilitiesAs we approach another General Conference, have you ever wondered what opportunities lie ahead for us as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

In his powerful address, Days Never to Be Forgotten, Elder Gary E. Stevenson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles invites us to contemplate both the remarkable early days of the Restoration and the prophetic potential of the coming decade. As he recounts the foundational miracles of the Church and looks forward to unparalleled opportunities, he challenges each of us to embrace our divinely appointed responsibilities as disciples of Jesus Christ.

With General Conference approaching and Easter just around the corner, this message becomes particularly applicable. How can we prepare our hearts and minds to make these sacred gatherings “days never to be forgotten”? How can we step forward with the faith of early Saints and the boldness of modern disciples?

Apologetic Issues: Divinely Appointed ResponsibilitiesCriticism: The Church places too much emphasis on strict obedience and structured service, limiting personal freedom and individual thought.Response: Following divine counsel enhances our capacity to live purposefully and develop Christlike attributes.The doctrine of divinely appointed responsibilities teaches that living the gospel of Jesus Christ, caring for those in need, inviting others to receive the gospel, and uniting families for eternity are not about restricting freedom but about developing Christlike attributes and living with purpose and joy. Elder Stevenson emphasizes that these responsibilities are opportunities to draw closer to God and serve others, rather than burdens to bear.

Like the early Saints who followed Joseph Smith’s prophetic leadership, modern disciples who follow President Nelson’s inspired counsel can experience greater spiritual strength and confidence. Prophetic guidance is not a matter of coercion but an invitation to actively participate in God’s work.

Solution: Faithful discipleship is not about relinquishing freedom but about choosing to follow Christ and embracing the joy that comes from committed, purposeful living.Common Fallacy: False DichotomyThis misconception presents a False Dilemma Fallacy by suggesting that one must choose between obedience to divine guidance and personal freedom. In reality, following prophetic counsel does not eliminate autonomy; it enhances personal growth and spiritual resilience. Choosing to follow a prophet is not about submitting to control but about embracing a higher purpose guided by eternal truths.

Apologetic Application: Prophetic Leadership and Divine GuidanceElder Gary E. Stevenson’s talk highlights three essential ways that prophetic leadership guides disciples of Christ in modern times:

1⃣ Clarity of Purpose: Prophets help us understand God’s will for our day, just as President Nelson’s counsel provides clear guidance during turbulent times. His leadership, even at 100 years old, exemplifies the strength and clarity that come from divine appointment.

2⃣ Confidence in Spiritual Direction: Following prophetic guidance does not limit personal agency; rather, it enhances our spiritual growth and resilience. By aligning our lives with inspired counsel, we build upon the rock of Christ and withstand the storms of doubt and confusion.

3⃣ Continuity of Revelation: Just as Joseph Smith was chosen to restore the gospel, modern prophets continue to receive direction from God. This unbroken line of divine guidance reassures us that the Lord has not left His people without counsel, even in a modern world filled with challenges and distractions.

Real-Life Analogy: Just as GPS navigation continually updates to guide us on our journey, prophetic leadership adapts to our needs without changing core truths. By trusting prophetic guidance, we stay on course even when the road ahead is unfamiliar or uncertain.Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsDuring the foundational decade of the Restoration (1820–1830), the Lord guided His people through Joseph Smith, restoring priesthood authority, divine revelation, and the organization of the Church. Elder Gary E. Stevenson draws a parallel between that unforgettable era and the coming decade (2024–2034), reminding us that prophetic leadership continues to guide us through monumental spiritual opportunities.

Doctrine and Covenants Connection:The Lord emphasized that “all things must be done in order” (D&C 28:2), establishing the principle that revelation and guidance flow through His chosen prophet. Just as Joseph Smith was appointed to receive commandments and revelations, modern prophets like President Russell M. Nelson continue to receive divine guidance to direct the Church today.

By aligning our lives with prophetic counsel, we not only follow an established pattern of divine order but also participate in God’s great work of inviting all to receive the gospel, uniting families for eternity, and serving others. As we look ahead, we can approach the next decade with faith and optimism, knowing that the Lord’s hand remains firmly on the helm.

Living Apologetics: How to Apply This Today How can we help others understand prophetic leadership and divinely appointed responsibilities?

Testify of Prophetic Guidance: Share personal experiences of how following prophetic counsel has brought peace and purpose to your life. Explain that prophetic leadership is not about control but about empowering discipleship and providing spiritual direction.

Teach the Divine Pattern: Use scriptural examples of prophetic guidance—like Moses leading Israel (Exodus 3:10) or Joseph Smith restoring the Church (D&C 27:8)—to demonstrate that God’s pattern has always been to call prophets to lead His people.

Emphasize Joyful Discipleship: Show how living the gospel as guided by prophets enhances spiritual growth and personal joy, rather than diminishing freedom. Encourage others to seek personal revelation alongside prophetic counsel, as both work together to strengthen faith and understanding.

Use Prophetic Leadership as an Apologetic Tool. Many see prophetic leadership as outdated or restrictive, rather than an ongoing source of divine direction. Clarify that prophetic guidance is about aligning with God’s will and receiving timely counsel for our day. Use practical examples like President Nelson’s emphasis on home-centered worship and the focus on building temples worldwide to demonstrate how modern revelation meets modern needs.
Teach the Difference Between Authority and Personal Revelation. When discussing prophetic guidance, explain that while prophets receive revelation for the Church, individuals receive revelation for their personal lives. This distinction helps resolve concerns that prophetic guidance might inhibit personal agency. Highlight how personal revelation complements prophetic counsel, empowering each member to act in faith while staying rooted in divine truths.

Faith in Action: How Can You Share This? 1. Family Discussions: Talk about the blessings of following prophetic counsel during family councils or conversations. Share how President Nelson’s guidance has shaped your spiritual growth and encouraged your family to strengthen their commitment to Christ.

2. Teaching Moments: When teaching a class or giving a talk, use Elder Stevenson’s message to emphasize the importance of divinely appointed responsibilities. Explain how living the gospel, caring for others, inviting to Christ, and uniting families brings lasting joy and spiritual confidence.

3. Testify of Prophetic Leadership: When bearing your testimony or sharing thoughts in church, highlight how trusting in modern prophets has deepened your relationship with God and brought peace during uncertain times.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses 1. Prophetic Leadership is Divinely Appointed — Elder Gary E. Stevenson highlights that age does not diminish prophetic authority, as demonstrated by President Nelson’s continued spiritual vitality and leadership (Newsweek, New York Times).

2. Prophetic Guidance Empowers Growth — Rather than limiting individuality, following prophetic counsel fosters personal discipleship and strengthens faith through living the gospel, caring for others, inviting to Christ, and uniting families (D&C 28:2).

3. Divinely Appointed Responsibilities Bring Joy – 2 Nephi 2:25 — Living the gospel, caring for others, inviting to Christ, and uniting families are pathways to happiness rather than burdens to bear. Embracing these responsibilities brings peace and fulfillment.

Conclusion: Preparing for Easter and General Conference with PurposeElder Gary E. Stevenson’s message is a powerful reminder that we are living in a time of divine opportunity and prophetic guidance. As we look ahead to the next decade—marked by unprecedented chances to share the gospel and strengthen our discipleship—we can find confidence in knowing that God’s hand continues to direct His Church through living prophets.

Just as the foundational decade of the Restoration (1820–1830) transformed the Church and its members, this new decade offers us the chance to rise to our divinely appointed responsibilities: living the gospel, caring for others, inviting to Christ, and uniting families for eternity. These aren’t just tasks—they are pathways to deeper faith and lasting joy.

As we prepare for General Conference and the Easter season, let us remember that glad tidings means good news and great joy—not just for us, but for the world.

How can we better share this message of hope with those around us?

“My beloved brothers and sisters, my dear young friends, there will likely be difficulties for each of us in the days ahead. However, as we enter this coming decade of unprecedented moments, may we share glad tidings through the simple activities of living, caring, inviting, and uniting. As we do so, the Lord will bless us with experiences never to be forgotten.” – Gary E. Stevenson

The post Ours are Days Never to Be Forgotten appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

God Chose a Prophetby Autumn Dickson

We are currently still in the very early days of the church where the Lord is revealing line upon line. Satan is actively working against God’s plan, and he often tries to mimic God to lead people astray. He loves to tell half-truths that seem logical upon first examination.

One of the historical accounts we can read about this week includes supposed revelations that were being received by Hiram Page. Hiram claimed to be receiving revelation for the church on various topics, and many saints believed him.

This was not the first time that priesthood organization needed to be clarified. Oliver Cowdery had once commanded Joseph to change some wording in a revelation because he believed it was in error. I find it especially interesting that when Joseph was seeking revelation on how to handle the issues with Hiram Page, the Lord responded by sending Oliver to Hiram to work it out.

Here is how the Lord clarified His priesthood organization in regards to Hiram Page.

Doctrine and Covenants 28:2 But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee, no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

In other words, the Lord very purposefully works through His prophet to guide His church. Only one man can receive revelation for the entire church at any given time. A bishop can receive revelation for the entire ward. A stake president can receive revelation for the entire stake. A Relief Society president can receive revelation for the women in her ward. Youth leaders, temple presidents, mission presidents, fathers, and mothers all have spiritual jurisdictions.

A lot of people struggle with the idea of one prophet receiving revelation for the entire church, and I’m sure the reasons for this struggle are numerous. However, I believe there are a couple of main ones we can talk about. And though we are covering specific reasons, I believe the principles can be applied to various circumstances and struggles.

Power and manipulation

I think one of the reasons that people struggle with this idea of a prophet is because they’ve seen positions of authority get abused throughout history. It happens politically. It happens in the home. It happens in religious organizations. It even happens in our own church often enough. I’m not specifically talking about the prophet, just leadership in general. We are imperfect people, and we’ve all abused our power to one extent or another.

Viewing it from a perspective of someone who is struggling to believe in a prophet adds additional insight. They see a man who has the power to make any decisions he wants with few consequences. This isn’t a democracy or republic. There is little room for redress when there are perceived wrongs because we believe that the prophet is receiving revelation from the Lord, and so disagreeing with the prophet feels complicated.

I think it’s important to view it from the standpoint of someone who believes differently than you, but I also believe it’s vital to view it from the standpoint of belief as well. There are a couple of principles that can be supremely comforting when you really, truly, deeply believe that the Savior chose to work through a prophet.

Principle One: The Lord had to choose a system of governance

Principle one. The Lord has to work within the framework of an imperfect world. If the world was perfect, systems of governance wouldn’t matter as much. In fact, if the world was perfect and we were all perfect, we wouldn’t need leaders at all. But alas, the Lord just has us and so He has to make decisions about how He’s going to handle that.

The Lord’s purpose was to create a system that would allow His gospel to more fully thrive. He needed the doctrine to stay pure because an accurate knowledge of the character of God and a framework for how to get back to Him is crucial. He needed to be able to send the gospel to all corners of the earth and make sure that the same truth was being taught everywhere.

He chose a prophet and a church with which to do it. Once again, some people struggle with it because there is ample opportunity for spiritual abuse. But let’s explore His alternative option.

Imagine, just for a moment, what things would look like if anyone could receive revelation for the entire church at any time. Imagine what it would look like if anyone could come up to you and tell you that they received revelation that you should do something specific. That sounds infinitely more terrifying in my mind. There may be opportunities for spiritual abuse with one leader, but there are far more opportunities for abuse when anyone can come along and hurt anyone by claiming divine revelation. One mean-spirited person could cause far more heartache in countless lives in comparison to imperfect but well-meaning men. There would be infinitely more opportunities for manipulation and religious abuse.

The Lord was wise in His choice of a prophet as a system of governance, but it doesn’t stop there! The Lord didn’t just say, “Well, all we have is imperfection so good luck!” There are more principles.

Principle Two: Promises

The Lord has given promises regarding His prophet. The foremost promise is that He won’t allow the prophet to lead the church astray. This can be minimally comforting when you think about the fact that this promise came from one of the men who had the power to lead the church astray, but once again, let’s put this in a lens of belief.

You can receive revelation. You can’t receive revelation for anyone; you have a spiritual jurisdiction as well. But you can receive revelation!

Pray about it! Pray and ask the Lord if He called a prophet, and then actually give Him a chance to answer by showing a little faith. Tell the Lord to help you find the answer, to change you so that you’re prepared to receive it. Once you have the assurance that He has called a prophet, it changes how you look at everything else.

When we receive a testimony of that promise (He won’t let the prophet lead the church astray), we can look at things through a lens of faith and that is incredibly powerful. It won’t make sense to the rest of the world that doesn’t hold that same testimony, but that doesn’t really matter. You’ll know the truth, and you’ll know you can trust the Lord, His choices, and His timing.

When things come along that don’t make sense, you don’t have to question everything you believe. You can ask the Lord. You can say to yourself, “I know God is good. I know He loves me. I know – insert testimony here-. I don’t know how it all fits together, but I trust that He does.”

Principle three: The Atonement of Jesus Christ

Now, prophets are imperfect men. That means there has been hurt. That means they don’t do everything perfectly.

How does that make sense? If they make mistakes, how can they not lead the church astray? How can both things be true?

Honestly, I think people take that promise too intensely. That promise doesn’t mean that a prophet will never make a mistake. It means that the Lord can course-correct. He can teach and lead and guide. This is a living church, and the restoration is ongoing. It means we’re headed in the right direction even if we don’t have it all figured out yet.

If that doesn’t sound good enough, then look at your own life.

You’re imperfect, but there is a lot of power in walking towards the right direction. The Lord isn’t trying to make you perfect yet. If His main purpose was to have you perfectly avoid sin, then He wouldn’t send trials or anything that could derail you. Rather, His purpose is your growth which means He’s not as concerned about errors and missteps as some of us are. He just wants to push us in the right direction and gain the growth and wisdom we need. If we keep heading in the right direction, eventually the missteps and errors stop anyway.

I believe it’s the same idea but on a grand scale in the church and the prophet.

Unfortunately, some missteps can cause pain and confusion. The Lord needed to allow us to be imperfect for so many good reasons, but He didn’t say, “Sorry. They’re imperfect. Tough luck.” That’s why God sent more than a prophet. He sent His Son.

Every injustice you suffer will be made up. Every injustice you watch someone else suffer will be made up. It will be more than made up because a Savior chose to come to earth and suffer and die for us. He’s got this. It’s going to work out.

But none of this really matters unless you believe it. It can be the truth, but it won’t bless you unless you know it’s the truth. So ask the Lord.

I’m grateful for a Savior who chooses to be involved in our affairs on the earth. I’m grateful for a Savior who has shown me time and again that I matter to Him, who has shown me that I can trust Him until I reach the point where I’m ready to receive all truth.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 27–28 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Nuances of Baptismby Autumn Dickson

Let’s talk about historical context again quickly so that we can have a reference for what we read this week. Chronologically, Section 21 came before Section 20. Section 21 came on the day the church was organized, and it talks a lot about how Joseph was called as a prophet and the importance of listening to the prophets. Section 20 came in between the day that the church was organized and its first conference held in June. Section 20 had a lot of administrative tasks explained as well as core doctrines that are found in The Book of Mormon. Section 22 came last as people were wondering whether they needed to get rebaptized.

There is actually quite a bit given to us on the subject of baptism this week. One section describes the mode and manner of baptism, and another section describes the need to be baptized with proper authority. Let’s talk about some of the things we can learn about baptism from the revelations we’re covering this week.

He follows us

The first detail I want to talk about comes as the Lord describes how we are to be baptized.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:72-74

72 Baptism is to be administered in the following manner unto all those who repent—

73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

74 Then shall he immerse him or her in the water, and come forth again out of the water.

We know that baptism holds a lot of symbolism. We’re dressed in white. We go down into the water and come back out, symbolizing the death of our old life and becoming new again. It also symbolizes Christ dying and being resurrected. There was one piece of symbolism that I did not previously recognize that was pointed out quite clearly in the previous verses.

The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism…

In order to understand the symbolism, we have to understand the “characters” participating in the baptism. We are representing ourselves (or those who have passed on and cannot do the work themselves), but we are not the only one present in our baptism. There is also a priesthood holder that follows us in.

This priesthood holder is authorized by Jesus Christ to use His authority to bind us to the Savior so that the Savior can legally (in an eternal sense) bind us to Him in a manner that produces salvation. One might even argue that the priesthood holder is a representation of Christ, Himself.

Christ follows us into the water as we choose to make a covenant with Him, as we walk towards the death of our old life. If we were to picture the Savior, with the wounds of His sacrifice still on His resurrected body, walking into the water with us, how would our baptism feel different? It may be a priesthood holder actually standing in the water, but the only reason the priesthood holder is there is because he is holding Christ’s authority to baptize. It’s really Christ who is utilizing power to bind us to Him in a covenant that saves us. The priesthood holder is nothing more than a vessel.

There are a couple of ways this might change how we feel about our baptism.

The first one that comes to my mind is that He is teaching us what the rest of our lives are going to look like because we chose to enter into a covenant relationship with Him. Following us into the water and binding us to Him according to our willingness is a foreshadowing of what our lives can look like. If we keep our willingness to follow Him and allow Him near us, we don’t have to do anything alone anymore.

Christ’s approach to our growth and development is two-pronged. It is wise in the sense that He allows us to suffer, struggle, and figure it out. This is really difficult for many people to swallow, especially when you consider the depths of injustice and despair in the world. But that’s why the second prong of His approach is so important.

The Savior is not asking us to do anything that He has not done Himself. He was already perfect, and so He didn’t need these experiences to figure out how to live happily in an eternal setting. With His sacrifice, He chose to step into that water to feel it firsthand. And then He chooses to be with us as we struggle through those same experiences in our own life.

I am quite adamant in my parenting approach to let my kids struggle through things. I think it’s so critical to their growth. It’s absolutely essential to their becoming a well-adjusted adult. Sometimes this makes my kids feel unsupported and unloved, but that’s far from the case. I do it because I love them.

This is the same with the Savior. He sent us here because He loves us. Our struggle is evidence of His love, not the other way around. But He takes it beyond wisdom. His approach is not, “Go get in those baptismal waters and put yourself under and come back up.” His approach is, “I will follow you where you have to go to get where you need to be.” He follows us into the water and brings us closer to Him. He is willing to follow us the rest of our lives through every “water” we have to walk through.

We have to believe that He’s walking with us and mourning with us, or His sacrifice won’t have much effect. Even though He follows us, it won’t bring much comfort unless we believe it and allow that belief to fill us with the relief He is offering.

Dead works

The next detail about baptism that I want to talk about is found in Section 22. The Saints had not yet grasped the idea of proper authority and so the idea of getting rebaptized confused them. This is how the Lord explained it.

Doctrine and Covenants 22:2 Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.

I understand the need for proper authority, but this verse originally confused me. In my mind, the Lord was telling His people to not trust in dead works. The Israelites used to believe that following the Law of Moses would save them. They didn’t realize that the Law of Moses was supposed to bring them closer to the Savior who would save them. This also makes sense to me.

The part that confused me was the fact that baptism can be considered one of our “works.” He commanded the Israelites to keep the Law of Moses, and He commanded us to be baptized by proper authority. The difference (and the detail I want to expound on) is that one work is “dead” and one work is not.

Performing the work of baptism is different from other commandments (not all commandments, but some of them). It is an essential ordinance. The Savior is the one who saves us, but it is baptism that pulls us into a covenant relationship with Him so that He can save us. This is also why the Lord commands us to perform vicarious ordinances for those who weren’t baptized. Everybody needs to have the work done.

We don’t go out and mow a neighbor’s lawn vicariously for someone else. We don’t follow the Word of Wisdom or pay tithing on behalf of those who didn’t do it in their own lives. There are commandments that are given to us to bring us closer to the Savior so He can save us. Going out and mowing a lawn can help us understand sacrifice and charity. Following the Word of Wisdom can help us have healthy bodies and keep our minds clear and free. Paying tithing allows us to learn how to trust in the Lord. All of these things help us get closer to Christ who will save us, but they are dead in and of themselves.

Baptism obviously brings us closer to the Lord and helps us understand Him, but baptism does more than that. It binds us to Him using His own power and authority. Regular men on earth do not have the power to seal in heaven. They can baptize you with their religious degree or their certifications from their churches, but power given from regular old human to regular old human is not sufficient to bind in heaven. Only the Savior can give that kind of power.

In this manner, when we die, that baptism has the ability to follow us into heaven where the Savior still holds power. It keeps us bound to Him on both sides of the veil because the Savior holds enough power to accomplish that, and He lends that power to us. It’s still His power.

Baptism (and other covenant-entering ordinances) are essential. They are literally binding us to the Savior. That’s why the Lord treats that commandment differently than other dead, Law-of-Moses type commandments.

This also enlightens us as to why we should never tear down baptisms that are done without proper authority. I once heard a missionary describe someone’s baptism into another church as an abomination. It went over well (sarcasm).

The Lord did describe these works as dead because they were done without proper authority. However, He also described the Law of Moses (the one that He specifically gave to His people) as dead. He’s not saying that it’s worthless. He gave the Law of Moses so that the Israelites could draw closer to Him and become ready to receive Him. Baptism into other Christian churches holds that same ability. They can (and often do) bring people closer to Christ and help them become ready to receive Him more fully. There’s no reason to ever tear down someone’s decision to try and draw closer to Christ.

I testify of a Heavenly Father who set up a perfect Plan of Salvation. I testify that His words are so consistent. I have often run into ideas, stories, and words that I did not originally understand. There have been times when I have found myself confused about details or things that didn’t seem congruent with what I understood of a loving Heavenly Father. I have also learned that as I choose to be patient, new understanding comes to my mind and clarifies what I didn’t yet know. The more I study the gospel, in all of its rich details, the more I understand the character of my Heavenly Father and Savior.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 20–22 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Ron C. Rhodes

Critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints aggressively publish negative information about the Church in large volumes. This article explores the facts to determine if the critics of our faith are coming from a place of honesty and integrity, without disparaging individuals. The goal of the paper is to help members become better inoculated against misinformation, and to use faithful resources such as those found on FAIR to answer their questions about the Church.

Modern LDS Critics – Credibility or Contempt?

In a court of law, witnesses matter. A witness’s testimony can hold the power to either convict or exonerate an individual. There are instances, however, when a witness’s testimony is not credible. Perhaps they have lied under oath previously, or perhaps they have an ax to grind against the defendant. In such cases, a skilled attorney will seek to expose these vulnerabilities, helping the jury or the court disregard unreliable testimony.

Similarly, there are organizations set up specifically to witness against the Church by spreading accusations, particularly on social media. At present, the top two critical organizations have published over 4,800 videos on platforms like YouTube, the majority of which present negative portrayals of the Church. For many individuals encountering these claims, particularly when they are already navigating complex personal circumstances, the resulting distress can be overwhelming

Thankfully, the Lord has provided us with a prophet to guide us in these latter days. In a 2015 General Conference address, President Nelson warned: “Attacks against the Church, its doctrine, and our way of life are going to increase. Because of this, we need [members] who have a bedrock understanding of the doctrine of Christ and who will use that understanding to teach and help raise a sin-resistant generation. We need [members] who can detect deception in all of its forms.”[1]

Detecting deception requires more than just investigating individual accusations. The Lord has also blessed us with the gift of discernment, which can guide us in making sound judgments based on the credibility of the source. To be clear, critics are children of God. They are our brothers and sisters, and we are called to love and pray for them. This love, however, does not obligate us to unquestioningly accept the content they produce. Like everything else in life, we are encouraged to exercise discernment and critically evaluate the credibility of those presenting information, particularly information about our faith that can impact our lives so dramatically.

Most of the accusations leveled against the Church—on topics ranging from polygamy, the translation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and Freemasonry, to Church finances and the Book of Abraham—originate from critics. By virtue of their public dissemination of thousands of videos on these subjects, critics imply they have the credentials and the credibility to provide this data accurately, but is that actually the case?

While we cannot know the hearts of others, one’s behavior can be an illuminating window into one’s integrity and character. With that, let’s consider some well-documented actions of a few of the most prominent critics of the Church. For the sake of anonymity, we will not name individuals but will only highlight their behaviors:

Physical Threats Against Church Leaders: The top critical organization, with over 2200 videos on YouTube alone, published an episode in which a guest openly threatened physical violence against Dallin H. Oaks.[2] While it is true that a podcast host cannot control everything a guest says, they do have the power to edit out offensive material or choose not to publish it. Unfortunately, the host/CEO, a former member of the Church, did neither, and instead aired it publicly. Ironically, this video was published in direct opposition to their own mission statement, which is to “promote understanding, healing, growth, and community for people experiencing or impacted by religious transition”. An appropriate question might be: Can an organization with this level of contempt for the Church and its leaders be trusted to provide accurate information about the Church?
Contempt for Sacred Institutions: The same host also praised a guest who boasted of attempting to sneak an adult film star into a temple to make a pornographic film for money[3]—an act that demonstrates not only disrespect for the sacred nature of the temple but also a disregard for the deeply held beliefs of millions of faithful members. This kind of behavior is troubling particularly when these individuals are held by many as reliable sources of information on the Church.
Promotion of Illegal Activity: The CEO of another critical organization with over 2,400 videos appeared in an episode in which he promoted the use of illegal drugs, likening the experience to feeling the Spirit.[4] This type of content, which was made publicly available on YouTube, should be deeply concerning to all viewers, regardless of their religious affiliations. When individuals seeking to present themselves as experts on Church history engage in such behaviors, their credibility as impartial sources becomes highly questionable. Should they not be held to a higher standard?
Financial Misrepresentation: One critical organization, in a public video, misrepresented their financial situation by presenting revenue figures that were significantly lower than what they had reported to the IRS.[5] This misrepresentation to their followers—those who trust and support their work financially—raises serious concerns about their ethical standards. Would an organization that is willing to misrepresent facts to their own followers have any issue misrepresenting facts about Church history?
Profiting from Disrespect: The second largest organization sells vile merchandise via their online gift shop that mocks God and Jesus Christ, as well as products that denigrate the tokens of the holy priesthood by placing them on a t-shirt or a mug.[6] Knowing the sacred nature of these symbols to millions of members, these critical organizations not only demonstrate a lack of respect for the faith of others but also undermine their own integrity.
Censures from Those They Claim to Represent: LGBTQ Utah, LGBTQ Wyoming, and LGBTQ Arizona formally censured the largest critical organization of the Church for the way they treat LGBTQ members.[7] In addition, a total of nineteen women who were previously associated with the largest critical organization published a public letter censuring its CEO for abuse.[8] Since character and reputation are important qualities for those providing information about the Church, this is concerning.
LDS Critics’ Business Model: Like most nonprofit organizations, the top two critical organizations are largely dependent on donations to sustain their business.[9] What is significant though is in the case of LDS critics, those who donate are those who have lost their faith or feel contempt for the Church. Why is that significant? In order to grow their revenue, they must expand the population of members who have a faith crisis, then set up fee-based services to address the trauma. Very literally, the more faith they shake, the more money they make. High volumes of videos containing misinformation and accusations about the Church make their business model highly efficient.

These examples—detailed further on www.answeringldscritics.com—are not intended to be all inclusive, nor to pass judgment on individuals, but rather to illustrate the importance of examining the reliability of those who present themselves as experts or authorities on the Church. As members of the Church, we are entitled, and even obligated, to ensure that the information we consume regarding our faith is trustworthy, accurate, and aligned with truth. There are wonderful, faithful resources, including those found right here on FAIR, that can provide accurate information about questions one may have about the Church and Church history.

Elder Neal A Maxwell stated that “some insist upon studying the Church only through the eyes of its defectors—like interviewing Judas to understand Jesus.”[10] Elder Maxwell understood the importance of knowing the source of critical information. While we do not have all the answers to every question regarding Church history, neither do the critics. There are gaps…that’s simply the nature of history. But in the absence of conclusive historical documentation, we are best served by following President Nelson’s advice to focus on the one source of all truth—Jesus Christ—who alone can provide peace and joy in our lives.

[1] Russell M. Nelson, “A Plea to my Sisters”, www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2015/10/a-plea-to-my-sisters?lang=eng, (11/19/2024).
[2] Ron C. Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-stories, (11/19/2024).
[3]Ibid.
[4] Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-discussion, (11/19/2024).
[5] Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-stories, (11/19/2024).
[6] Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-discussion, (11/19/2024).
[7] Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-stories, (11/19/2024).
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-stories, (11/19/2024), Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, https://www.answeringldscritics.com/mormon-discussion, (11/19/2024), Ron C Rhodes, “Answering LDS Critics”, https://www.answeringldscritics.com/critics-business-model, (11/19/2024).
[10] Neal A Maxwell, “All Hell Is Moved”, https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/neal-a-maxwell/hell-moved/, (11/19/2024).

Ron C. Rhodes spent many years in the banking and direct sales industries. He recently retired as a Director of IT and Project Management and served on the Board of Directors of the Mid-America Bankers Association in Omaha, Nebraska. Ron is the owner/administrator of the Answering LDS Critics website (www.answeringldscritics.com) and associated YouTube channel. He served a full-time mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the New York Rochester Mission and has fulfilled many callings over the years, finding particular joy in teaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Ron and his wife, Ruth, are parents of three children and grandparents to nine grandchildren.

The post The Credibility of Modern Critics appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Introduction; reception, editing & publication of Joseph Smith’s revelations(D&C Section 1)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Handout

Additional Reading

Joseph Smith’s Revelations: A Doctrine and Covenants Study Companion from the Joseph Smith Papers (The Church Historian’s Press). A compilation and historical study of the earliest versions of Joseph Smith’s revelations and other texts now found in the Doctrine and Covenants. Includes brief introductions to each section along with an annotated transcript and photos of the earliest versions. (Also available for Kindle.)
Elder Steven E. Snow, “Treasuring the Doctrine and Covenants,” Ensign, January 2009, 50–53.
James B. Allen, “Line Upon Line,” Ensign, July 1979, 32–39. Church history reveals how the Lord has continually added to his people’s knowledge and understanding.
Melvin J. Petersen, “Preparing Early Revelations for Publication,” Ensign, February 1985, 14–20. Petersen explores how Joseph edited his early revelations into the form we have in our current Doctrine and Covenants.
“Approaching Mormon Doctrine,” Newsroom of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 4 May 2007.
“Mystery Solved: Who Wrote the Lectures on Faith?,” LDS Perspectives Podcast #44 (12 July 2017). In this illuminating podcast, Noel Reynolds, BYU professor emeritus and a long-time Book of Mormon scholar, discusses who wrote the Lectures and what Joseph Smith thought about them. (You can listen to the interview or read the transcript.)

Uncanonized Revelations From the Time of Joseph Smith

The Doctrine and Covenants contains revelations to the Prophet Joseph Smith that were “carefully selected” from all the revelations that he had received. At least forty-three uncanonized revelations and inspired statements made by Joseph and other Church leaders were written down during Joseph’s lifetime.

The following is a list of known revelations that were received during the Prophet’s lifetime but not published as scripture:

Ca. June 1829: “Articles of the Church of Christ.” This was an early draft of what became D&C Section 20; it was written by Oliver Cowdery by commandment.
Ca. early 1830: “23 Commandment AD 1830.” A revelation given to Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Hiram Page, Josiah Stowell, and Joseph Knight Sr. commanding them to go to Canada to secure a copyright there for the Book of Mormon.
15 May 1831: “53 Commandment, May 15th 1831.” A revelation given to Frederick G. Williams, Ezra Thayer, and Joseph Smith Sr. regarding the disposition of land in Kirtland, Ohio, that had been consecrated by Williams.
17 July 1831: A revelation to Joseph Smith and other brethren on the preaching of the gospel to the Lamanites who lived in Indian Territory west of Jackson County, Missouri. (A contemporary transcript of this revelation is not extant; the only known version was written from memory by William W. Phelps in a letter to Brigham Young, 12 August 1861. Because the transcript was prepared thirty years after the fact, its accuracy should be treated with skepticism.)
31 August 1831: A revelation to John Burk, Erastus Babbitt, and David Elliott, instructing them to travel from Kirtland, Ohio, to Zion, Jackson County, Missouri, in the fall of 1831.
Ca. 2 November 1831: “Testimony, circa 2 November 1831.” A document signed by eighteen brethren who testified that the revelations that were to be published in the Book of Commandments were “given by inspiration of God & are profitable for all men & are verily true.” (A similar statement by the Twelve Apostles was published as part of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants.)
27 February 1832: A revelation directing that Lincoln Haskins be ordained and supplied with copies of revelations with which to undertake a proselytizing mission.
Ca. 4–20 March 1832: “A Sample of pure Language given by Joseph the Seer.” A list containing the names of God, the Son of God, angels, and man in a “pure language.”
Ca. 8–24 March 1832: A revelation to Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith clarifying the duties and responsibilities of bishops in overseeing the consecration of property to the church.
20 March 1832: A revelation commanding Joseph Smith to suspend work on his revision of the Bible and take paper to Missouri for the printing of the Book of Commandments, given in response to two questions asked of the Lord by Joseph.
5 January 1833: A revelation to Frederick G. Williams, calling him as a counselor and scribe to Joseph Smith and instructing him to consecrate his farm.
27 February 1833: A song sung in an unknown language by David W. Patten and interpreted by the gift of tongues by Sidney Rigdon. (William W. Phelps turned this song into a hymn and published it in the May 1833 issue of The Evening and the Morning Star.)
28 April 1834: Further information about the reorganization of the United Firm, supplementing what had been revealed five days earlier (D&C Section 104).
5 December 1834: A revelation reprimanding the members of the Church for the informal, casual nature of interaction and discourse between Church leaders and Church members.
18 October 1835: A prophecy of Joseph Smith, received “by the Spirit of Revelation” in the Kirtland Temple, “that the distress, and sickness that has heretofore prevailed among” the Saints in Missouri would “be mitigated from this time forth.”
27 October 1835: The word of the Lord, received by Joseph Smith in answer to prayer, that Frederick G. Williams would arrive soon and successfully assist Mary Bailey Smith in giving birth to her first child.
1 November 1835: A revelation chastising Reynolds Cahoon for “his iniquities[,] his covetous and dishonest principles in himself and family” and for failing to “set his house in order.”
2 November 1835: A revelation to Frederick G. Williams, directing him to not go to New York to take care of Church business, but instead authorizing him to travel to preach the gospel to his relatives.
3 November 1835: A revelation directed to the members of the Quorum of the Twelve, reproving them for covetousness, inequality, lack of humility, and counseling them to repent and “prepare their hearts for the solem[n] assembly and for the great day which is to come.”
7 November 1835: A revelation to Missouri bishop Edward Partridge and his counselor Isaac Morley, commending them for their integrity and labors and commanding them to remain in Kirtland until the completion of the House of the Lord.
8 November 1835: A revelation rebuking William W. Phelps and John Whitmer for their iniquities.
14 November 1835: A revelation praising Warren Parrish “because of his desires to do the works of righteousness” and promising him great blessings for his efforts as a scribe for Joseph Smith.
16 November 1835: A revelation received at the request of Erastus Holmes, directing him to not be baptized in Kirtland and warning him “that there were three men that were seeking his destruction.”
12 January 1836: A record of visions received by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the Kirtland Temple, the first half of which was canonized in 1976 and is now D&C Section 137. The uncanonized portion contains a vision of the Twelve Apostles in foreign lands, fatigued and discouraged, with Jesus standing in their midst; Apostle William McLellin preaching and healing in the South; Brigham Young in the desert of the far southwest, preaching to “about a dozen men of colour” in their own language while protected by an angel; the Twelve in the celestial kingdom, the redemption of Zion, and “many things which the toung[e] of man, cannot discribe in full.”
4 September 1837: A revelation rebuking John Whitmer and William W. Phelps and commanding them to repent.
November 1837: A prophecy of the Lord that “peace shall soon be taken from the earth,” for “behold saith the Lord, very fierce and very terrible war is near at hand, even at your doors.” (This prophecy was published in the November 1837 issue of Elders’ Journal as part of a message from Joseph Smith to “the Saints scattered abroad.” Cf. D&C Section 87.)
7 January 1838: A letter and revelation to Missouri bishop Edward Partridge, blessing him for his faithfulness and warning the Saints in Far West about “dissensions among them lest the enemy have power over them.” (A contemporary transcript of this letter is not extant; the only known version is in the handwriting of Edward Partridge Jr., in a book of family history given to the Church Historian’s Office in 1925.)
12 January 1838 (A): Revealed answers to questions about the procedure for holding a disciplinary council to try the members of the First Presidency for transgression. (This revelation clarified the instructions in D&C 107:82–84.)
12 January 12 (B): A revelation directing that only the First Presidency is authorized to appoint and dedicate a stake of Zion.
12 January 1838 (C): A revelation commanding Joseph Smith and other members of the presidency of the Church to leave Kirtland, Ohio, and relocate their families to Caldwell County, Missouri.
17 April 1838: A revelation to Brigham Young, commanding him to leave Far West and return to his home on Mill Creek to care for his family.
8 July 1838 (B): A revelation directing that Frederick G. Williams and William W. Phelps should be ordained elders and travel, preach, and proselytize.
13 May 1839: A promise of the Lord to Oliver Granger that Oliver would be lifted up and have a “a great name on the earth and among my people, because of the integrity of his soul.” (See also D&C 117:12–15.)
20 March 1841: A revelation to several brethren, directing them to support the building of the Nauvoo House.
2 December 1841: A revelation to to Ebenezer and Angelina Robinson, directing them to provide shelter and care for Marinda Nancy Johnson Hyde and her children while her husband, Apostle Orson Hyde, served a mission abroad.
22 December 1841 (A): A revelation appointing Amos Fuller to serve a mission.
22 December 1841 (B): A revelation instructing John Snider to serve a mission to the eastern states and collect donations for the construction of the Nauvoo Temple and the Nauvoo House.
28 January 1842: A revelation directing the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles to assume editorial responsibility for the church newspaper Times and Seasons.
19 May 1842: A revelation warning Joseph Smith that Hiram Kimball had been “insinuating evil. & forming evil opinions against you with. others.”
27 July 1842: A revelation for Newel K. Whitney that provided instructions for him to use in performing the sealing of his daughter, Sarah Ann Whitney, to Joseph Smith that same day. (A contemporary transcript of this revelation is not extant; see the historical introduction on the Joseph Smith Papers website.)
25 November 1843: A revelation directing Apostle John E. Page to leave Boston and go to Washington, D.C., to preach the gospel there.
14 March 1844: A revelation to the Council of Fifty, giving the council the name “The Kingdom of God and his Laws.”
25 April 1844: A revelation to the Council of Fifty, declaring to its members, “Ye are my constitution, and I am your God, and ye are my spokesmen.”

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 1 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Matthew Sailors

Introduction

Church history provides many cautionary tales of people who apostatized for various reasons. Today in the Church, the adversary is stirring up apostate movements similar to their historical predecessors, threatening the spiritual lives of some Church members. Yet God has not left us defenseless against the adversary’s counterfeits, such as the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.1 By learning from Church history and nurturing our testimonies of the restored truths contained in official Church proclamations, we can avoid deception and lay a firm foundation for our faith on the “rock” of Jesus Christ (see Helaman 5:12).

I take my definition of “apostasy” from the Church’s General Handbook:

“As used here, apostasy refers to a member engaging in any of the following:

Repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the Church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders
Persisting in teaching as Church doctrine what is not Church doctrine after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
Showing a pattern of intentionally working to weaken the faith and activity of Church members
Continuing to follow the teachings of apostate sects after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
Formally joining another church and promoting its teachings (Total inactivity in the Church or attending another church does not by itself constitute apostasy. However, if a member formally joins another church and advocates its teachings, withdrawing his or her membership may be necessary.)”2

Based on that definition, it appears that the greatest dangers of apostasy do not consist only in believing false doctrine, but relate to attitudes and behaviors that engender enmity,3 or opposition, towards God and other people. The Prophet Joseph Smith recognized the oppositional spirit manifested by apostates when he responded by letter to a rash of apostasy in Kirtland, Ohio, U.S.A.4 In that letter, he taught that faith in and love of God should govern relationships between members and leaders of the Church. Joseph’s description of apostasy in that same letter reveals a vicious spiritual cycle in which apostasy both proceeds from and leads to violations of the First and Second Great Commandments.5 My intent in this article is to expose what I call the apostate mindset and contrast it with the principle of faith in Jesus Christ,6 which includes faithfulness to the leadership of His restored Church.7

Learning from Apostasies in Church History

A book that I have studied recently is Divergent Paths of the Restoration by Steven L. Shields, who is a member of the Community of Christ. In his book, Shields documents over 500 “expressions” of the Restoration from 1830 onward. Some of these expressions involved large groups of people who formally organized into churches, while others consisted of just a few individuals or families who put their own schismatic spin on the Restored Gospel. Most of these movements have long since died out.

I learned a wealth of lessons from my study of Shields’s book and other materials used as I prepared this article. I encourage the reader to check out the footnotes if you want to do further research. As I read Divergent Paths, something I noticed was that most of the apostate individuals and groups that Shields describes displayed common behavioral patterns:

Criticizing Church leaders as uninspired, possessing invalid authority, or “fallen”8, 9, 10
Exaggerating their self-importance through grandiose delusions, sensational claims of revelation, and aspiring to leadership positions11, 12, 13
Exploiting other people for gain by using intrigue, fraud, and in some cases violence 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Revising Church history narratives to justify their dissent from the Church.19

Each of these patterns manifest the apostate mindset of opposition to God and our fellow beings. Many scriptural and prophetic counsels can be cited that reveal the dangers of each of these patterns.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 Current apostate trends in the Church generally follow one or more of these four patterns of criticizing Church members and leaders, exaggerating one’s self-importance, exploiting other people for gain, and Church history narratives.

It is also worth noting that some LDS-oriented online communities frequently attract apostates to their circles because they share many worldview assumptions with them. These worldviews may serve as “red flags” for possible apostate trends. They include the following:

Fundamentalism,26 which can contribute to a variety of doctrinal, historical, and intellectual errors, including denying Joseph Smith’s involvement with plural marriage, engaging with conspiratorial thinking and fringe ideologies, and exaggerating the capacity of science to answer non-scientific questions.
Politicizing the Gospel,27 which includes elevating ideologies and causes on both the political left and right over the Gospel.
Mormon Gnosticism,28 which refers to an obsession with so-called “deep doctrine” or “hidden messages” in scripture, often dismissing the mainstream Church as spiritually deficient in the process.
Syncretism, which means mixing the teachings or worldviews of different religions (syncretism may have contributed to Nephite apostasies recorded in the Book of Mormon29).

The Protective Power of Official Church Proclamations and Declarations

We modern Latter-day Saints have a huge advantage in the struggle against personal apostasy because we have the benefit of several landmark Church statements that distill, synthesize, and summarize core doctrinal truths that can help us avoid being deceived by modern apostate trends. To constitute official Church proclamations and declarations on doctrine for my purposes here, sources must meet the following criteria:

They must be official Church statements, endorsed by the united First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
They must be doctrinally rich (some official Church proclamations from the past are more historical in nature rather than doctrinal)
They must be consistently used to teach Church doctrine since they were first published.

By that measure, we can include several official Church statements such as

The Articles of Faith (published 1842, canonized 1880)
The Family Proclamation (published 1994)
The Living Christ (published 2000)
The Bicentennial Restoration Proclamation (published 2020)

The power of the truths contained in these sacred prophetic statements to protect us from deception becomes clear when we consider how Church leaders have regarded them and taught from them through time. According to them, these proclamations and declarations are

“authoritative interpretations of scriptures” because they are official teachings of the President of the Church30
“statement[s] of eternal truth… tests for this generation”31
“our benchmark for judging the philosophies of the world”32
best understood with “an eye of faith” and “the intent to obey”33
intended to help guide us to salvation and exaltation through Jesus Christ.

It is also important to note what official proclamations and declarations are not.

They are not creeds in the sense that Christian orthodoxy regards traditional creeds. John Welch and David Whittaker once wrote of the Articles of Faith, “Unlike creeds which are delimiting and dogmatic, the Articles of Faith are living and open. They invite further thought…. They enhance our understanding of certain principles and give us simultaneously a commitment toward living the same.”34 This commentary is equally true of other official statements of Church doctrine such as the family proclamation.
They are not “changeable statement[s] of policy”35
They are not intended to attack or dismiss people who have sincere doubts or whose family situations are not ideal.

It is important for each of us to consider how we can use these proclamations and declarations to respond to apostate trends and move the Lord’s work forward now and in the future. The prophet Alma declared,

“For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him. And now I say unto you… [the good shepherd] commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed.”36

We likewise have a duty to resist spiritual “wolves” such as doctrinal pollutions and dilutions through living, teaching, and testifying of the Gospel of Christ in its simplicity and purity.37 Official Church proclamations and declarations should be an integral part of that endeavor. Not only should we understand them and bear our testimonies of them, but we should also share them, teach with them, find people with them for the missionaries to teach, and minister with them. We should reflect on how we can more fully utilize these sacred teachings:

The doctrines in “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” seemed taken for granted when it was published in 1995. Nowadays, this official statement stands validated as prophetic and protective against the flood of secularist philosophies and shifting cultural and legal views of morality. How can we use the Family Proclamation in defense of truth and virtue?
“The Living Christ” was published in 2000, when a large majority of Americans still affiliated with Christianity. Presently, an increasing number of churches are retreating from belief in Jesus’ divinity, and the numbers of those religiously unaffiliated has almost doubled.38 How can we use “The Living Christ” to build people’s faith in the risen Savior?
The “Bicentennial Restoration Proclamation,” published in 2020, affirms truths that most members of the Church currently cherish. Will we be able to say that in a generation or two from now? How can we proactively use The Restoration Proclamation to share and defend the message of the Restoration of Christ’s Gospel and Church?

I believe that receiving answers to these questions by inspiration from the Spirit and putting those answers into action will affect our capacity to avoid deception, resist personal apostasy, and build our spiritual foundation on the rock of Jesus Christ.

References

1 Members of the Church, especially those endowed, will recognize that one of Satan’s most effective tactics is preaching false religion by mixing scriptural truths with human error.

2 General Handbook, Section 32.6.3.2, “Apostasy,” cited 8 October 2024.

3 See President Ezra Taft Benson, “Beware of Pride,” April 1989 General Conference

4 Letter to Oliver Granger, between circa 22 and circa 28 July 1840, p. 159, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed September 15, 2024, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-oliver-granger-between-circa-22-and-circa-28-july-1840/1#historical-intro

5 See Matthew 22:35-40.

6 See the 4th Article of Faith.

7 Elder Ahmad S. Corbitt has taught, “…distrust [of human nature] is the very opposite of the faith the Lord requires of His covenant people in Himself, His prophets and apostles, and those they direct. He established His apostles as an extension of Himself…. [C]riticism of the Lord’s prophets is actively working in the minds of some to decouple prophets from the prophetic line that runs from Joseph Smith to President Nelson.” See Corbitt, “Activism VS. Discipleship: A Message for Chaplains of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” 4 October 2022.

8 See entry for Wycam/Wycom Clark in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 40

9 See entry for James Collins Brewster in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, pp. 94-95

10 See entry for Samuel Eastman in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, pp. 211-212

11 See entry for Warner/William McCary in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 75

12 See entry for Gladden Bishop in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 78

13 See entry for Elijah Schwackhammer in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 98

14 See entry for John H. Koyle in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 204

15 See the article about Nathaniel Baldwin, written by Will Bagley at The Salt Lake Tribune, 8 July 2001; cited from web.archive.org.

16 See entry for Ervil LeBaron in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, pp. 267-268

17 See entry for Arvin Shreeve in Steven L. Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, pp. 444-445

18 Dan Ellsworth, “The Seductive Power of Apocalyptic Ideas in Mainstream Religions,” Public Square Magazine,8 May 2024. https://publicsquaremag.org/faith/gospel-fare/chad-daybell-faith-apostasy/

19 Gregory L. Smith, “Passing Up the Heavenly Gift,” parts one and two. Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture. 2013. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/ and

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-two-of-two/

20 History of the Church, 3:385; from a discourse given by Joseph Smith on July 2, 1839, in Montrose, Iowa; reported by Wilford Woodruff and Willard Richards.

21 See Alma 30:53.

22 See 2 Nephi 26:29.

23 See 2 Nephi 26:21-22.

24 See Ether 8:19.

25 Travis Ewell, “When I Felt Deceived about the Church,” July 2020 Ensign https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2020/07/when-i-felt-deceived-about-the-church?lang=eng

26 Wikipedia, “Fundamentalism,” cited 23 September 2024 from en.wikipedia.org.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism

27 Dan Ellsworth and Jeff Bennion, “Has Politics Become Your New Religion?” Public Square Magazine. 19 July 2022

28 Carol Rice and C. D. Cunningham, “How Susceptible Are You to the Allure of Divergent Doctrine?” Public Square Magazine. 15 November 2023

29 Mark Alan Wright and Brant A. Gardner, “The Cultural Context of Nephite Apostasy,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture, 1(2012):25-55. 10 August 2012

30 Boyd K. Packer, “The Twelve Apostles,” October 1996 General Conference

31 Dallin H. Oaks, “The Plan and the Proclamation,” October 2017 General Conference

32 Bonnie L. Oscarson, “Defenders of the Family Proclamation,” April 2015 General Conference

33 Neil L. Andersen, “The Eye of Faith,” April 2019 General Conference

34 John W. Welch and David J. Whittaker, “We Believe,” Sept. 1979 Ensign

35 See Dallin H. Oaks, “Kingdoms of Glory,” Oct. 2023 Gen. Conf.

36 Alma 5:59-60

37 See Henry B. Eyring, “Simple Is the Doctrine of Jesus Christ,” October 2024 General Conference.

38 See Pew Research Center, “Religious ‘Nones’ in America: Who They Are and What They Believe,” 24 January 2024.

Matthew Sailors is an adult convert to the Restored Gospel and has been a member of the Church for 9 years. He recently graduated from Brigham Young University – Idaho with a bachelor’s degree in marriage and family studies. He is married, currently has one precious baby daughter, and is enjoying life as a stay-at-home dad (for now) in Texas.

The post Apostate Patterns Show Our Need for Prophetic Proclamations appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Can faith and trust in God’s guidance coexist with personal doubts?

Elder David P. Homer’s recent General Conference address, “Trusting Our Father,” explores a fundamental question: How can we fully trust God’s will, even when it challenges our own understanding? Drawing on historical and scriptural examples, Elder Homer emphasizes that God’s boundaries are eternal and defined by His love for us. As we seek to understand these divine truths, this talk offers valuable insights for those facing doubts or challenges to their faith.

Questions, Misconceptions, and CriticismsDoctrine:

Misconception: Truth is always relative and depends on individual perspective or context.
- Response: This belief reflects the philosophical concept of moral relativism, which suggests that what is right or true depends entirely on social norms, personal beliefs, or situational factors. However, Elder David P. Homer counters this idea by teaching that God’s truths are absolute, eternal, and independent of human perspective. “The boundaries between right and wrong are not for us to define. God has established these boundaries Himself, based on eternal truths for our benefit and blessing.” Elder Homer asserts that while circumstances can shape how we experience or apply principles, some truths remain unchanged because they are divinely appointed. For example, the law of chastity, honesty, and the command to love one another are consistent moral standards that transcend cultural shifts. These truths are not contingent on context but are rooted in God’s eternal character.
Fallacies and Cognitive Biases:
- Moral Relativism Fallacy: This fallacy suggests that since different cultures have varying beliefs about what is right or wrong, no universal truth exists. While individual experiences vary, God’s laws are designed for the eternal well-being of all His children, not just specific groups or times.
- Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon Fallacy): Believing that truth must conform to popular opinion assumes that societal consensus determines what is morally right. This is flawed because majorities have often supported unjust practices in history. Truth is not a democratic process; it is revealed by God.

Social Issues:

Criticism: Commandments should change to align with evolving social norms.
- Response: The belief that God’s laws must adapt to current cultural standards is based on the assumption that divine commandments are outdated social constructs. However, Elder Homer teaches that God’s commandments are not arbitrary rules but expressions of His love and eternal wisdom. “God’s saving truths are absolute, independent, and defined by God Himself.” While societies evolve, God’s commandments remain constant because they are designed to bring lasting happiness and spiritual safety. For example, commandments related to honesty, fidelity, and service reflect eternal principles that uplift individuals and communities. When societal values deviate from divine law, God does not alter His laws to accommodate humanity’s changing preferences; instead, He invites us to align with His higher standard.
Fallacies and Cognitive Biases:
- Appeal to Novelty: This fallacy assumes that newer societal norms are inherently better than established principles simply because they are modern. This discounts the wisdom embedded in enduring divine teachings.
- Presentism Bias: This bias judges historical religious teachings based on modern cultural values, ignoring the fact that God’s commandments are meant to be timeless and not bound by current societal trends.
- False Dilemma: Some assume that if commandments don’t change, believers must choose between following an outdated moral code or rejecting faith entirely. This oversimplifies the process of living faith, which involves applying unchanging truths in changing circumstances with personal revelation and divine grace.
By understanding that God’s laws are rooted in eternal truths rather than social consensus, we can see the wisdom in commandments that sometimes feel countercultural. Elder Homer reminds us that trusting in God’s design leads to spiritual clarity, peace, and lasting joy.

Defending Divine DoctrineElder Homer’s emphasis on trusting in divine boundaries provides an apologetic approach to several common critiques. By underscoring that truth is not for humans to redefine, he aligns with Come, Follow Me lessons in Moroni 1-6 about the Sacrament, repentance, and ordinances as God-given instructions rather than culturally influenced practices.

Application: Trusting God’s Boundaries in Daily LifeThis teaching helps counter the criticism that Church doctrines are restrictive. By trusting that God’s boundaries are an expression of love, believers can find meaning even when doctrines challenge their views. Elder David P. Homer’s talk offers several practical “to-do” items that help apply this principle in everyday life:

Pause, Reflect, and Respond with Faith:
- “When we don’t understand, we can pause, let our feelings settle, and then choose how to respond.” When faced with difficult teachings or personal struggles, practice pausing before reacting. This pause creates space for spiritual clarity through prayer and thoughtful reflection.
Study the Scriptures and Listen to Prophets
- “Fortunately, we have the scriptures and guidance from living prophets to help us understand God’s truth.” Commit to a consistent scripture study routine. Focus on teachings that address current questions or concerns, such as studying Come, Follow Me lessons or recent General Conference talks. Create a study journal to write down insights, questions, and how you see God’s guidance in your life.
Seek Personal Revelation
- “If clarification beyond what we have is needed, God provides it through His prophets. And He will respond to our sincere prayers through the Holy Ghost.” Practice regular personal prayer, specifically asking for help understanding God’s will. Follow promptings from the Holy Ghost, even when they require courage or sacrifice.
Stay with Faith through Uncertainty
- “We must never allow doubt to hold us prisoner and keep us from the divine love, peace, and gifts that come through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.” When doubts arise, try Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf’s counsel to “doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith.” Create a habit of spiritual resilience by focusing on past spiritual experiences and holding onto the truths you already know.
Choose to Trust God’s Timing
- “God gives His word according to the attention and effort we devote to it.” Make a conscious decision to trust God’s timeline. This might mean waiting patiently for answers to long-term questions while staying active in your spiritual practices.
Remember God’s Eternal Perspective
- “God has something better for us. If we reach out to Him, He will assist us.” Write down one area of your life where you struggle to trust God’s plan. Pray specifically about that area, asking for His help in seeing things from His eternal perspective.

By applying these steps, believers can build trust in God’s eternal laws rather than being influenced by temporary societal trends or personal uncertainties. As Elder Homer’s talk illustrates, trusting divine boundaries leads to deeper peace, spiritual growth, and lasting joy—even when understanding takes time.

Explaining the Nature of the PriesthoodElder Homer’s discussion on trusting divine roles and structures supports the Church’s position on priesthood authority as sacred and purpose-driven. For example, Moroni 3 discusses the importance of ordaining individuals by priesthood authority—a principle that underscores God’s intentional design for leadership in His Church.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsContextual Background – The Story of Louisa Barnes PrattThe example of Louisa Barnes Pratt courageously following God’s guidance despite personal reluctance mirrors the journeys many of us take in faith. This historical story reminds us of the faith required to trust in God’s eternal plan, even when societal norms suggest alternative paths.

Resources for Deeper Understanding:* Priesthood * Church resource: Revelation for Our Lives

Living ApologeticsPractical ApplicationRespectful Dialogue Guide: When discussing spiritual topics, particularly the idea of absolute truth vs. relative morality, it’s important to approach conversations with empathy, patience, and clarity. Here’s how to engage effectively:

Listen Actively: Begin by listening without interrupting to understand others’ perspectives, even if they differ from your own.
Ask Open-Ended Questions: Use phrases like, “How did you come to that conclusion?” or “What do you believe about truth?” to invite thoughtful dialogue.
Clarify God’s Teachings with Humility: Share beliefs without being defensive. Say something like: “I believe that God’s laws are based on eternal principles meant for our lasting happiness.”
Acknowledge Common Concerns: Recognize that trusting in God’s will can be challenging. You might say: “There have been times I’ve struggled to understand a commandment, but as I’ve studied and prayed, I’ve come to see its deeper purpose.”
Express Love and Understanding: No matter the outcome, express kindness: “Thank you for sharing your perspective. I’ve enjoyed learning more about what you believe.”

Faith in Action: Applying Elder David P. Homer’s counsel to trust in God’s boundaries, even when public opinion or personal desires differ, strengthens our spiritual foundation.

Suggested Actions: Speak with Purpose: Share your beliefs about God’s eternal truths when the opportunity arises. This might be during family discussions, in church meetings, or with friends who have honest questions. Use phrases like: “I believe that God’s truth isn’t defined by society but revealed through His prophets.” * Study Faithfully: Strengthen your understanding by studying scriptures and prophetic counsel. Focus on sections like Alma 30 (Korihor’s rebellion) and 2 Nephi 2* (agency and eternal law). Seek personal revelation on how to trust God’s will more fully.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses and Facts Truth is Eternal: God’s truths are independent and do not change based on cultural trends. * Historical Figures in Faith: Stories like Louisa Barnes Pratt show that trusting God often requires courage against popular opinion. * Sacrament and Ordinances:* Following sacred ordinances, as discussed in Moroni 1-6, helps believers connect to God’s guidance and protection.

ConclusionEncouragement and Reflection: Elder Homer’s message encourages us to trust in God’s eternal love and wisdom, especially in times of doubt or challenge. When we recognize that God’s boundaries are expressions of His love, we can find peace in His plan for us.

“God trusts us to make many important decisions, and in all matters He asks us to trust Him. This is especially difficult when our judgment or public opinion differs from His will for His children. Some suggest that we should redraw the lines between what is right and what is wrong because they say that truth is relative, reality is self-defined, or God is so generous that He does not actually care about what we do. As we seek to understand and accept God’s will, it is helpful to remember that the boundaries between right and wrong are not for us to define. God has established these boundaries Himself, based on eternal truths for our benefit and blessing.”

Share Your InsightShare your thoughts on trusting God’s boundaries – your thoughts and experiences can help others!

The post Trusting God’s Boundaries: Faithfully Navigating Modern Challenges appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Tiny Hingeby Autumn Dickson

In the chapters of Ether this week, we watch kingdoms rise and fall with few details. There were plenty of general patterns of righteousness and wickedness, and we likely missed a great many details in the abridged version. On the flip side, there were certain stories that Moroni chose to include. Recognizing which stories and details he prioritized can help us understand the gravity of certain principles.

In one of the stories that included more of the detail, we read about a girl who wanted her father to be happy again. Of all the stories that Moroni likely could have chosen from, he wanted our day to read about a critical juncture in the history of the Jaredites where secret combinations were reintroduced among the people. Considering the ability of these secret combinations to destroy entire nations, it’s no wonder that Moroni would want to include this story.

When we zoom out from some of the included details, we can find parallels in our day of which we can choose to be wary and cautious.

Details surrounding the daughter of Jared

Let’s cover the story of the daughter of Jared (not to be confused with the brother of Jared we covered in the last video) in a manner that can allow us to draw out these parallels. It all begins with the daughter noticing the unhappiness of her father.

Ether 8:7-8

7 And now Jared became exceedingly sorrowful because of the loss of the kingdom, for he had set his heart upon the kingdom and upon the glory of the world.

8 Now the daughter of Jared being exceedingly expert, and seeing the sorrows of her father, thought to devise a plan whereby she could redeem the kingdom unto her father.

Her plan included reintroducing secret combinations through a man named Akish. She would marry him in exchange for Akish killing her grandfather, Omer, and putting Jared back on the throne.

For all the tragedy that occurs in this specific story as well as its repercussions, it seems like a small enough beginning. We don’t know everything about this daughter. We don’t know how much she was motivated because she wanted to be the daughter of a king again. We don’t know the exact manner in which she was raised. Was she truly just trying to make her father happy or did she value the same things he did because that was the environment she had been given? Did she understand the consequences of what she was bringing into the world she lived in? Maybe she didn’t care about certain consequences, but if she had been allowed to observe that last battle of her people, would she have reconsidered putting it into the heart of her father?

It starts in the heart

Great wickedness doesn’t start out as great wickedness. It starts out as problems in the heart. These grow and develop. They can lead to actions that can tip the scales of tragedy in an entire nation or even just in our own lives.

I believe in the power of righteous disciples of Christ, but I also recognize the fact that our individual decisions to reject the idea of secret combinations (or any other tempting crossroads) may or may not have an effect on whether they take hold in the countries where we live. So let’s take a second and simply look at the daughter of Jared and what these secret combinations brought about in her own life.

Her father desired power, and she wanted to give that to him. She danced before Akish and achieved her wishes. Akish brought about secret combinations and delivered the kingdom to her father. Akish then swiftly turned on his father-in-law by the same means he had utilized to uphold his father-in-law. It’s ironic, but this daughter lost her father because of what she brought into his life to make him happy.

And the story doesn’t get better from there. Her father was killed by the husband she had sought out to kill her grandfather. Then her husband starved her son to death, before the rest of her sons went to war against their father. This war killed everyone except 30 souls who fled to Omer. Omer was once again placed on the throne. More patterns of wickedness and secret combinations follow after this specific timeline, but even when we isolate this specific story, we find the patterns of eternity.

The daughter of Jared swung the door of destruction on a very tiny hinge. It wreaked havoc in her own life, among her people, and for generations afterwards.

A crossroads

Recently I came to a bit of a crossroads myself. I made some mistakes this past week that I won’t go into detail about. I’ll simply teach what I learned from the experience.

After these mistakes, I recognized that I wasn’t really experiencing consequences. It wasn’t hurting my life. It wasn’t hurting anyone around me. I knew what I had done was wrong, and yet, it’s difficult to flip around and do what’s right when the negative consequences haven’t sunk in. Luckily, I’m old enough now to recognize the tiny hinge. I was at a crossroads. I was not hurting myself yet, at least not to any truly visible degree. But I also fully recognized that continuing on could lead to long-lasting problems that would dramatically affect me and my family.

I knew that I never wanted to get to the point where I was experiencing those consequences. I didn’t want to have to live the rest of my life with consequences. I wanted to make the right choice now before any real harm was done.

So I prayed for help. I prayed for help recognizing what my life could turn into if I gave in and continued down this path because I figured it would motivate me to get it together. I also just prayed for help in general in moving forward. I ended up having one of the most spiritual Sundays I’ve had in a very long time, and I believe it came as a result of how hard I was trying to repent proactively. There were frequent moments throughout the day that I would be surprised by the forcefulness of how strongly I was feeling His love for me.

Great wickedness doesn’t start out as great wickedness. It starts out very small in the heart. In the case of the Jaredite secret combinations, it started out as a man who couldn’t appreciate the fact that he had been given so much after causing so many problems within his own family; I mean consider his context. Jared had put his father into captivity so he could rule. His brothers got mad at him, beat his armies back, spared his life, and even allowed him to get his own house. It also started in the heart of a daughter who wanted to help her father gain his power back rather than recognizing what that road held in store for her.

Recognizing the hinge

I have observed that the hinges we usually start out with happen in relation to the words of the prophets.

Oftentimes, we sacrifice obedience to the words of the prophets because we do what we want and find that we aren’t experiencing any consequences. It’s natural for humans to act and observe what the actions bring them before adjusting their next actions accordingly. We do this as children, and oftentimes, we do it as adults. We think, “Hey I did this even though the prophet said not to, and I still feel really good. I still feel close to God, and I still feel my testimony. I still believe in the church so Heavenly Father must be fine with me doing this. I can handle it.”

In some cases, this may be true. The nature of prophetic warnings is to provide a fence between you and a cliff. Climbing over the fence and taking a couple steps towards a cliff doesn’t mean you’re going to immediately free fall over the side. You may climb that fence and still feel your testimony. You may live your whole life playing on the land between the fence and the cliff and never fall off. You may entertain your pride, just as the daughter of Jared did with her father, and you may never bring about the destruction of a nation or the destruction of your family.

But one of the things I have learned from delving deeply into Come Follow Me each week is that you are missing out when you ignore the words of the prophets, no matter how small or silly or unnecessary or outdated you may believe they are. You are missing out on privileges that were meant to be your’s.

Life is not just about avoiding hell; it’s about experiencing heaven.

There are aspects of heaven that you miss out on when you ignore the prophets. These small hinges may not bring about devastating destruction, but they can still close doors to blessings that you didn’t even know were available to you.

I testify that these small hinges wield great power. Not only do they protect you from the possibility of specific tragedies you would not otherwise have to experience, but they catapult you further towards privileges. You have a Lord who is willing to reveal all things to you, just as He has to His prophets. He is simply waiting for you to be ready, and whether we like it or not, a huge portion of that readiness is developed by being mature enough to recognize the hinges and act before experiencing consequences. A huge portion of that readiness to receive is developed when you have the faith to utilize those hinges instead of doing what you want with them because they are not destroying your life as they did with the daughter of Jared.

I testify of a Heavenly Father who has far more to offer than the cliff, or even just that little spot of land where you can look at the cliff. I testify of a Heavenly Father who works through His prophets, who promised us to work through prophets. I testify of a Heavenly Father who rewards faith in the smallest principles by bringing huge miracles. He wants us to trust Him in everything, and He offers so much in return.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Ether 6–11 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

How can we find answers to spiritual questions in a world full of doubt and uncertainty? For many, questions about the gospel, Church history, and personal faith can be complex and emotionally charged. Sister Tracy Y. Browning’s talk, “Seeking Answers to Spiritual Questions,” offers profound insights into navigating spiritual curiosity with patience, trust, and a willingness to follow God’s guidance, even when answers seem elusive.

In her message, Sister Browning underscores that questioning is an essential part of spiritual growth. The gospel invites us to seek truth with a sincere heart and “real intent,” trusting that Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ will guide us “line upon line, precept upon precept.” For those who struggle with faith questions, her counsel offers a hopeful roadmap.

Common Questions, Misconceptions, and CriticismsDoctrineMany faith questions revolve around the nature of God, revelation, and eternal progression. Sister Browning’s talk addresses common questions about whether God answers us in real-time and how much of His plan is available to our understanding right now.

Does the Church’s belief in a corporeal God conflict with traditional Christian teachings about the Trinity?
- Response: Traditional Christian views of the Trinity describe God as one essence in three persons without a physical body.The LDS doctrine of God teaches that Heavenly Father has a glorified, tangible body, as described in Doctrine and Covenants 130:22: “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s.” Latter-day Saints believe this distinction aligns with biblical accounts of God appearing in physical form, such as Moses speaking with God “face to face” (Exodus 33:11).
- Common Fallacies: Straw Man Fallacy: Critics may misrepresent LDS beliefs by implying that Latter-day Saints worship a “different God” entirely. However, Latter-day Saints worship the same God of the Bible, with a different understanding of His nature. Appeal to Tradition: Some argue that the Trinity has been accepted for centuries, and thus alternative views are invalid. However, early Christian writings indicate a diversity of thought about God’s nature.
- Resources: FAIR: The Nature of God; LDS Gospel Topics Essay: The Godhead
Why does the Church teach that humans can become like God (deification), and is this doctrine biblical?
- Response: The doctrine of deification, or theosis, teaches that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, humans can become like God and inherit all that He has. This belief is rooted in scripture, such as Romans 8:16-17, which states that we are “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ,” and 2 Peter 1:4, which invites us to become “partakers of the divine nature.” Early Christian leaders like Irenaeus and Athanasius also wrote about the idea of deification.
- Common Fallacies: False Dilemma: Critics may assert that believing in deification conflicts with worshiping God alone, but Latter-day Saints maintain that our exaltation glorifies God, as it is through His power and grace that this transformation is possible. Ad Hominem: Some may dismiss this belief by labeling it as self-aggrandizing, rather than engaging with its scriptural and historical basis.
- Resources: FAIR: Deification; LDS Gospel Topics Essay: Becoming Like God; Article: Theosis: The Early Christian Doctrine of Divinization (BYU Studies)

History Is ongoing revelation through modern prophets a contradiction to the Bible’s teaching of sola scriptura (scripture alone)? * + Response:Latter-day Saints believe that God continues to guide His children through modern revelation, as promised in Amos 3:7: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” This belief does not diminish the importance of the Bible but builds on the principle that God’s word is “quick” (living and active) (Hebrews 4:12). * + Common Fallacies: Circular Reasoning: Critics who advocate for sola scriptura (the idea that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority) often use the Bible itself to argue that no other scripture or revelation is valid. This is an example of circular reasoning because they are using the Bible to prove a conclusion that relies on the Bible being the only source of authority, essentially assuming their conclusion is true from the start. Slippery Slope: Some claim that accepting modern revelation opens the door to false prophets, ignoring safeguards like scriptural consistency and spiritual confirmation. * + Resources:* FAIR: Modern Revelation; LDS Gospel Topics Essay: Revelation

Defending Divine DoctrinesDoctrinal Emphasis:Sister Browning speaks about the importance of obedience to God’s laws, even when understanding is incomplete. She highlights Adam’s willingness to obey without full understanding as a model of faithful obedience, noting that obedience often precedes understanding. Her emphasis on obedience to divine law as a gateway to personal revelation counters criticisms that God’s commandments are restrictive.

Application:This emphasis helps to clarify misunderstandings about why LDS members place such importance on faith and obedience. Sister Browning explains that faith does not mean having all the answers but rather embracing the journey of spiritual discovery as a sacred, step-by-step process with God as our guide.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsContextual BackgroundHistorically, Latter-day Saints have encountered criticisms regarding doctrines like eternal progression and revelation. Sister Browning’s talk places these in the context of patiently seeking truth and recognizing divine timing. Her emphasis on the role of the Holy Ghost as a “personal teacher” offers a useful perspective when responding to criticisms about revelatory practices in the Church.

Resources for Deeper Understanding

The FAIR article on The Nature of God and this talk “We Can Do Better and Be Better” provide insights that reinforce Sister Browning’s counsel to trust in divine timing.

Living ApologeticsPractical ApplicationTo live the principles Sister Browning teaches, individuals can begin by applying her counsel to daily spiritual practices. Here are practical ways to cultivate a deeper, trust-filled faith:

Respectful Dialogue: When addressing sensitive topics with others, use Sister Browning’s approach of encouraging sincere questioning without contention. Listen thoughtfully and answer questions by sharing your personal journey.
Faith in Action: Take your concerns to the Lord with “real intent,” as Sister Browning suggests, meaningfully committing to accept and follow His guidance.

Faith in ActionReflect on Sister Browning’s teachings and how they resonate with your personal experiences of seeking answers. Consider journaling your thoughts and feelings of your own faith journey.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses and FactsDefensive Highlights:

Seeking Truth: Trust that Heavenly Father has a timing for each of us, and revelation often requires waiting and preparation.
Divine Guidance: Faithful obedience prepares us to receive further understanding, even when it’s difficult to comprehend immediately.
Living Prophets: Prophets provide modern-day revelation to help navigate today’s unique challenges. Sister Browning’s counsel aligns with President Nelson’s encouragement to seek guidance through prayer and study.

Top Apologetic Facts:

Revelation is Continuous and Essential: The belief in ongoing revelation distinguishes Latter-day Saints from many other Christian denominations. Revelation is not confined to ancient scripture but continues today through prophets (as affirmed in Amos 3:7) and personal spiritual guidance. This underscores the doctrine that God’s communication with His children is active and personalized.
Trust in God’s Timing and Wisdom: The principle of receiving truth “line upon line” (2 Nephi 28:30) teaches patience and trust in divine timing. Answers to spiritual questions often come incrementally as individuals are spiritually prepared to receive them. This prioritizes individual readiness by obedience and faith.
Obedience Precedes Understanding: As illustrated by Adam’s obedience in offering sacrifices (Moses 5:5-7), obedience often lays the foundation for deeper spiritual insight. Sister Browning emphasizes that obeying God’s commandments even without complete understanding invites greater revelation.
Faith and Questions are Compatible: Asking questions is not seen as a sign of weak faith but as a precursor to spiritual growth. Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf teaches that questions lead to learning and deeper understanding.

Conclusion

Encouragement and Reflection:
Sister Browning’s talk offers a profound reminder that faithful seeking is a journey that requires trust, patience, and obedience. Her insights reassure us that Heavenly Father is intimately aware of our sincere questions and will provide answers that lead us closer to Him. Consider how you can apply these teachings in your life, especially in moments of uncertainty. What can you do today to practice faith while waiting for answers?

“Our sincere gospel questions can provide Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ with opportunities to help us grow.” Tracy Y. Browning

Share your insightYour thoughts and experiences can help others along their journey. Share them below, and let’s continue this conversation on sustaining the Savior’s light together.

The post Seeking Divine Guidance: Finding Answers to Spiritual Questions in an Age of Doubt appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In this special episode, Sarah Allen and Zachary Wright host a panel discussion on the question “Are Prophets Infallible?”

Panel participants:

Don Bradley: https://gregkofford.com/collections/don-bradley
Ben Spackman: https://benspackman.com/
J. Max Wilson: https://www.sixteensmallstones.org/

The post Me, My Shelf, & I – Are Prophets Infallible? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Six Days in August is a new film from The Interpreter Foundation about the succession crisis of 1844. The film will officially open in theaters on the Thursday following General Conference, which is 10 October. If you haven’t already watched the trailer, it’s up at https://witnessesfilm.com/. In anticipation of the theatrical release, there will be a couple of events this week:

There will be a significant Six Days in August fireside at the SCERA Center for the Arts in Orem, Utah, on Wednesday, 25 September. A free ticket is required.
On the following evening, at 7 PM on 26 September, nine Carmike theaters along the Wasatch Front — in Draper, Salt Lake City, American Fork, Orem, Provo, Ogden, Midvale/Sandy, West Jordan, and Farmington — will be offering a “sneak peek” early screening of Six Days in August. (The same will be done on 7 October.) See https://www.cinemark.com/movies/six-days-in-august-early-access?showDate=2024-09-26

The post Release events for “Six Days in August” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Scott Hansen

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

The closest scriptural parallel we have to modern-day general conference is found in the Book of Mosiah. People who gathered to hear the words of King Benjamin “pitched their tents round about the temple, every man having his tent with the door thereof towards the temple, that thereby they might remain in their tents and hear the words which King Benjamin should speak unto them” (Mosiah 2:6). Each April and October, we do our best impersonation by remaining in our pajamas with our attention fixed on the television screen. All kidding aside, this multi-day sermon recorded in the Book of Mormon was a pivotal moment in the lives of everyone in attendance. What can we do to make general conference a pivotal moment in our lives? Here are three ideas:

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: What Can I Do to Prepare to Receive Personal Revelation at General Conference? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Foretold Promisesby Autumn Dickson

In the chapters for this week, we find Samuel the Lamanite. His title, “the Lamanite,” is actually very telling for this particular passage in The Book of Mormon. All throughout the history of The Book of Mormon, the Lamanites were traditionally the ones who rejected the gospel. And yet, we’ve reached a point in the timeline where the Nephites had grown extremely wicked. The Lord sent a Lamanite to go to the Nephites and preach the gospel to them.

Samuel listened and did so. He warned them of all sorts of scary things that could happen if they didn’t repent, and he was miraculously preserved as he delivered his message.

He also testified that Christ was coming.

Helaman 14:2 And behold, he said unto them: Behold, I give unto you a sign; for five years more cometh, and behold, then cometh the Son of God to redeem all those who shall believe on his name.

Samuel told the Nephites that Christ would be born back in Jerusalem in five years. Even though Christ would be born an ocean away, there were going to be all sorts of signs that would precede His birth. The night before His birth, there wouldn’t be darkness in the night. A new star would appear. There would be many signs and wonders, and many would fall to the earth in amazement and wonder.

Even though many of Samuel’s prophecies can be considered frightening, it didn’t need to scare anyone who chose to repent. Samuel even teaches that Zarahemla was currently being preserved because of the righteous people who were still in the city.

Prophets prophesy of things to come. They foretell of signs to look for. They encourage us to change our lives according to the events on Heavenly Father’s timeline. Let’s talk about it in a modern context so that this can be a more relatable principle.

In our day

I want you to imagine that President Nelson told us all that Christ was returning in five years. This will likely not happen since we’ve been taught that no one, not even the angels, know when Christ is coming. However, for the sake of applying the scriptures, let’s pretend that he did.

I’m sure there would be plenty of mockery in the world, just as there was with Samuel the Lamanite. I wonder how many people who are not of our faith would become curious over this miraculous and bold announcement. It would be an interesting day on social media to say the least.

But how would you respond? What would you change? If Christ was really coming within the next five years, what kind of feelings would you experience with this announcement?

President Nelson did not come forward last General Conference and announce the coming of the Savior, but he is a prophet and he has made pronouncements. He has admonished us in specific ways but because there is no deadline, sometimes we underestimate the importance of such guidance.

I can think of two specific ways that President Nelson’s (along with other prophets) pronouncements should change us. I want to cover the first, but I want to focus on the second.

Behavior

The first way it should change us is in our behavior.

If I knew Christ was coming, I’d probably get a bunch more food storage. I’d spend more time with my family and at the temple. I would probably cut out a lot of extra things that once felt so important to me. I would probably spend more conscious time considering how I spent my free time, reading books with tons of value in comparison to these cheap filler novels I can find on Stuff Your Kindle day. I’d spend my money differently knowing that things would change after He came.

To an extent, it’s wise to consider how we would change. It can help us refocus our priorities and remember what has true value.

However, I want to highlight the phrase, “To an extent…” It’s also important to remember that we might live another hundred years before He comes. There’s a balance there. For example, I mentioned how I would change the way I spent my time and money. We just spent the last two months trying to fix up our yard. Would I have bothered to fix it up if I knew Christ was coming? Maybe. I definitely would have reconsidered if I knew that the world was going to look different in five years.

We can’t drop everything and live our lives as though Christ is coming in five years because we don’t know whether He is, but we can consider how we would change. Pondering this idea may not dramatically change our current actions, but they might realign what we’re focusing on and worrying about.

Which leads me to my second point that I truly want to hone in on.

How we feel would change

I hope that an announcement regarding the coming of the Savior would make you feel hope over despair. I hope that the idea of facing Him would fill you with all the best kinds of anticipation. I hope that your life would feel lighter.

When we have something really exciting to look forward to, all of the days leading up to that event can often feel more exciting even though the event isn’t there yet. When you’re looking forward to a cruise or the last day of school, the anticipation can be just as fun as the event itself. I remember I used to love Fridays at school because it meant the weekend was coming. Friday was technically the same as any other day at school, but Friday felt different because I was looking forward to something.

During a district meeting on my mission, we all made lists of the blessings that we were most excited for. It was actually a really fun exercise and made me feel lighter and better even though nothing had really changed. It simply brought the anticipation of the promised blessings of the Savior to the forefront of my mind where I could enjoy them even though they weren’t here yet.

We listed blessings from the ridiculous to the deep. We were excited to hold our children, to be happy and safe in a marital relationship. We were excited to be able to fly (I don’t know if that was ever directly promised, but one could argue it’s implied). We were excited to see a beautiful world that was even prettier than what we already have. We were excited to not get the flu anymore, to see loved ones who had passed on, and to pet lions.

Like Samuel, we have modern day prophets who have warned us. However, also like Samuel, we have prophets who have taught us about the Lord’s promises, and we have every reason to rejoice in those blessings today. If we are repenting, remaining close to the Lord, and trying to be a good person, we have every reason to believe that He will bestow all that the Father has on us. That means whole and healed family relationships, healthy bodies that can move and act in tremendous and free ways, and a gorgeous setting to enjoy all of it in.

What is hurting you? What has the Lord promised you that’s adjacent to that hurt? Can you visualize it? Can you visualize the fulfillment of His merciful promises? We don’t have to be afraid of getting our hopes up. Christ has the capacity to fill our hopes beyond what we could have dreamed of. Sit in that visualization of that fulfilled promise, and let it fill you with faith. Let it fill you with a sweet and healing gratitude for your Savior.

The Savior has promised tremendous blessings. Make a conscious list of them and allow yourself to hope for them. It’s okay to still feel hurt and disappointment and sacrifice in this life as we ache to have those blessings fulfilled now. The Savior does not begrudge us feeling misery when He built the world for the very purpose of experiencing the full spectrum of life. However, when you’re ready to step out of the misery and you’ve allowed yourself to feel it sufficiently, let His promises be a balm to you. Let your anticipation of the fulfillment of these promises be as exciting as the event itself.

I testify of a Savior who is coming again even if we’re not sure when. I testify that He has the capacity to fulfill His promises; He already won! He already secured the right to give us everything our hearts desire. I testify of a Savior who also has the capacity to help you strive and reach and repent so that you’re ready to experience those blessings. If you’re worried about being able to receive those blessings because you’re worried about your ability to follow Him, then visualize the promise that there is no darkness too far where He can’t reach you and save you. And beyond pulling you from that darkness, He wants to give you more than you can imagine. He can give you more than you can imagine. Hold those promises in your heart, and let them fill you now.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Helaman 13-16 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Kamryn Maughan

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

Have you ever had a question about a topic in Church history? Because we were not there, some Church history events and topics can be hard for us to understand. For example, plural marriage, also known as polygamy, is a difficult topic for many members of the Church. So how do we approach questions about topics like plural marriage? Here are three ideas:

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: How Can I Find Answers to Tough Topics in Church History? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What You Choose to Seeby Autumn Dickson

We have arrived at the war chapters. Within these chapters are plenty of principles that we can still spiritually engage with despite the fact that the events are taking place on a battlefield. During one such battle, Captain Moroni bears his testimony to Zerahemnah (one of the antagonizing military leaders) regarding the protection of the Lord.

He testifies that they have the true faith and that the Lord strengthened and protected them because of their belief and worship. After bearing testimony, he commands Zerahemnah to make an oath that he and his men will never come against the Nephites again. Otherwise they will commence the battle and wipe out the remainder of the men.

Zerahemnah delivers his weapon to Captain Moroni but refuses the oath. Zerahemnah gives this as his reasoning:

Alma 44:9 Behold, we are not of your faith; we do not believe that it is God that has delivered us into your hands; but we believe that it is your cunning that has preserved you from our swords. Behold, it is your breastplates and your shields that have preserved you.

Captain Moroni believes that they won because of their faith. Zerahemnah believes it was because they were good at war. Note that both sentences contain the word “belief.” People can find evidence of whatever they choose to look for. Captain Moroni found evidence of the Lord’s protection, and Zerahemnah did not.

What we choose to see

I taught a man on my mission who had lost his faith. He had grown up a devout Catholic. He attended mass regularly, and after marrying his wife who was a member, he also started attending church meetings with us. He met with us regularly, read The Book of Mormon, and participated in other faith-promoting activities.

And yet, if you were to ask him, he would have maintained that he didn’t feel any faith in God. He had watched a movie that had asked a question, “What if it’s not true?” or something along those lines. That question had stuck with him, and he had not been able to feel faith since.

My companion and I worked over and over and over to teach him to look for those good feelings from God. We wanted so badly for him to find that faith he had lost. There was one evening where the Spirit was so powerful. We had randomly chosen to sing a hymn or primary song (can’t remember which one). He, his wife, my companion, and I found ourselves in tears. It was “thick” in the room.

But still, our friend could not bring himself to attribute it beyond good hormones that were conjured up with beautiful music. He still could not bring himself to see God in it.

I’ve learned since then that faith is a choice, both when it comes to obedience and when it comes to seeing God in our lives.

My friend participated in faith-promoting activities but wasn’t choosing faith; he wanted faith to descend upon him. Where we felt the presence of God, he felt good feelings that didn’t necessarily come from Him. People can look at the same event and draw completely different conclusions.

When I pray about finding my lost keys, I can choose to believe that God helped me find them or that it was a coincidence. When I feel good emotions associated with church, I can believe that the Lord is making His presence known or that I simply have positive pathways built in my brain when it comes to church. When we look at mistakes leaders in the past and present, we can choose to see fallible humans who are still generally led by God or we can see evidence that they can’t really be prophets if they had flaws. When Alma faced off with Korihor, he testified that all of creation was a witness of God. Obviously, there are millions of people throughout history who have come to a completely different conclusion.

The truth remains that you can find “evidence” to support your beliefs no matter which beliefs you ascribe to. I feel that almost most everyone goes through moments in their lives when they ask, “What if it’s not true?” Though these moments can be a little scary, both for ourselves and those we love, these moments can be defining. They can be the threshold in our lives where we really decide where we are going to invest our belief, and that’s incredibly powerful.

We may be tempted to desperately avoid questions such as, “What if it’s not true?” However, rather than avoiding them, we can examine them closely and try to include the Lord we’ve been taught about. We can use it as a testing ground rather than unraveling because we’re afraid of it.

Why should I choose to invest in faith?

So let’s say we’ve reached that threshold. We’ve asked ourselves, “What if we were wrong about everything? What if I was just seeing what I wanted to see?” If you can find “evidence” of whatever you believe in, why should you choose faith?

Unfortunately, this is an extremely personal question that gets handled by the Lord according to each individual. I can only share my experiences.

For a long time, I’m not even sure I had a good reason for choosing to invest in faith because I’m not sure I was consciously choosing it. I was afraid to consider the alternative of leaving the church, and I had found enough goodness and evidence that I felt okay moving forward. I invested in faith because I had been taught to invest in faith. I believed that my good feelings were coming from God because I had been taught to believe. I’m so grateful for that gift.

I’m also grateful that I reached the point where I’ve made my own, conscious choice to continue investing in faith. It was scary facing some of those questions at first, but walking through those low points created an opportunity for me to invest on my faith on purpose, and that has been far more rewarding.

I still receive all those good feelings and quiet moments and associate them with God, but those are not the reasons I choose to keep investing. Those are rewards I receive from investing, but they are not the reasons I continue investing.

I think my most definitive reason for investing right now is how I’ve felt guided. Over the past couple years, I have been watching the Lord guide my prayers before something happened and then watching them be fulfilled before my eyes.

I’ve told the story before, but as we were moving to Virginia, I opened my journal and prayed for absolutely everything I wanted. I left nothing out, no matter how silly or artificial it seemed. At a time when my husband was under immense stress trying to find something we could afford that wasn’t a box in an alley, I was feeling pretty good about everything and asking for whatever I wanted. Sure enough, seven months later, we were led to a temporary home that had every single thing I had asked for. Not to mention, it was given to us at a price that was unheard of, and we did absolutely no work to get it. It quite literally fell into our laps.

I would have been fine if the Lord had given us a tiny apartment without all the extras and I told Him that too, but it was one of those moments where one of the most important lessons He taught me was, “I heard you.” Maybe in and of itself, this can be considered coincidence, but this has been repeated over and over and over.

I pray. I am guided as I pray. Things come together, and I recognize the Lord’s hand because He told me to pray for it. He would likely still bless my family, but because I prayed for it, I was given the tremendous gift of recognizing that He was speaking to me.

Maybe this is how Captain Moroni felt. Maybe Zerahemnah was impressed with their shields, breastplates, and cunning, but maybe Captain Moroni had felt something nagging at him ahead of time to prepare his men in precisely this manner. Then, when he saw everything come together, he quietly thanked the Lord for preparing him ahead of time. Or, maybe Captain Moroni had enough experiences of that manner that he knew the Lord had been guiding them, even if he hadn’t felt any specifics in that particular moment.

Right now, prayer and its results are the reasons I keep investing in faith. I have had other experiences where my prayers have been much shorter and involved far less of my silly, little wants, and I have seen how those prayers were also guided because He led me towards something that I wasn’t expecting. I have had even more experiences where I did pray for everything I wanted, but I felt this little nagging feeling that I wasn’t going to get it. And sure enough, I was led elsewhere.

The Lord could lead me for my entire life without me knowing it. But because He has commanded me to pray, He has been able to guide my feelings ahead of time so that I can recognize Him later. And isn’t that just a beautiful reason to pray? Prayer isn’t about getting what we want. It’s about helping us find our Heavenly Father, and it has surely done that for me.

I testify of Heavenly Father who hears and answers prayers. I testify that He can guide our prayers and feelings if we practice that skill. I testify that He can make Himself known to you should you choose to invest in faith and ask for help in recognizing Him. The experiment surely won’t hurt you. You have nothing to lose by asking Him to help you see Him if He’s really there. The rewards I have personally experienced have gone far beyond what I could have imagined, and I know it all comes from a loving Heavenly Father who loved me because He made me.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Alma 43–52 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

[English]

Diese Liste von verfügbaren Ressourcen wurde erstellt, um die Fehlinformationen in der kürzlich veröffentlichten Abhandlung von Francois Radzik mit dem Titel „13 Thesen: Die Irreführung durch die Kirche Jesu Christi der Heiligen der Letzten Tage, die Mormonen“ besser einordnen und klarstellen zu können. Leser, die mit den von der Kirche bereits veröffentlichten korrekten Informationen sowie mit den üblichen Taktiken der Fehlinformation vertraut sind, werden die Verzerrungen in dieser Abhandlung erkennen. Wie bei den meisten Angriffen auf die Kirche heutzutage ist das einzig Neue die Verpackung.

Nützliche Informationsquellenvon Keith Erekson

1) Wissen über Gott wird Zeile um Zeile offenbart

Vorträge über Theologie („Vorlesungen über den Glauben“) (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
King-Follett-Rede (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Wie Gott werden (Abhandlungen zu Evangeliumsthemen)
Veränderung ist in Ordnung (siehe 2 Nephi 28:30; 29:9; Lehre und Bündnisse 61:20; 9. Glaubensartikel)

2) Vollmacht und Führung

Wiederherstellung des Aaronischen Priestertums (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Wiederherstellung des Melchisedekischen Priestertums (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Nachfolge in der Führung der Kirche (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Heilige, Band 3: Unerschrocken, erhaben und unbeirrbar (Salt Lake City: Kirche Jesu Christi der Heiligen der Letzten Tage, 2022), 214-217 (Kapitel 12). [Beschreibt die Lehren von Brigham Young]

3) Visionen von Jesus Christus und anderen Boten

Berichte über die erste Vision (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Joseph Smith, Journal, April 3, 1836 [Jesus, Mose, Elias, und Elija im Kirtland Tempel] (nur auf Englisch abrufbar)
Alexander L. Baugh, „Parting the Veil: The Visions of Joseph Smith“, BYU Studies 38, Nr. 1 (1999): 23–69 (nur auf Englisch abrufbar).

4) Die frühe Geschichte von Joseph Smith

Siehe Joseph Smith-Lebensgeschichte 1:55-56
Schatzsuchen (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Sehersteine (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Berichte über die erste Vision (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Joseph Smith, Geschichte, 1832 [frühester schriftlicher Bericht über die Erste Vision]
Die Übersetzung des Buches Mormon (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Engel Moroni (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)

5) Mehrehe

Die Mehrehe in Kirtland und in Nauvoo (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Fanny Alger (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
„Mercy Thompson und die Offenbarung über die Ehe“, in Offenbarungen im Zusammenhang

6) Veränderung im Laufe der Zeit

Kollegium der Zwölf Apostel (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Rassenzugehörigkeit und Priestertum (Abhandlungen zu Evangeliumsthemen)
Das Manifest und das Ende der Mehrehe (Abhandlungen zu Evangeliumsthemen)
Veränderung ist in Ordnung (siehe 2 Nephi 28:30; 29:9; Lehre und Bündnisse 61:20; 9. Glaubensartikel)

7) Zion

Zion/Neues Jerusalem (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Das Buch Mormon und die DNS-Forschung (Abhandlungen zu Evangeliumsthemen)

8) Geschichte der Kirche in Missouri

Zion/Neues Jerusalem (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Gewalt im Kreis Jackson (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Die Kirtland Safety Society (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Daniten (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Krieg mit den Mormonen in Missouri 1838 (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Ausrottungsbefehl (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Gefängnis zu Liberty (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Prophezeiungen von Joseph Smith (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)

9) Frühe Tempel und Verordnungen

Kirtland-Tempel (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Nauvoo-Tempel (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Endowment im Tempel (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Freimaurerei (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Anpassungen bei der Tempelarbeit (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Tempelbau (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)

10) Auszug aus Nauvoo

Nauvoo (Commerce), Illinois (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Freimaurerei (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Rat der Fünfzig (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Versuchte Auslieferung nach Missouri (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Nachfolge in der Führung der Kirche (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Treck der Pioniere (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)

11) Brigham Young

Brigham Young (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Tod von Joseph und Hyrum Smith (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Utah (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Daniten (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Massaker von Mountain Meadows (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Frieden und Gewalt unter den Heiligen der Letzten Tage im 19. Jahrhundert (Abhandlungen zu Evangeliumsthemen)

12) Studium und Glauben

Nach Antworten auf Ihre Fragen suchen (Themen und Fragen)
Dieter F. Uchtdorf, „Kommen Sie zu uns!”, Generalkonferenz, Oktober 2013
Russell M. Nelson, „Christus ist auferstanden; Glaube an ihn versetzt Berge“, Generalkonferenz, April 2021
„Auskünfte aus zuverlässigen Quellen“, Allgemeines Handbuch: Wie man in der Kirche Jesu Christi der Heiligen der Letzten Tage dient, 38.8.41
Dallin H. Oaks, „Criticism“, Ensign, Februar 1987 (nur auf Englisch abrufbar)

13) Zehnter

Zehnter (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)
Finanzen der Kirche (Themen im Zusammenhang mit der Geschichte der Kirche)

Übliche Taktiken in antagonistischen Materialien

Anbieten von neuer Freiheit und fortschrittlichem Denken
Mitteilen von ausgewählten Fakten, die aus ihrem größeren Zusammenhang gerissen sind
Darstellen von Fehlern, als ob sie richtig wären, wobei Fakten und Fehler oft miteinander vermischt werden
Behaupten von geheimnisvollen Verschwörungen und dunklen Motiven

Siehe auch „How Can We Find Truth in a Sea of Information?“ (Liahona, April 2023 – nur auf Englisch abrufbar)

Keith Erekson is an author, teacher, and public historian who has published on topics including politics, hoaxes, Abraham Lincoln, Elvis Presley, and Church history. He grew up in Baltimore, served a mission in Brazil, and earned advanced degrees in history and business. He works for the Church History Department in efforts to encourage outreach and historical engagement. His 2021 FAIR Conference presentation, “Real Vs. Rumor,” can be seen here.

The post Aufgewärmte Fragen, bereitstehende Antworten: Sich mit Radzik und seinen 13 Thesen auseinandersetzen appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2024 April General Conference, Saturday Morning Session

Motions of a Hidden Fire

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland
Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Summary

In his talk “Motions of a Hidden Fire,” Elder Jeffrey R. Holland reflects on personal trials, including the loss of his wife and his own serious illness. He emphasizes the power of prayer, recounting his gratitude for the prayers offered on his behalf. He underscores the importance of earnest prayer, the example set by Jesus Christ, and the need for faithfulness and covenant-keeping. Holland encourages a deeper commitment to discipleship, trusting in God’s timing and the power of prayer to bring about divine intervention and personal growth.

Gospel Doctrine & Principles taught

The Atonement of Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ, Prayer, The Plan of Salvation, The Holy Ghost

Scriptures

Doctrine and Covenants 112:4–5, 14; Luke 18:1–8, 2 Nephi 4:35, Luke 21:36, Alma 13:28 & 34:27; Doctrine and Covenants 23:6, Alma 34:27, 2 Thessalonians 1:11, Alma 34:21, James 5:16, Psalm 55:17, Mosiah 24:10–12, Alma 34:27, 3 Nephi 20:1, Doctrine and Covenants 19:28, 3 Nephi 18:19–21, Alma 33:3, Matthew 14:23 & 18:19–20, 3 Nephi 18:16, 21–24, 30; Helaman 3:35, Matthew 6:13; Luke 22:40; 3 Nephi 18:15; Doctrine and Covenants 10:5, 2 Nephi 32:8; Joseph Smith—History 1:15–16, Romans 8:26; 3 Nephi 19:24; Doctrine and Covenants 50:30, Matthew 5:44, Matthew 14:23, Matthew 17:2; Mark 9:3; Luke 9:29; 3 Nephi 19:25, Matthew 17:2; Luke 9:29; 3 Nephi 19:25, Matthew 26:39, Mark 14:35, Luke 22:44, Matthew 7:23, Joseph Smith Translation, Matthew 7:33 (in Matthew 7:23, footnote a), Doctrine and Covenants 76:66, Hebrews 4:16, Job 42:3

Other Sources

K. Chesterton, A Short History of England (1917), 72.
“Prayer Is the Soul’s Sincere Desire,” Hymns, no. 145.
“Sweet Hour of Prayer,” Hymns, no. 142.

Helps

From the Oxford Dictionary: ex·pi·a·tion /ˌekspēˈāSH(ə)n/, noun
the act of making amends or reparation for guilt or wrongdoing; atonement.“an act of public expiation”

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- But it has always been intriguing to me that Jesus felt the need to pray at all. Wasn’t He perfect? About what did He need to pray? Well, I have come to realize that He too, with us, wanted to “seek [the Father’s] face, believe his word, and trust his grace.”
- Against that backdrop of Christ’s victory over death and His recent gift to me of a few more weeks or months in mortality, I bear solemn witness of the reality of eternal life and the need for us to be serious in our planning for it.
Description of His Life.
- Ultimately, we can look to the example of the Savior, who prayed so very, very often.
Description of His Atonement.
- Luke describes Jesus’s descent into His expiation as requiring Him to pray “more earnestly.” How does one who was perfect pray more earnestly? We assume that all of His prayers were earnest, yet in fulfilling His atoning sacrifice and through the pain that attended its universal reach, He felt to pray ever more pleadingly, with the weight of His offering finally bringing blood from every pore.
Words of Christ
- Thou shalt bear record of my name … [and] send forth my word unto the ends of the earth. … Morning by morning; and day after day let thy warning voice go forth; and when the night cometh let not the inhabitants of the earth slumber, because of thy speech. … Arise[,] … take up your cross, [and] follow me.
- “I never knew you”
- “[You] never knew me”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

My beloved sisters and brothers, since that experience, I have tried to take up my cross more earnestly, with more resolve to find where I can raise an apostolic voice of both warmth and warning in the morning, during the day, and into the night.
Brothers and sisters, I testify that God hears every prayer we offer and responds to each of them according to the path He has outlined for our perfection.
It is for reasons known only to God why prayers are answered differently than we hope—but I promise you they are heard and they are answered according to His unfailing love and cosmic timetable.
…If there be any time we feel not to pray, we can be sure that hesitancy does not come from God, who yearns to communicate with His children at any and all times. Indeed, some efforts to keep us from praying come directly from the adversary.
When we don’t know how or exactly for what to pray, we should begin, and continue, until the Holy Spirit guides us into the prayer we should be offering. This approach may be the one we have to invoke when praying for our enemies and those who despitefully use us.
But it has always been intriguing to me that Jesus felt the need to pray at all. Wasn’t He perfect? About what did He need to pray? Well, I have come to realize that He too, with us, wanted to “seek [the Father’s] face, believe his word, and trust his grace.”
Against that backdrop of Christ’s victory over death and His recent gift to me of a few more weeks or months in mortality, I bear solemn witness of the reality of eternal life and the need for us to be serious in our planning for it.

Lists

Three recent experiences that Elder Holland has had:

The death of his wife, Patricia, and an increased value on their sealing.
A near-death experience which left Elder Holland with a conviction that he must return to his ministry, and he has made changes and found new resolve from that experience.
gratitude for the prayers and faith of others on his behalf.

Some things about prayer:

We are to “ask not amiss”
there are no limits to when, where, or about what we should pray
We are to pray always
We are to pray for those around us
We are to believe that sincere prayer of the righteous makes a difference
Our prayers should be vocal when there is privacy
Silent, heartfelt prayer is also appropriate
Prayers are described in the hymn as “motion of a hidden fire”
Prayers are always to be offered to God our Father in the name of Jesus Christ

We should pray:

Individually
in our families
in congregations of all sizes
as a shield against temptation

If there are times we ‘feel not to pray’:

we can be sure that hesitancy does not come from God
some efforts to keep us from praying come directly from the adversary
We should begin to pray and continue until the Holy Spirit guides our prayer

Ways that Jesus prayed:

He retreated from society to be alone
He prayed in the company of a few companions
He would seek heaven on behalf of multitudes
Sometimes prayer glorified His clothing
Sometimes it glorified His countenance
Sometimes He stood to pray
Sometimes He knelt to pray
At least once He fell on His face in prayer.

We need to believe in:

Angels
Miracles
The promises of the holy priesthood
The gift of the Holy Ghost
The influence of good families
The influence of good friends
The power of the pure love of Christ
Revelation
Prophets, seers, and revelators and President Russell M. Nelson
That we can be exalted

Things we can do to be exalted:

Pray
Plead
Be personally righteousness

Invitations/Challenges

Against that backdrop of Christ’s victory over death and His recent gift to me of a few more weeks or months in mortality, I bear solemn witness of the reality of eternal life and the need for us to be serious in our planning for it.
I bear witness that when Christ comes, He needs to recognize us… as thoroughly committed, faithfully believing, covenant-keeping disciples.

Warnings

I bear witness that when Christ comes, He needs to recognize us—not as nominal members listed on a faded baptismal record but as thoroughly committed, faithfully believing, covenant-keeping disciples. This is an urgent matter for all of us, lest we ever hear with devastating regret: “I never knew you,” or, as Joseph Smith translated that phrase, “[You] never knew me.”

Blessings/Promises

Fortunately, we have help for this task—lots of help.
Brothers and sisters, as we repent of our sins and come boldly to the “throne of grace,” leaving before Him there our alms and our heartfelt supplications, we will find mercy and compassion and forgiveness at the benevolent hands of our Eternal Father and His obedient, perfectly pure Son. Then, with Job and all the refined faithful, we will behold a world “too wonderful” to understand.

Stories:

Brothers and sisters, I have learned a painful lesson since I last occupied this pulpit in October of 2022. That lesson is: if you don’t give an acceptable talk, you can be banned for the next several conferences. You can see I am assigned early in the first session of this one. What you can’t see is that I am positioned on a trapdoor with a very delicate latch. If this talk doesn’t go well, I won’t see you for another few conferences.
Elder Jeffrey R. Holland shares the deeply personal and painful experience of losing his beloved wife, Pat. He describes her as the greatest woman he has ever known, highlighting her purity, gift of expression, and spirituality. He recounts a talk she gave titled “Fulfilling the Measure of Your Creation,” expressing that she did so more successfully than anyone could have imagined. Elder Holland reflects on the blessing of their 60-year marriage and the hope of being reunited with her for eternity through their sealing.
Elder Jeffrey R. Holland recounts a medical crisis he faced just 48 hours after his wife’s burial. Hospitalized and in and out of consciousness for weeks, he had a profound experience that felt like a journey to the edge of eternity. He received an admonition to return to his ministry with greater urgency and focus on the Savior. Inspired by a revelation given to the Twelve Apostles nearly 200 years ago, he resolved to more earnestly take up his cross and raise an apostolic voice of warmth and warning continually.

Application Ideas

Elder Holland invites us to “look to the example of the Savior” and ways that He prayed. Carefully read this section of Elder Holland’s talk (paragraphs 16 and 17), and read the scriptures Elder Holland references. Write in your study journal any thoughts or ideas that come into your mind as you study. Prayerfully choose one aspect of Christ’s prayers that you would like to emulate and make a plan to focus your personal study and prayer on that aspect in the coming week.
Elder Holland warns us that when Christ comes, He needs to recognize us as individuals. He also invites us to become recognizable to Christ by our being “thoroughly committed, faithfully believing, covenant-keeping disciples.” In your study journal or journal, write each of those three items at the top of a column, and number 1-10 below each one. Brainstorm 10 ideas that would help Christ recognize you as thoroughly committed, faithfully believing, and covenant-keeping. Set a goal to do one of those ideas every week. Write your experiences in your journal.
Elder Holland instructs us to “employ prayer as a shield against temptation.” Think about the things you find tempting. Prayerfully read Ether 12:27. As you recognize your own temptations and weaknesses, make those a subject of prayer. Keep in mind this instruction from Wendy Ulrich: “Even when we sincerely repent of our sins, obtain forgiveness, and become clean again, we remain weak. We are still subject to illness, emotion, ignorance, predispositions, fatigue, and temptation. But limitations and inadequacies are not sins and do not keep us from being clean and worthy of the Spirit.” (Wendy Ulrich, “It isn’t a Sin to Be Weak,” April 2015 Ensign)
Read the list “We need to believe in:” (found in the talk here). Over the course of the next week, choose one of those items listed before each of your prayers. Spend a few moments as you compose yourself to prayer, pondering that item. Follow Elder Holland’s advice as you pray about these aspects of testimony: When we don’t know how or exactly for what to pray, we should begin, and continue, until the Holy Spirit guides us into the prayer we should be offering.

The post Consider Conference: “Motions of a Hidden Fire” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Keith Erekson

[This document was prepared in response to a paper recently published in German by Francois Radzik called “13 Theses: The deception of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormons.” As with most attacks on the Church today, the only thing new is the packaging.]

1) Knowledge of God Revealed Line Upon Line

Lecture on Theology (‚Lectures on Faith‘) (Church History Topics)
King Follett Discourse (Church History Topics)
Becoming Like God (Gospel Topic Essays)
Change is okay (see 2 Nephi 28:30; 29:9; Doctrine and Covenants 61:20; Article of Faith 9)

2) Authority and Governance

Restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood (Church History Topics)
Restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood (Church History Topics)
Succession of Church Leadership (Church History Topics)
Saints, Volume 3: Boldly, Nobly, and Independent (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2022), 181-184 (chapter 12). [Describes Brigham Young’s teachings]

3) Visions of Jesus Christ and Other Messengers

First Vision Accounts (Gospel Topics Essays)
Joseph Smith, Journal, April 3, 1836 [Jesus, Moses, Elias, and Elijah in the Kirtland Temple]
Alexander L. Baugh, “Parting the Veil: The Visions of Joseph Smith,” BYU Studies 38, no. 1 (1999): 23–69.

4) Joseph Smith’s Early History

See Joseph Smith-History 1:55-56
Treasure Seeking (Church History Topics)
Seer Stones (Church History Topics)
First Vision Accounts (Gospel Topics Essays)
Joseph Smith, History, 1832 [earliest written account of the First Vision]
Book of Mormon Translation (Gospel Topics Essays)
Angel Moroni (Church History Topics)

5) Plural Marriage

Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo (Gospel Topics Essay)
Fanny Alger (Church History Topics)
“Mercy Thompson and the Revelation on Marriage,” in Revelations in Context

6) Change over Time

Quorum of the Twelve (Church History Topics)
Race and Priesthood (Gospel Topics Essays)
The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage (Gospel Topics Essays)
Change is okay (see 2 Nephi 28:30; 29:9; Doctrine and Covenants 61:20; Article of Faith 9)

7) Zion

Zion/New Jerusalem (Church History Topics)
Book of Mormon and DNA Studies (Gospel Topics Essays)

8) Church History in Missouri

Zion/New Jerusalem (Church History Topics)
Jackson County Violence (Church History Topics)
Kirtland Safety Society (Church History Topics)
Danites (Church History Topics)
Mormon-Missouri War of 1838 (Church History Topics)
Extermination Order (Church History Topics)
Liberty Jail (Church History Topics)
Prophecies of Joseph Smith (Church History Topics)

9) Early Temples and Ordinances

Kirtland Temple (Church History Topics)
Nauvoo Temple (Church History Topics)
Temple Endowment (Church History Topics)
Masonry (Church History Topics)
Adjustments to Temple Work (Church History Topics)
Temple Building (Church History Topics)

10) Departure from Nauvoo

Nauvoo (Commerce), Illinois (Church History Topics)
Masonry (Church History Topics)
Council of Fifty (Church History Topics)
Missouri Extradition Attempts (Church History Topics)
Succession of Church Leadership (Church History Topics)
Pioneer Trek (Church History Topics)

11) Brigham Young

Brigham Young (Church History Topics)
Deaths of Joseph and Hyrum Smith (Church History Topics)
Utah (Church History Topics)
Danites (Church History Topics)
Mountain Meadows Massacre (Church History Topics)
Peace and Violence among 19th Century Latter-day Saints (Gospel Topics Essays)

12) Seeking and Learning

Seeking Answers to Questions (Topics and Questions)
Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “Come, Join with Us,” General Conference, October 2013
Russell M. Nelson, “Christ Is Risen; Faith in Him Will Move Mountains,” General Conference, April 2021
Dallin H. Oaks, “Criticism,” Ensign, February 1987

13) Tithing

Tithing (Church History Topics)
Church Finances (Church History Topics)

Common Tactics in Antagonistic Materials

Offer new freedom and advanced thinking
Share selected facts that are taken out of their wider contexts
Present errors as if they are correct, often blurring facts and errors together
Allege secret conspiracies and dark motives

See alo “How Can We Find Truth in a Sea of Information?” (Liahona, April 2023)

The post Helpful Sources of Information appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2024 April General Conference, Sunday Morning Session

Pillars and Rays

Elder Alexander Dushku
Of the Seventy

Main Points

We too can have our own pillar of light—one ray at a time.
No two people experience God’s light and truth in exactly the same way.
Most of us receive truth line upon line, not in one big revelation

Gospel Principles taught

Jesus Christ, The Holy Ghost, Faith in Christ,

Gospel Doctrine taught

Restoration, Prophets

Scriptures

Joseph Smith—History 1:10–13, Joseph Smith—History 1:14–16, Joseph Smith—History 1:17, Joseph Smith—History 1:20, Mosiah 16:9, Doctrine and Covenants 84:46; John 1:9, Doctrine and Covenants 88:12–13, Doctrine and Covenants 6:23, Doctrine and Covenants 8:2; Helaman 5:30, Mosiah 5:2; Doctrine and Covenants 11:12, 2 Nephi 4:21; Helaman 5:44, Doctrine and Covenants 46:13–14, Doctrine and Covenants 18:35–36, Mosiah 2:17; Moroni 7:45–48, 1 Nephi 1:20, Helaman 5:9–12, Doctrine and Covenants 20:77, 79, Moroni 10:3–4, Doctrine and Covenants 88:40, Alma 32:35, Doctrine and Covenants 50:24, Alma 32:41

Other Sources

Joseph Smith, Journal, Nov. 9–11, 1835, 24

Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith Chapter 23: Receiving a Testimony of Jesus Christ

Related talks:

Russell M. Nelson, “Closing Remarks”
Spencer W. Kimball, in Conference Report, Munich Germany Area Conference, 1973, 77; quoted in Graham W. Doxey, “The Voice Is Still Small”
David A. Bednar, The Spirit of Revelation
Gerritt W. Gong, Ministering
Always Remember Him

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- Jesus Christ “is the light and … life of the world”
- Christ’s “Spirit giveth light to every man [and woman] that cometh into the world”
- His light “fill[s] the immensity of space”
- His light gives “life to all things.”
- I bear witness of Jesus Christ, that He is the light and life of the whole world—and of your personal world and mine.
- I testify that He is the true and living Son of the true and living God and that He stands at the head of this true and living Church, guided and directed by His true and living prophets and apostles.
Description of His Teachings.
- The Lord teaches truth line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.”
- The Lord’s typical pattern, brothers and sisters. Rather than sending us a pillar of light, the Lord sends us a ray of light, and then another, and another.

Inspiring Words & Phrases

My message is for those who worry about their testimony because they haven’t had overwhelming spiritual experiences.
The Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ began with an explosion of light and truth!
All that, and much more, began with a boy’s desperate prayer and a pillar of light.
One of the great truths of the Restoration is that the heavens are open—that we too can receive light and knowledge from on high. I testify that is true.
One of the great truths of the Restoration is that the heavens are open—that we too can receive light and knowledge from on high. I testify that is true.
But we must be wary of a spiritual trap. Sometimes faithful Church members become discouraged and even drift away because they haven’t had overwhelming spiritual experiences—because they haven’t experienced their own pillar of light.
President Spencer W. Kimball warned, “Always expecting the spectacular, many will miss entirely the constant flow of revealed communication.”
Rather than sending us a pillar of light, the Lord sends us a ray of light, and then another, and another.
The Light of Christ is literally all around us.
Perhaps you were reading in the Book of Mormon and a verse spoke to your soul, as if God had put it there just for you—and then you realized that He did.
Brothers and sisters, I have not seen a pillar of light, but, like you, I have experienced many divine rays. Over the years, I’ve tried to treasure such experiences. I find that as I do, I recognize and remember even more of them.
I remember studying and praying desperately to receive a more certain witness of Jesus Christ. Then one day, as I pled with Heavenly Father, I felt a powerful sense of light and warmth. And I knew. I just knew.
You have had your own experiences—your own light-filled bursts of testimony. As we recognize, remember, and gather these rays “together in one,” something wonderful and powerful begins to happen. “Light cleaveth unto light”—“truth embraceth truth.” The reality and power of one ray of testimony reinforces and combines with another, and then another, and another. Line upon line, precept upon precept, here a ray and there a ray—one small, treasured spiritual moment at a time—there grows up within us a core of light-filled, spiritual experiences. Perhaps no one ray is strong enough or bright enough to constitute a full testimony, but together they can become a light that the darkness of doubt cannot overcome.
In time and through “great diligence,” we too can have our own pillar of light—one ray at a time. And in the midst of that pillar, we too will find a loving Heavenly Father calling us by name, pointing us to our Savior, Jesus Christ, and inviting us to “Hear Him!”
May we recognize and receive His glorious light and then choose Him over the darkness of the world—always and forever.

Lists

We have needs just like Joseph did:

Freedom from spiritual confusion.
Freedom from worldly darkness.
The need to know for ourselves.

The restoration brought a flood of:

Divine revelation
New scripture
Restored priesthood keys
Apostles
Prophets
Ordinances
Covenants
Reestablishment of the true and living church

We are ‘living in revelation’ (worthy to receive these divine rays constantly) if:

We have received the gift of the Holy Ghost
We are striving to exercise faith
We are striving to repent
We honor our covenants

Different ways we experience the light and Spirit of the Lord:

Peace spoken to your mind about something that has worried you
An impression to do something good
A desire to follow Jesus Christ
A desire to be faithful
Felt that the testimony you shared was true
Felt an assurance that God loves you
Someone else’s testimony of Christ touches you and gives you hope
A verse in the Book of Mormon seems to be just for you
Felt love of God as you serve others
Remember past tender mercies

Invitations/Challenges

“Immerse yourself in the glorious light of the Restoration.” (Russell M. Nelson)
May we recognize and receive His glorious light and then choose Him over the darkness of the world—always and forever.

Warnings

But we must be wary of a spiritual trap. Sometimes faithful Church members become discouraged and even drift away because they haven’t had overwhelming spiritual experiences—because they haven’t experienced their own pillar of light.
President Spencer W. Kimball warned, “Always expecting the spectacular, many will miss entirely the constant flow of revealed communication.”

Blessings/Promises

in time and through “great diligence,” we too can have our own pillar of light—one ray at a time. And in the midst of that pillar, we too will find a loving Heavenly Father calling us by name, pointing us to our Savior, Jesus Christ, and inviting us to “Hear Him!”

Stories:

Elder Dushku tells the story of Joseph Smith. “And then, “at the very moment when [he’s] ready to sink into despair and abandon [him]self to destruction,” when he doesn’t know if he can hang on any longer, a glorious brilliance fills the grove, scattering the darkness and the enemy of his soul.” The answer to his question was given when a pillar of light appeared in the grove, with the Father and the Son.
Elder Dushku remembers being a rowdy teenager at a baptism and having the Spirit urge him to sit down and be reverent.
He recounts how he received a more sure witness of Christ before his mission.
“Being awakened one night years later by a feeling of “pure intelligence” telling me I would be called to serve in the elders quorum.”
“I remember a general conference where a beloved member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles spoke the exact words of testimony I had told a friend I hoped to hear.”
I remember kneeling with hundreds of brethren to pray for a dear friend who lay unconscious on a ventilator in a small, faraway hospital after his heart had stopped. As we united our own hearts to plead for his life, he woke up and pulled the ventilator out of his own throat. He serves today as a stake president.
And I remember waking up with strong spiritual feelings after a vivid dream of a dear friend and mentor who passed away far too early, leaving an enormous hole in my life. He was smiling and joyful. I knew he was OK.

Application Ideas

Take some time to think about how you experience the light and Spirit of the Lord. Write your observations in a journal or your study journal. Revisit and revise your comments over time.
Over the next month, spend a week focusing on each of the items under “living in revelation.” Write about your experiences or share them with a trusted friend.
Honestly evaluate whether or not you are being aware of the spiritual trap Elder Dushku mentions. Ask Heavenly Father for a desire to overcome and weakness you may find.

The post Consider Conference: Pillars and Rays appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Gerrit Dirkmaat was featured in episode 5. This is the full interview. Check out Dr. Dirkmaat’s podcast with Prof. Richard LeDuc: https://standardoftruth.com/

Gerrit Dirkmaat is an associate professor of Church history and doctrine at Brigham Young University. He received his PhD from the University of Colorado in 2010, where he studied nineteenth-century American expansionism and foreign relations. He worked as a historian and writer for the Church History Department from 2010 to 2014 with the Joseph Smith Papers Project. He is the coauthor, along with Michael Hubbard MacKay, of the award-winning book From Darkness unto Light: Joseph Smith’s Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon, published by the BYU Religious Studies Center and Deseret Book in 2015. In 2023, they published another book on the topic: Let’s Talk About the Translation of the Book of Mormon. In addition to books, Gerrit is also the author of dozens of academic articles. He currently serves as the editor of the academic journal Latter-day Saint Historical Studies published by the Ensign Peak Foundation. Since 2021 he has hosted and produced a weekly Church history podcast: Standard of Truth. It examines Church history questions and sources. He and his wife, Angela, have four children.

Sarah Allen is a senior researcher with FAIR, and the 2022 recipient of the John Taylor: Defender of the Faith Award. By profession, she works in mortgage compliance and is a freelance copyeditor. An avid reader, she loves studying the Gospel and the history of the restored Church. After watching some of her friends lose their testimonies, she became interested in helping others through their faith crises. That’s when she began sharing what she’d learned through her studies. She is a co-moderator the LDS subreddit on Reddit and the author of a multi-part series rebutting the CES Letter. She’s grateful to those at FAIR who have given her the opportunity to share her testimony with a wider audience.

The post Me, My Shelf, & I – Episode 8 – Seer Stones w/ Dr. Gerrit Dirkmaat (Full Interview) appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In this episode, Jennifer, Zach, and Sarah discuss why seer stones are no longer used today. Throughout this 6 part series, Me, My Shelf, & I will tackle and refute claims about the seer stones head-on using facts from the historical narrative.

Timestamps:
(00:00) Introduction
(1:35) Background
(13:39) Peace Child
(21:11) Conclusion

Jennifer Roach earned a Master of Divinity from The Seattle School of Theology and Psychology, and a Master of Counseling from Argosy University. Before her conversion to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints she was an ordained minister in the Anglican church. Her own experience of sexual abuse from a pastor during her teen years led her to care deeply about issues of abuse in faith communities.

Zachary Wright was born in American Fork, UT. He served his mission speaking Spanish in North Carolina and the Dominican Republic. He currently attends BYU studying psychology, but loves writing, and studying LDS theology and history. His biggest desire is to help other people bring them closer to each other, and ultimately bring people closer to God.

The post Me, My Shelf, & I – Episode 6 – Seer Stones: Why Aren’t They Used Today? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2024 April General Conference, Sunday Afternoon Session

It Is Wisdom in the Lord That We Should Have the Book of Mormon

President Mark L. Pace
Sunday School General President

Main Points

It is my prayer that reading the Book of Mormon this year will be a joy and a blessing for each of us.
Study implies effort.
We can have a personal experience with the love of God by prayerfully studying the Book of Mormon.
We need the Book of Mormon every day.

Gospel Principles taught

Jesus Christ, Agency, The Holy Ghost, Prayer, Scriptures, Second Coming

Gospel Doctrine taught

Prophets and Revelation, Prophets

Scriptures

Doctrine and Covenants 64:33, Doctrine and Covenants 11:13, Moses 5:12–16, Daniel 2:34–35, 44–45; Doctrine and Covenants 65:2, Doctrine and Covenants 50:22; see also verses 17–21, Jacob 1:3–4, Jacob 4:6, 1 Nephi 5:21–22, 1 Nephi 8:14–16, 2 Nephi 25:26, Doctrine and Covenants 6:22–24

Other Sources

Topics and Questions, “Dispensations,” Gospel Library
Conversion Is Our Goal,” Come Follow Me—For Home and Church: Book of Mormon 2024
Ryan Jensen, “Church Distributes 200 Millionth Copy of the Book of Mormon,” Church News, Dec. 29, 2023
Introduction to the Book of Mormon

Related talks:

Becoming Exemplary Latter-day Saints
Russell M. Nelson, “The Gathering of Scattered Israel,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2006
Russell M. Nelson, “Opening Remarks,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2018
Kevin W. Pearson, “Are You Still Willing?,” Liahona, Nov. 2022
Russell M. Nelson, “The Book of Mormon: What Would Your Life Be Like without It?,” Ensign or Liahona, Nov. 2017

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- Heavenly Father lives. Jesus Christ is our Savior and Redeemer. The Book of Mormon contains His words and conveys His love. President Russell M. Nelson is the Lord’s living prophet on the earth today. I know these things to be true because of the confirming witness of the Holy Ghost, which witness I first received while reading the Book of Mormon as a boy. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Inspiring Words & Phrases

Your daily connection with God and His word has profound consequences.
Now, today, we live in the dispensation of the fulness of times. This is the only dispensation that will not end in an apostasy. It is this dispensation that will usher in the Second Coming of the Savior Jesus Christ and His millennial reign. So, what’s different about this dispensation? What has the Lord provided us today, especially for our time, that will help us draw near to the Savior and never leave Him? One answer that comes to my mind is the scriptures—and particularly the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ.
While God has promised there will never be another general apostasy, we need to be mindful and careful to avoid a personal apostasy—remembering, as President Russell M. Nelson has taught, “We are each responsible for our individual spiritual growth.”
Studying the Book of Mormon, as we are doing this year, always brings us closer to the Savior—and helps us stay close to Him.
Sometimes reading the Book of Mormon is just about feeling connected to God today—nourishing the soul, being strengthened spiritually before heading out to face the world, or finding healing after a rough day out in the world.
The great worth and spiritual power of the scriptures continue undimmed in our lives today.
There has never been a people in history with the access to the Book of Mormon and other scriptures that we enjoy today.
The most important copy of the Book of Mormon is our personal copy. It is the copy that we read.
From the time I started reading the Book of Mormon, I felt that Heavenly Father was aware of my efforts. And I felt that I mattered to Him. As I read and prayed, comfortable, peaceful feelings rested upon me. Chapter by chapter, the light of faith was growing brighter inside my soul. In time, I realized that these feelings were confirmations of truth from the Holy Ghost. I came to know for myself that the Book of Mormon is true and that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world.
Nephi said it right. It was wisdom in the Lord that we should carry the scriptures with us throughout our lives. The Book of Mormon is the “keystone” that makes this dispensation different from all previous dispensations.

Lists

Reading the Savior’s teachings in the scriptures:

Helps us transform our homes into sanctuaries of faith
Helps us transform our homes into centers of gospel learning
Invites the Spirit into our homes
Enables the Spirit to fill our souls with joy
Enables the Spirit to convert us into lifelong disciples of Jesus Christ

Reading in the holy books of scripture, we find the following pattern in every dispensation:

God restores or reveals the gospel of Jesus Christ through His prophets.
The people follow the prophets and are greatly blessed.
Over time, some people stop heeding the words of the prophets and distance themselves from the Lord and His gospel. This is what we call apostasy.
We see a pattern of restoration and apostasy repeated in the dispensations of Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and others.

President Nelson’s promises to those who study the Book of Mormon prayerfully every day:

You will make better decisions every day
The windows of Heaven will open
You will receive answers to your own questions
You will receive direction for your own life

Invitations/Challenges

It is my prayer that reading the Book of Mormon this year will be a joy and a blessing for each of us and will draw us ever nearer to the Savior.

Warnings

we need to be mindful and careful to avoid a personal apostasy

Blessings/Promises

Studying the Book of Mormon, as we are doing this year, always brings us closer to the Savior—and helps us stay close to Him.
We study the scriptures so the Holy Ghost, the great teacher, can deepen our conversion to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ and help us become more like Them.
“Heavenly Father wants you to know for yourself. But you must put in the effort. You need to read the Book of Mormon and pray to know by the Holy Ghost. Heavenly Father will answer your prayers.”
As we study the Book of Mormon and follow the living prophet, there will be no personal apostasy in our lives.

Stories:

The story of Lehi’s vision of the tree of life. This vision teaches us how important it is that we have a personal experience with the love of God. Lehi was an intentional parent – he led his children to partake of the fruit with clear directions so he couldn’t be misunderstood.
President Pace had a similar experience with his mother, who instructed him to work to know for himself that the gospel is true. “Her question ignited in me a desire to know for myself.” He read from the Book of Mormon every night before going to bed, then knelt and prayer to know of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon

Equations:

IF ‘we improve our learning at home’ THEN ‘we improve our teaching at Church’
IF ‘it was wise for Lehi and his family to have the scriptures’ THEN ‘it is just as wise for us today’

Application Ideas

“What has the Holy Ghost taught us this week during our study of the Book of Mormon?” Write your answer in your journal or scripture journal.
Ask yourself, “How does what I studied this week bring me closer to the Savior?” Write your answers in your journal.
How can you have a personal experience with the love of God this week?
How can you increase your experience with the Book of Mormon this week?

The post Consider Conference: It Is Wisdom in the Lord That We Should Have the Book of Mormon appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In this episode, Sarah, Jennifer, and Zach discuss mentions of the seer stones throughout history. Throughout this 6 part series, Me, My Shelf, & I will tackle and refute claims about the seer stones head-on using facts from the historical narrative.

Timestamps:
(00:00) Introduction
(5:44) Richard Bushman Statement
(6:11) Overview
(8:16) Gerrit Dirmaat Interview
(35:39) Mark Ashurst-McGee Interview
(01:12:34) Conclusion

Mark Ashurst-McGee is a senior historian in the Church History Department and the senior research and review editor for the Joseph Smith Papers, where he also serves as a specialist in document analysis and documentary editing methodology. He holds a PhD in history from Arizona State University and has trained at the Institute for the Editing of Historical Documents. He has coedited several volumes of The Joseph Smith Papers and is also coeditor of Foundational Texts of Mormonism: Examining Major Early Sources (Oxford University Press, 2018). He is also the author of several articles on Joseph Smith and early Latter-day Saint history published in scholarly journals and popular venues.

The post Me, My Shelf, & I – Episode 5 – Seer Stones: Did the Church Lie? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2024 April General Conference, Sunday Afternoon Session

Words Matter

Elder Ronald A. Rasband
of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Main Points

Words set a tone. They voice our thoughts, feelings, and experiences, for good or bad.
God’s words matter. The prophets’ words matter. And our words matter.

Gospel Principles taught

Jesus Christ, Prayer, Scriptures, Personal Responsibility

Gospel Doctrine taught

Marriage and Family, Commandments, Agency, Prophets

Scriptures

Alma 31:5, Genesis 1:3, Matthew 24:35, John 14:23, Luke 1:38, Joseph Smith—History 1:17, 2 Nephi 1:15, Jacob 4:13, Jacob 7:5, Ephesians 2:21, 2 Nephi 32:3, 2 Nephi 32:3, 2 Nephi 32:2, 2 Nephi 33, Isaiah 9:6, John 1:1

Other Sources

“More Holiness Give Me,” Hymns, no. 131
“President Nelson Invites Us to #GiveThanks”
Chapter 6: Sustaining Those Whom the Lord Sustains
News for Temples in Five Nations
Dedicatory Prayer – Bangkok Thailand Temple, 22 October 2023

Related talks:

Russell M. Nelson, “I Studied More Than 2,200 Scriptures about the Savior in Six Weeks: Here Is a Little of What I Learned,”
Russell M. Nelson, “Sustaining the Prophets,”
Russell M. Nelson, “As We Go Forward Together,”
Russell M. Nelson, “Hope of Israel”
Russell M. Nelson, “Let God Prevail,”
Russell M. Nelson, “President Nelson Shares Social Post about Racism and Calls for Respect for Human Dignity,”
Russell M. Nelson, “Overcome the World and Find Rest,”
Russell M. Nelson, “Choices for Eternity”
Russell M. Nelson, “Peacemakers Needed,”
Russell M. Nelson, “Think Celestial!,”
Thomas S. Monson, “Blessings of the Temple,”
Thomas S. Monson, “To the Rescue,”

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- I love the Lord Jesus Christ. He is, in the words of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah, “Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” And as the Apostle John made clear, Jesus Christ Himself is “the Word.”Of this I testify as an Apostle called to the Lord’s divine service—to declare His word—and called to stand as a special witness of Him. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, amen.
Description of His Teachings.
- First and foremost, the Lord’s words matter.
Christ’s words:
- “Let there be light:
- “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”
- “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

Words matter a lot. Let me say that again. Words matter! They are the bedrock of how we connect; they represent our beliefs, morals, and perspectives. Sometimes we speak words; other times we listen. Words set a tone. They voice our thoughts, feelings, and experiences, for good or bad.
First and foremost, the Lord’s words matter.
The “word of God” surpasses all other expressions.
When we think celestial, we see “things as they really are, and … really will be.” In this world burdened with confusion and contention, we all need that perspective.
Our words can be supportive or angry, joyful or mean, compassionate or tossed aside. In the heat of the moment, words can sting and sink painfully deep into the soul—and stay there. Our words on the internet, texting, social media, or tweets take on a life of their own. So be careful what you say and how you say it. In our families, especially with husbands, wives, and children, our words can bring us together or drive a wedge between us.
Let me suggest three simple phrases that we can use to take the sting out of difficulties and differences, lift, and reassure each other: “Thank you.” “I am sorry.” And “I love you.” Do not save these humble phrases for a special event or catastrophe. Use them often and sincerely, for they show regard for others.

Lists

Words can be used negatively. Words:

Can be thoughtless
Can be hasty
Can be hurtful
Cannot be taken back once they’re spoken
Can wound
Words can punish
Words can cut down
Words can lead to destructive action
Words can weigh heavily on us

Words can be used positively. Words:

Can celebrate victory
Can be hopeful
Can be encouraging
Can prompt us to rethink
Can prompt us to reboot
Can prompt us to redirect our course
Can open our minds to truth

Ways we “Hear Him” – ways we listen to the word of the Lord:

We “hear Him” in the words of scripture
We “hear Him” in personal revelation
We “hear Him” in promptings from the Holy Ghost
We “hear Him” in answers to prayer
We “hear Him” in those moments when only Jesus Christ, through the power of His Atonement, can lift our burdens, grant us forgiveness and peace, and embrace us “in the arms of his love.”

What words matter?

The word of God
The words of prophets

Memorable words of President Nelson:

Keep on the covenant path
Gather Israel
Let God prevail
Build bridges of understanding
Give thanks
Increase your faith in Jesus Christ
Take charge of your testimony
Become a peacemaker
Think Celestial

Invitations/Challenges

We can say “thank you” on the elevator, in the parking lot, at the market, in the office, in a queue, or with our neighbors or friends. We can say “I am sorry” when we make a mistake, miss a meeting, forget a birthday, or see someone in pain. We can say “I love you,” and those words carry the message “I am thinking about you,” “I care about you,” “I am here for you,” or “You are everything to me.”

Either/Or

Our words can:

Be supportive OR be angry
Be joyful OR mean
Be compassionate OR tossed aside

Warnings

We “hear Him” in the words of scripture, but do we let them just sit on the page, or do we recognize He is speaking to us? Do we change?
Words of the prophet matter to the Lord and to us.
In the heat of the moment, words can sting and sink painfully deep into the soul—and stay there. Our words on the internet, texting, social media, or tweets take on a life of their own. So be careful what you say and how you say it. In our families, especially with husbands, wives, and children, our words can bring us together or drive a wedge between us.
Do not save these humble phrases for a special event or catastrophe. Use them often and sincerely, for they show regard for others. Talk is growing cheap; do not follow that pattern.
“The words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do.” We are Heavenly Father’s children and He is our God, and He expects us to speak with “the tongue of angels” by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Blessings/Promises

Believing and heeding the word of God will draw us closer to Him. President Russell M. Nelson has promised, “If you will study His words, your ability to be more like Him will increase.”
(quoting President Nelson) As you think celestial, your heart will gradually change, … you will view trials and opposition in a new light, … [and] your faith will increase.
President Thomas S. Monson used to say, “There are feet to steady, hands to grasp, minds to encourage, hearts to inspire, and souls to save.”30 Saying “thank you,” “I am sorry,” “I love you” will do just that.
I promise that if we
1. “feast upon the words of Christ” that lead to salvation,
2. (feast upon) our prophet’s words that guide and encourage us,
3. and our own words that speak of who we are and what we hold dear,

Then the powers of heaven will pour down upon us.

Stories:

The story of how Alma counseled that they use the word of God because it had a greater effect on the people than anything else.
Reminded us that the “words of God” that Joseph heard in the Sacred Grove were “Hear Him!”
Elder George Albert Smith, long before becoming President of the Church, spoke of sustaining the prophet and heeding his words. He said: “The obligation that we make when we raise our hands … is a most sacred one. … It means … that we will stand behind him; we will pray for him; … and we will strive to carry out his instructions as the Lord shall direct.” In other words, we will diligently act upon our prophet’s words.
Told of his experience in dedicating the Bangkok, Thailand, temple. He had written out the words of the prayer and it had been translated into 12 languages, but the night before the dedication, he felt inspired to add these words to the closing part of the prayer: “May we think celestial, letting Thy Spirit prevail in our lives, and strive to be peacemakers always.”
Story of when he traveled for business, he would call home at the end of every day and he and his wife Melanie would “report in.” These conversations always led to expressing love to each other. “Every day, those words served as an anchor to my soul and my conduct; they were a protection to me from evil designs. ‘Melanie, I love you’ spoke of the precious trust between us.”

Application Ideas

This week, pray for the desire to have the “powers of Heaven pour down” upon you. Ponder what that would mean in your life.
Each day this week, take the opportunity to “feast upon the words of Christ.”
Each day this week, find a way to “feast” upon the words of the prophets. As you are ‘feasting,’ identify the prophet’s words that seem to offer you guidance, and identify the prophet’s words that offer you encouragement. Write those words in your journal.
Pay attention to the way you speak, especially to and about those you love. How can you use your words to illustrate what things, people and relationships you hold dear?
Find one example of how your words have driven a wedge between you and someone else. How can you use your words to mend that relationship? Pray about your situation and follow any promptings you receive.

The post Consider Conference: Words Matter appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2024 April General Conference, Sunday Afternoon Session

Rejoice in the Gift of Priesthood Keys
President Russell M. Nelson
President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Main Points

Priesthood keys govern how the priesthood of God may be used to bring about the Lord’s purposes and bless all who accept the restored gospel.
The Kirtland Temple has unusual significance in the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Several events that took place there had been prophesied for millennia and were essential for the Lord’s restored Church to fulfill its latter-day mission.
The promise Christ gave of the Kirtland Temple on April 3, 1836, applies to every dedicated temple today: “I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.”
The significance of the restoration of Priesthood keys to the earth cannot be overstated.
Joseph Smith’s dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland Temple is a tutorial about how the temple spiritually empowers you and me to meet the challenges of life in these last days.
Understanding the spiritual privileges made possible in the temple is vital to each of us today.

Gospel Principles taught

Our Heavenly Family, Jesus Christ, Agency, The Priesthood, Priesthood Organization, The Lord’s Covenant People, Missionary Work, The Family can be Eternal, Eternal Marriage, Temple Work & Family History, Gathering of Israel

Gospel Doctrine taught

Priesthood and Priesthood Keys, Ordinances and Covenants, The Restoration, Marriage and Family, Agency, The Covenant Path

Scriptures

Doctrine and Covenants 110:3
Doctrine and Covenants 110:4
Doctrine and Covenants 110:7
Doctrine and Covenants 110:11
Doctrine and Covenants 110:12
Genesis 18:18
1 Nephi 15:18
Malachi 4:5–6
Doctrine and Covenants 110:13–16
Doctrine and Covenants 13
Doctrine and Covenants 27:7–8, 12
Doctrine and Covenants 20:1–4
Doctrine and Covenants 121:28
Doctrine and Covenants 95:8
Doctrine and Covenants 109:22
Doctrine and Covenants 132:45–46
2 Nephi 26:33
Doctrine and Covenants 109:8
Doctrine and Covenants 109:15
Doctrine and Covenants 109:22
Doctrine and Covenants 109:24–26
Doctrine and Covenants 110:12
Doctrine and Covenants 132:29–30

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- The Prophet recorded that the Savior’s “eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters.”
- My dear brothers and sisters, I testify that this is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He stands at its head. We are His disciples.
Christ’s own words.
- “I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father.”
- “I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

Jesus Christ…declared that He had accepted the temple as His house and made this stunning promise: “I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.” This significant promise applies to every dedicated temple today.
Then Elijah the prophet appeared. His appearance fulfilled Malachi’s promise that before the Second Coming, the Lord would send Elijah to “turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers.”10 Elijah conferred the keys of the sealing power upon Joseph Smith.
The significance of these keys being returned to the earth by three heavenly messengers under the direction of the Lord cannot be overstated.
The power of these priesthood keys is infinite and breathtaking.
Without priesthood keys, none of us would have access to essential ordinances and covenants that bind us to our loved ones eternally and allow us eventually to live with God.
Priesthood keys distinguish The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from any other organization on earth. Many other organizations can and do make your life better here in mortality. But no other organization can and will influence your life after death.
Priesthood keys give us the authority to extend all of the blessings promised to Abraham to every covenant-keeping man and woman. Temple work makes these exquisite blessings available to all of God’s children, regardless of where or when they lived or now live. Let us rejoice that priesthood keys are once again on the earth!
The sealing power is supernal evidence of how much God loves all of His children everywhere and wants each of them to choose to return home to Him.
How much does it increase your confidence to know that, as an endowed woman or man armed with the power of God, you do not have to face life alone? What courage does it give you to know that angels really will help you?
The temple is the gateway to the greatest blessings God has in store for each of us, for the temple is the only place on earth where we may receive all of the blessings promised to Abraham.

Lists

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery experienced a series of remarkable visions in the Kirtland Temple on Easter Sunday, April 3, 1836:

Jesus Christ appeared. He affirmed His identity as the Savior and accepted the Kirtland Temple as His House.
Moses appeared. He conferred upon Joseph Smith the keys for the gathering of Israel and the return of the ten tribes.
Elias appeared. He committed the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham to Joseph.
Elijah the prophet appeared. Elijah conferred the keys of the sealing power upon Joseph Smith.

About priesthood keys:

Constitute the authority and power of presidency.
Govern how the priesthood of God may be used to bring about the Lord’s purposes.
Bless all who accept the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.
Gave Joseph Smith authority to organize the Church in 1830.

Different priesthood keys mentioned:

Keys of the Aaronic priesthood
Keys of the Melchizedek priesthood
Keys of the Gathering of Israel
Keys of the Gospel of Abraham
Keys of the Sealing Power

These keys are essential in order to authorize Joseph Smith and all succeeding Presidents of the Lord’s Church

To gather Israel on both sides of the veil
To bless all covenant children with the blessings of Abraham
To place a ratifying seal on priesthood ordinances and covenants
To seal families eternally
make it possible for every covenant-keeping man and woman to enjoy incredible personal spiritual privileges.

Without these keys:

You could not be endowed with the power of God.
The Church could serve only as a significant teaching and humanitarian organization but not much more.
None of us would have access to essential ordinances and covenants that bind us to our loved ones eternally and allow us eventually to live with God.

I invite you to consider carefully the following three statements:

The gathering of Israel is evidence that God loves all of His children everywhere.
The gospel of Abraham is further evidence that God loves all of His children everywhere. He invites all to come unto Him—“black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God.”
The sealing power is supernal evidence of how much God loves all of His children everywhere and wants each of them to choose to return home to Him.

The Temple is:

a house of prayer
a house of fasting
a house of faith
a house of learning
a house of glory
a house of order
a house of God

This list of attributes is much more than a description of a temple. It is a promise about what will happen to those who serve and worship in the house of the Lord. They can expect to receive answers to prayer, personal revelation, greater faith, strength, comfort, increased knowledge, and increased power.

New Temples announced:

Uturoa, French Polynesia
Chihuahua, Mexico
Florianópolis, Brazil
Rosario, Argentina
Edinburgh, Scotland
Brisbane, Australia south area
Victoria, British Columbia
Yuma, Arizona
Houston, Texas south area
Des Moines, Iowa
Cincinnati, Ohio
Honolulu, Hawaii
West Jordan, Utah
Lehi, Utah
Maracaibo, Venezuela

Invitations/Challenges

I hope you will repeatedly study the messages of this conference throughout the coming months.
I invite you to ponder what the Lord’s promise (“I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.”) means for you personally.
Consider how your life would be different if priesthood keys had not been restored to the earth.
I encourage you to study that prayer (the dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland Temple), recorded in Doctrine and Covenants section 109.
How much does it increase your confidence to know that, as an endowed woman or man armed with the power of God, you do not have to face life alone? What courage does it give you to know that angels really will help you?
Let us rejoice in the restoration of priesthood keys, which make it possible for you and me to enjoy every spiritual blessing we are willing and worthy to receive.

Blessings/Promises

This list of attributes (“a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God.”) is much more than a description of a temple. It is a promise about what will happen to those who serve and worship in the house of the Lord. They can expect to receive answers to prayer, personal revelation, greater faith, strength, comfort, increased knowledge, and increased power.
Time in the temple will help you to think celestial and to catch a vision of who you really are, who you can become, and the kind of life you can have forever.
Regular temple worship will enhance the way you see yourself and how you fit into God’s magnificent plan. I promise you that.
We are also promised that in the temple we may “receive a fullness of the Holy Ghost.” Imagine what that promise means in terms of having the heavens open for each earnest seeker of eternal truth.
all who worship in the temple will have the power of God and angels having “charge over them.”
“no combination of wickedness” will prevail over those who worship in the house of the Lord.
My dear brothers and sisters, here is my promise. Nothing will help you more to hold fast to the iron rod than worshiping in the temple as regularly as your circumstances permit. Nothing will protect you more as you encounter the world’s mists of darkness. Nothing will bolster your testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ and His Atonement or help you understand God’s magnificent plan more. Nothing will soothe your spirit more during times of pain. Nothing will open the heavens more. Nothing!

Stories:

40 years ago to the day, on April 7, 1984, President Dallin H. Oaks and President Russell M. Nelson were sustained to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
When Russell M. Nelson was born (Sept 9, 1924), there were only six functioning temples in the Church:St. George, Logan, Manti, and Salt Lake City, Utah; as well as in Cardston, Alberta, Canada; and Laie, Hawaii; as well as the Nauvoo and Kirtland temples, which the Saints had to leave when they moved west. The Nauvoo was destroyed by arson, and rebuilt and dedicated by President Gordon B. Hinkley. The Kirtland temple was first desecrated by enemies of the Church, then acquired by the Community of Christ, and now (along with several historic sites in Nauvoo) has been purchased by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Application Ideas

Make a plan of how you personally will follow the Prophet’s instruction to ‘repeatedly study the messages’ of the April 2024 General Conference throughout the coming months.
Accept the prophet’s challenge to ponder what the Lord’s promise to manifest himself to his people in mercy in His house means to you personally. Write your feelings and any impressions you have in your journal or study journal.
Read and ponder D&C 109.
Make an effort to visit a temple this week, even if it’s only the temple grounds. If you don’t live near a temple, you might consider a virtual tour of the Kirtland Temple, the Orem, Utah temple or the Saratoga Springs Temple.
Pray for an increased understanding and love of the temple.

The post Consider Conference: Rejoice in the Gift of Priesthood Keys appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Shauna Horne

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

General conference is a time for members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to hear from the beloved prophet and apostles. Conference weekend is always spiritually uplifting, but preparing beforehand is essential if we want to get the most out of the messages we hear.

President Howard W. Hunter (1907–1995) taught that general conference is a time to strengthen our testimonies and resolve to improve our lives: “Conference time is a season of spiritual revival when knowledge and testimony are increased and solidified.”

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: How Can I Prepare for General Conference? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2023 October General Conference, Sunday Morning Session

Our Constant Companion
President Henry B. Eyring, Second Counselor in the First Presidency

Main Points

President Eyring offers a brief letter to his posterity in hopes it will help them when he is no longer with them. This talk is meant to share with them (and us) what he has personally come to know in hopes it will help them in difficult days ahead.
We can be taught by the Spirit line upon line
When a task from the Lord seems greater than our capacity and experience, we can take courage that the Spirit will guide us.
The constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is not easy to achieve.
The Lord sends the Holy Ghost when we turn to Him in faith.
When we are willing to serve the Lord, the Holy Ghost can and will guide us.

Gospel Principles taught

Our Father in Heaven, Jesus Christ, The Holy Ghost, Repentance, the Gift of the Holy Ghost, Sacrament, Service

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Godhead, God the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost

Scriptures

Helaman 11:23, 1 Nephi 3:7, 1 Nephi 4:5–6, Doctrine and Covenants 20:77, John 15:26, Doctrine and Covenants 121:45–46

Related talks:

Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives
Lessons from Liberty Jail
We Can Do Better and Be Better

Other sources cited:

At times I have difficulty feeling the Spirit because I feel numb. Does this mean I am doing something wrong and have lost the Spirit?

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- Of all the things of which the Holy Ghost testifies, the most precious for us is that Jesus is the Christ, the living Son of God.
- As a witness of Jesus Christ, I know that He lives and He leads His Church.
Description of His Teachings.
- The Savior promised, “When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.”
- Jesus Christ did pray to the Father to send the Holy Ghost to guide, comfort, and testify of truth to us.
Description of His Atonement.
- I try to remember the Savior’s sacrifice and His love for me. Then, when I pray to Heavenly Father to give thanks, I feel love and assurance that my prayers are heard and that I will receive whatever is best for me and those I love. It strengthens my testimony.
Description of His relationship with us.
- I testify that the Lord has kept His promise. The Holy Ghost is being sent to the faithful covenant members of the Church of Jesus Christ.

Inspiring Words & Phrases

the Lord speaks to us personally through the Holy Ghost.
We can be taught by and learn from the Spirit line upon line, receiving what we need, and then when we are ready, we will receive more.
Nephi’s experience with the Holy Ghost on that errand has given me courage many times when I have embarked on tasks I knew were assignments from the Lord but which seemed far beyond my past experience and beyond what I saw as my capacity.
We each think and say and do things in our daily lives that can offend the Spirit. When that happens, as it will, we may feel disapproval from the Lord. And we may be tempted to feel we are alone. It is important to remember the sure promise we receive each week as we repent and partake of the sacrament: “That they may always have his Spirit to be with them.”
When I feel distant from the Lord, when answers to my prayers seem delayed, I have learned … to review my life for opportunities to repent.
Our motives need to be driven by the pure love of Christ.
I bear my witness that God the Father lives. He loves you. He hears your every prayer.
I pray that we may have that blessing and the companionship of the Holy Spirit this day and every day of our lives.
I love you.

Lists

The Holy Ghost’s role is to:

Enable us to survive spiritually
Guide us
Direct us
Comfort us
Influence us constantly
Testify of truth

I bear my witness:

God the Father lives.
God the Father loves you.
God the Father hears your every prayer.
Jesus Christ did pray to the Father to send the Holy Ghost.
The Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith.
The prophet Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God.
Heavenly messengers restored priesthood keys.
President Russell M. Nelson is the prophet of God for all the earth.
Jesus Christ lives.
Jesus Christ leads His church.

We can have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost as we:

Remember the Savior
Love the Savior
Repent
Ask for the Savior’s love to be in our hearts

Invitations/Challenges

“Daily repentance is the pathway to purity, and purity brings power.” (Nelson)
I pray with all my heart that your confidence will grow.

Equations

Daily repentance →purity→power

Warnings

We each think and say and do things in our daily lives that can offend the Spirit. When that happens, as it will, we may feel disapproval from the Lord. And we may be tempted to feel we are alone. It is important to remember the sure promise we receive each week as we repent and partake of the sacrament: “That they may always have his Spirit to be with them.”
If you want to receive the companionship of the Holy Ghost, you must want it for the right reasons. Your purposes must be the Lord’s purposes. If your motives are too selfish, you will find it difficult to receive and sense the promptings of the Spirit.

Blessings/Promises

As we pray and then heed the Spirit’s promptings, we gain greater insights and blessings to guide us through the increasingly difficult days ahead.
We can be taught by and learn from the Spirit line upon line, receiving what we need, and then when we are ready, we will receive more.
If you have felt the influence of the Holy Ghost today, you may take it as a sweet evidence that the Atonement is working in your life.
If you find yourself having difficulty in feeling the Holy Ghost, you might ponder whether there is anything for which you might repent and receive forgiveness.
You can pray with faith to know what to do to be cleansed and thus more nearly qualify for that constant companionship of the Holy Ghost.
Now, your experiences will be unique, and the Spirit will guide in the way best suited to your faith and capacity to receive revelation for you and for those you love and serve.
You and I have the opportunity to have the Holy Ghost as our constant companion and to have those truths confirmed as we remember and love the Savior, repent, and ask for His love to be in our hearts.

Stories:

Invited us to think about and pray about the story of the sons of Helaman, Nephi and Lehi, and those laboring with them. They faced opposition, served in a wicked place and dealt with deceptions. But they were “taught and guided by a series of experiences with the Holy Ghost.”
Reminded us of Nephi’s experience in being “led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things” he was supposed to do.
The story of a young woman who had moved far from home; her mother and her home teachers had felt concern on her behalf. The home teachers felt inspired that she was about to make choices that would lead to sadness and misery, so they went to see her. Under the influence of the Spirit, they pleaded with her to repent and choose the Lord’s path for her.

Application Ideas

Study the story of the sons of Helaman (Helaman 5 & 11 especially). Take notes in your journal or scriptures. Write down any impressions you have, and then follow President Eyring’s invitation to pray about this story.
After your study and prayer, make a goal of how you can apply this story to your life.
In the last three paragraphs of his talk, President Eyring testifies of many of the fundamental truths of the gospel. Then he says, “You and I have the opportunity to have the Holy Ghost as our constant companion and to have those truths confirmed as we remember and love the Savior, repent, and ask for His love to be in our hearts.” If those truths have been confirmed to you, consider writing those experiences in your journal. If any of those truths have not yet been confirmed to you, consider following President Eyring’s suggestion to love the Savior, repent, and ask for the Savior’s love to be in your heart.
Whenever you feel alone, think of the words of the sacrament prayer: ‘that they may always have His spirit to be with them.’
Reframe how you think about repentance. For the next week, try to notice the things you say and do that may offend the spirit, and ask for forgiveness. Write about your experience in your journal.

The post Consider Conference: Our Constant Companion appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2023 October General Conference, Sunday Morning Session

Be Peaceable Followers of Christ
Elder Quentin L. Cook, Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Main Points

Trials and death are things all of us face in mortality.
We are blessed with agency
Peaceable followers of Christ remember that mortality is like the second act in a three act play. They follow and obey even in trials.
Moroni quotes his father, who in speaking to his congregation, calls them the “peaceable followers of Christ.” Those troubled times in Nephite history resemble our own times. Navigating such difficult times can be done with joy by being the peaceable followers of Christ.

Gospel Principles taught

Our Father in Heaven, Jesus Christ, Agency, Prayer, Prophets, The Atonement, Faith in Christ, Obedience, the Family can be Eternal, Exaltation

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Plan of Salvation, The Atonement of Jesus Christ, Ordinances and Covenants, Commandments

Scriptures

Moroni 7:3, John 16:33, Mosiah 18:8–9, 2 Nephi 32:7, Abraham 3 (Chapter heading), Abraham 3:24–25, Alma 12:24, 2 Nephi 28:7–9, Acts 17:21, Doctrine and Covenants 123:12, Moroni 7:3, Doctrine and Covenants 6:34, Doctrine and Covenants 6:36–37, Hebrews 4:16, Hebrews 5:9, Moroni 7:3–4, Doctrine and Covenants 122:7–9, Alma 7:11-12, Matthew 11:28;verses 29–30, Doctrine and Covenants 137:10, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7, Mosiah 2:41, Doctrine and Covenants 1:14, Doctrine and Covenants 1:12, Doctrine and Covenants 136, Doctrine and Covenants 136:28, Doctrine and Covenants 136:29

Related talks:

The Songs They Could Not Sing
Overcome the World and Find Rest
“The Peaceable Followers of Christ”
Peacemakers Needed

Other Sources Cited:

President Russell M Nelson introduces preach my gospel …
Video: 3 Apostles talk about the impact of ‘Preach My Gospel’
Chapter 3: Lesson 2—Heavenly Father’s Plan of Salvation
The Great Plan of Happiness
‘These Things Shall Give Thee Experience’
Come, Ye Disconsolate

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- …We have a Father in Heaven who knows and loves us personally and understands our suffering perfectly. His Son, Jesus Christ, is our Savior and Redeemer.
- As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, I testify that “peaceable followers of Christ” will find personal peace in this life and a glorious heavenly reunion. I bear a sure witness of the Savior’s divinity and the reality of His Atonement. He is our Savior and Redeemer. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
Description of His Teachings.
- “Fear not, little flock; do good; let earth and hell combine against you, for if ye are built upon my rock, they cannot prevail.”
- “Look unto me in every thought; doubt not, fear not.”
- “… Be faithful, keep my commandments, and ye shall inherit the kingdom of heaven.”
- “If the very jaws of hell shall gape open the mouth wide after thee, know thou, my son, that all these things shall give thee experience, and shall be for thy good.
- “The Son of Man hath descended below them all. Art thou greater than he?
- “… Fear not what man can do, for God shall be with you forever and ever.”
- “give heed to the words of the prophets.”
- “Prepare ye, prepare ye for that which is to come.”
Description of His Atonement.
- We are blessed to know of Jesus Christ and His role in the plan.
- As peaceable followers of Christ, we strive to live His commandments. It has never been easy for His followers. Nor was it easy for the Savior to faithfully fulfill His mortal mission.
- “In His atoning sacrifice, Jesus Christ took upon Himself our pains, afflictions, and infirmities. Because of this, He knows ‘according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities’. He invites, ‘Come unto me,’ and as we do, He gives us rest, hope, strength, perspective, and healing.” (Preach My Gospel)
- “As we rely on Jesus Christ and His Atonement, He can help us endure our trials, sicknesses, and pain. We can be filled with joy, peace, and consolation. All that is unfair about life can be made right through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.” (Preach My Gospel)

Inspiring Words & Phrases

Those who believe in, humbly worship, and testify of Jesus Christ have always experienced trials, tribulation, and adversities.
Bad things happen to good people on this mortal journey.
Now all of us are here in the second estate of our journey of progression toward a kingdom of glory as part of God’s great plan of salvation and exaltation. We are blessed with agency and subject to the trials of mortality. This is the time allotted for us to prepare to meet God.
We choose the role of “a peacemaker, now and always.”
Our heavenly destiny is not altered when we suffer adversity.
Trials are a part of mortality and occur in everyone’s life throughout the world. This includes major conflicts between countries.
We can joyfully be peaceable followers of Christ.
Our Father’s plan of happiness for His children includes not only a premortal and mortal life but also a potential for eternal life, including a great and glorious reunion with those we have lost.
Many do not appreciate that under His loving and comprehensive plan, those who appear to be disadvantaged, through no fault of their own, are not ultimately impacted.
Almost all of us have experienced physical and spiritual storms in our lives, some devastating.
A loving Father in Heaven and His Son, Jesus Christ, who is the head of His restored Church, have provided us scriptures and prophets to prepare us, warn us about dangers, and give us guidance to prepare and protect us.
The Lord provides His people a chance to prepare for the challenges they will face.
Lives full of praise, music, and thanksgiving are uniquely blessed. Being joyful and relying on heavenly help through prayer is a powerful way to be peaceable followers of Christ. Striving always to be of good cheer helps avoid being cast down in spirit.

Lists

The scriptures warn us of some of the ways people are led astray:

They succumb to an “eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die” approach
Follow in line with like-minded people advocating for the next “new thing”
Listen to the philosophies of men
They know not where to find the truth

The Plan of Salvation:

Includes a premortal life
Includes a mortal life
Includes the potential for eternal life
Includes the potential for a great and glorious reunion with those we have lost
Includes the potential of having all wrongs righted
Will allow us to see with perfect clarity
Will allow us to have faultless perspective and understanding

Father in Heaven and Jesus Christ have given us scriptures & prophets to:

prepare us for physical & spiritual storms in our lives
Warn us about dangers
Give us guidance to prepare
Prepare and protect us

Some of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ’s directions:

Require immediate action
Provide protection for many years in the future

Stories/Parables

The Plan of Salvation is like a three-act play. Those who have no knowledge of the Father’s plan don’t understand what happened in the first act (the premortal life) and the purposes established there; nor do they understand the clarification and resolution that come in the third act. Many do not appreciate that under His loving and comprehensive plan, those who appear to be disadvantaged, through no fault of their own, are not ultimately impacted.
One of the most important scriptures for those who are righteous, regardless of their situation in life, is part of King Benjamin’s address to his people. He promises that those who faithfully keep the commandments are blessed in all things in this life and “are received into heaven … [and] dwell with God in a state of never-ending happiness.”
Story of the revelation given to Brigham Young on Jan 14, 1847 at Winter Quarters. The revelation gave practical counsel on preparing for the exodus; taking care of the poor, the widows and fatherless and families of the Mormon Battalion; advice on living righteously; and then encouraging them to praise the Lord with singing, music, dancing and prayer; and if sorrowful, to call on the Lord that their souls may be joyful.

Invitations/Challenges

We are warm, engaged members of the communities where we live. We love, share, and invite all of God’s children to follow Christ’s teachings. We follow the counsel of our beloved prophet, President Nelson: we choose the role of “a peacemaker, now and always.”

Equations

Peaceable followers of Christ who (a) are righteous + (b) follow the Savior + (c) keep His commandments = will be blessed
the ultimate answer = “Earth has no sorrow that heav’n cannot heal.”

Blessings/Promises

For those of us in the Church striving to be peaceable followers of Christ, a brighter day awaits us as we focus on our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
All wrongs will be righted, and we will see with perfect clarity and faultless perspective and understanding.
As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, I testify that “peaceable followers of Christ” will find personal peace in this life and a glorious heavenly reunion.

Apologetics:

We do not know all the answers; however, we do know important principles that allow us to face trials, tribulation, and adversities with faith and confidence in a bright future that awaits each of us.

Application Ideas

How can I better love all of God’s children? How can I invite them to follow Christ’s teachings?
Ask yourself: which gospel principles allow us to face trials, tribulations and adversities with faith and confidence? Consider listing them in your journal, scriptures or study journal. Make a plan to study those principles and pray about them.
Make a goal to be a peaceable follower of Jesus Christ.
How can I praise the Lord with singing, music, dancing and the prayer of thanksgiving?
How can I show others the joy I have in being a follower of Jesus Christ?

The post Consider Conference: Be Peaceable Followers of Christ appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2022 conference.

Kerry Muhlestein, Keys to Understanding Isaiah

Kerry has several books available from the FAIR Bookstore.

Kerry received his B.S. from BYU in Psychology with a Hebrew minor. He received an M.A. in Ancient Near Eastern Studies from BYU and his Ph.D. from UCLA in Egyptology, where in his final year he was named the UCLA Affiliates Graduate Student of the Year. His first full time appointment was a joint position in Religion and History at BYU-Hawaii. He is the director of the BYU Egypt Excavation Project. He has been teaching about Isaiah for almost three decades, and has been teaching classes specifically on Isaiah for several years, and has written a verse-by-verse commentary on Isaiah. He and his wife, Julianne, are the parents of six children, and together they have lived in Jerusalem while Kerry has taught there on multiple occasions.

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #82 – Kerry Muhlestein, “Keys to Understanding Isaiah” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Lyndie Jackson

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

Conflicts and differing opinions surround us in this world. All voices—good and bad—are amplified through social and mass media. Thankfully, the Lord has given us a voice that we can and should listen to above all others: the voice of living prophets.

Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf said, “One of the glorious messages of the Restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ is that God continues to speak to His children! He is not hidden in the heavens but speaks today as He did in ancient days. From the days of Adam, God has spoken to His children through appointed oracles who are charged with revealing His will and counsel to others.”

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: Why Do We Need a Living Prophet? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2023 October General Conference, Saturday Morning Session

Kingdoms of Glory
President Dallin H. Oaks, First Counselor in the First Presidency

Main Points

Our church is different from other Christian churches because we have the fullness of the doctrine of Jesus Christ.
The kingdom of glory we desire to inherit is manifested through our choices.
The observation of eternal law, ordinances and covenants lead to the development of godly attributes. Godly attributes are necessary to realize divine potential.
Eternal marriage will ultimately be available to all the faithful.
We get to choose which kingdom we want to inherit.
We qualify for eternal life through a process of conversion.

Gospel Principles taught

Our Father in Heaven, Jesus Christ, Agency, the Atonement, Obedience, the Family Can be Eternal, Eternal Marriage, Temple Work, Millennium, Final Judgement, Exaltation

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Plan of Salvation, the Atonement of Jesus Christ, the Restoration, Prophets and Revelation, Ordinances and Covenants, Marriage and Family, Commandments, Three Degrees of Glory, the Plan of Salvation, Exaltation/Godhood, Agency, the Covenant Path

Scriptures

Doctrine and Covenants 88:36, Doctrine and Covenants 88:23, Doctrine and Covenants 88:22, Doctrine and Covenants 76:89, Doctrine and Covenants 76:82, 103, Doctrine and Covenants 76:79, Doctrine and Covenants 76:77, Doctrine and Covenants 76:75, Doctrine and Covenants 76:62, Doctrine and Covenants 76:56, 58, Doctrine and Covenants 76:43, Doctrine and Covenants 29:11, Doctrine and Covenants 138:57–59, Doctrine and Covenants 132:19–20, Doctrine and Covenants 131:1, 1 Corinthians 11:11, 1 Corinthians 15:40, 1 Corinthians 15:40, 1 Corinthians 15:40, 1 Corinthians 15:40, 1 Corinthians 15:41, JST, 1 Corinthians 15:40, JST, 1 Corinthians 15:40, Ephesians 4:13, Hebrews 12:2, John 14:2, John 15:4–7, 10, Alma 34:32, Moroni 6:4, Abide, The Family Proclamation

Related talks:

The Challenge to Become

“Come, Follow Me”

Works Cited:

Russell M. Nelson, Heart of the Matter (2023)

Chapter 46: Redeeming Our Dead through Temple Service

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- My dear brothers and sisters, I testify of the truth of these things. I testify of our Lord Jesus Christ, “the author and finisher of our faith,” whose Atonement, under the plan of our Father in Heaven, makes it all possible, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
Description of His Teachings.
- “In my Father’s house are many mansions.” Christ taught that there isn’t just a heaven for the righteous and eternal suffering in hell for everyone else.
- the Lord’s teachings and commandments were given that we may all attain “the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.”
Description of His Atonement.
- Christ “glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands”
- Because of Jesus Christ and His Atonement, when we fall short in this life, we can repent and rejoin the covenant path that leads to what our Heavenly Father desires for us.
- Through Christ’s sacrifice, the dead who repent will be redeemed and are heirs of salvation.
Description of His relationship with us.
- (At) the Final Judgment of the Lord Jesus Christ… our loving Savior… will send all the children of God to one of these kingdoms of glory according to the desires manifested through their choices.

Inspiring Words & Phrases

It is not even enough to be convinced of the gospel; we must act so that we are converted by it. In contrast to other preaching, which teaches us to know something, the gospel of Jesus Christ challenges us to become something.
We must act.
We qualify for eternal life through a process of conversion.
Our Heavenly Father loves all His children so much that He wants us all to live in a kingdom of glory forever. Moreover, He wants us to live with Him and His Son, Jesus Christ, eternally.
“…All the children of God… will ultimately inherit one of three kingdoms of glory, even the least of which ‘surpasses all understanding.’”
Exaltation in the celestial kingdom—is the focus of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The purpose of this restored Church is to prepare God’s children for salvation in the celestial glory and, more particularly, for exaltation in its highest degree.
The mortal family relationship [is] where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.
The Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil acts—what we have done. It is based on the final effect of our acts and thoughts—what we have become.
The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become.
We have a loving Heavenly Father who will see that we receive every blessing and every advantage that our own desires and choices allow.

Lists

Unique doctrines and practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

Heavenly Father loves all His children so much that He has prepared a way for all to live in a kingdom of glory forever
The revealed commandments and covenants that offer all the children of God the sacred privilege of qualifying for the highest degree of glory in the celestial kingdom.
We know from modern revelation that “all kingdoms have a law given” and that the kingdom of glory we receive in the Final Judgment is determined by the laws we choose to follow in our mortal journey.
We teach that “gender is an essential characteristic” because eternal marriage is between a man and a woman
The process of measuring up to the stature of the fullness of Christ requires more than knowledge
Missionary work, repentance and redemption continue in the Spirit world.
The Millennium will be a time to perform ordinances for those who didn’t receive them in mortality.

The Plan of Salvation:

Gives us the teachings and opportunity to make choices that assure us of the destiny and life we choose
Provides “many mansions”: three kingdoms of glory
Is God’s plan of happiness for His children
Begins with our life as spirits before we were born
Reveals the purpose and conditions of our chosen journey in mortality
Reveals our desired destination after our mortal journey
Enables all of God’s children to inherit a kingdom of glory where they will be comfortable
Is founded on eternal truth
Requires that exaltation can be attained only through faithfulness to the covenants of an eternal marriage between a man and a woman in the holy temple
Prepares kingdoms of glory that are suited to the laws individuals choose and can comfortably keep
Is a plan that completely honors your agency

Truths we know about the premortal spirit world, mortality and the next life:

Salvation is an individual matter
Exaltation is a family matter
We have a loving Heavenly Father
He will give us every blessing & advantage our desires and choices allow
Heavenly Father won’t force anyone into a sealing relationship against their own will

The Celestial Kingdom:

Is likened to the glory of the sun
Contains three levels; the highest level is “exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom”
The inhabitants of this kingdom:
- Receive the fullness of God the Father
- Are gods
- Are faithful to the covenant of eternal marriage
- Have chosen to keep the law of a celestial kingdom
Is the focus of the commandments and ordinances of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The Terrestrial Kingdom:

Is likened to the glory of the moon
Is comparable to the popular concept of heaven
The inhabitants of this kingdom:
- Receive the presence of the Son, Jesus Christ
- Were honorable in mortality
- Were blinded by the craftiness of men in mortality
- Were not valiant in the testimony of Jesus

The Telestial Kingdom:

Is likened to the glory of the stars
Is where the wicked abide, after they have suffered for their sins
The inhabitants of this kingdom:
- Have rejected the Savior
- Have observed no divine limits on their behavior

Equations

Obedience to eternal laws, ordinances and covenants = development of godly attributes
The development of specific godly attributes = realization of divine potential
Divine potential = exaltation in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom
Conversion = a profound change of nature

Invitations/Challenges

The proclamation on the family clarifies the requirements that prepare us to live with God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.

Blessings/Promises

Eternal marriage will ultimately be available to all the faithful.
The mortal family relationship [is] where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.

Apologetics:

The 1995 proclamation on the family is not a changeable statement of policy but is founded on irrevocable doctrine.
There is much we do not know about the three major periods in the plan of salvation and their relationship to one another: (1) the premortal spirit world, (2) mortality, and (3) the next life.
We also know that He (Heavenly Father) will force no one into a sealing relationship against his or her will. The blessings of a sealed relationship are assured for all who keep their covenants but never by forcing a sealed relationship on another person who is unworthy or unwilling.

Application Ideas

Find new ways to bond with members of your family to make sure Exaltation becomes (or stays) a family matter.
At the end of every week, reflect on and journal things you’ve done to continue your conversion process, and list new things you can do in the next week to continuously improve.
List the ways you’ve used the Atonement in your life and look for patterns that help you strengthen your understanding of and appreciation for our Savior’s mercy.
Spend time in the temple or working on preparing family names for temple work. Consider how this time will bless both you and them in the eternities.

The post Consider Conference: Kingdoms of Glory appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Second Spindleby Autumn Dickson

I learned something this week about the Liahona that kinda blew my mind. I want to share what I learned, and then let’s take some principles from it.

In a Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Robert L. Bunker describes an engineering phenomenon that I was completely unaware of. He talks about a concept that was invented by man in the 1940’s known as fault tolerant systems. Essentially, you build a computer that does the same processing twice (or more sometimes). If the processing comes back the same, then the computer can continue on because it is “correct.” If the processing comes back different, then something failed and the computer can know about it. Thus, it is fault tolerant. The computer can detect if it’s having its own issues.

Maybe I’m way behind on figuring this out, but the Lord built a fault tolerant system in the Liahona. It didn’t even register in my mind that the Liahona had two spindles until I was an adult. Even then, I couldn’t figure out why it had two spindles until I googled it and found this article from Robert L. Bunker. This verse is not in this week’s reading, but it does give us insight into the Liahona which we’re studying this week.

Alma 37:40 And it did work for them according to their faith in God; therefore, if they had faith to believe that God could cause that those spindles should point the way they should go, behold, it was done; therefore they had this miracle, and also many other miracles wrought by the power of God, day by day.

Spindles. Plural. Both were pointing. If the Liahona only had one spindle, how was Lehi’s family supposed to know whether it was “working?” They could have waned in their faith and diligence, but the one arrow was still going to be pointing somewhere. There was no way they could have known that it was pointing “wrong.” Maybe this is completely obvious to anyone with any kind of predilection for engineering, but this totally blew my mind.

First of all, the idea that Joseph Smith, with all three years of his formal schooling, could have come up with that would have been impressive to say the least. This kind of fault finding system wasn’t formally invented until the 1940’s, but Joseph kinda just threw it out there while interpreting The Book of Mormon in three months. If it hadn’t been in there, I’m sure I could have found the faith to just assume the Lord had a way of letting the family know, but I still think it’s super cool that it was included.

Anyway, I obviously do not claim to have figured this out on my own, as made apparent by surprise. However, I do want to try and take this a step further. It makes sense that the Lord would provide a way for the family to know if their Liahona was in working order; He was planning on using it as a tool to teach them about faith, diligence, and being led along. He didn’t just give it to them, and they were done. The Lord is purposeful and wanted them to practice living the gospel principles in a continuous manner.

Though the second arrow has very obvious implications for Lehi’s family, I believe there are spiritual implications for us. After all, The Book of Mormon was written for our day so that we could learn about the Lord’s dealings with His children. So what do we learn from this fault tolerant, second spindle?

The words of the prophets

One of the fail-safe systems the Lord has provided are dual pathways for revelation. Like much of the world, we believe that the Lord can speak to us directly. This pathway of revelation is critical to our exaltation. It requires us to stretch and reach and dig for ourselves. When we have to seek out personal revelation, we are able to gain that personal relationship with Christ which is ultimately what saves and exalts us. It also allows us to be guided in our personal lives so that the prophet doesn’t have to tell me whether studying elementary education in college is a good idea. Personal revelation is crucial.

The world is also a great example of what happens when you don’t have that second pathway; President Oaks has coined this pathway the “priesthood line.” The priesthood line is how we received the scriptures in the past, and it’s how we receive His guidance today. As a missionary, I remember coming across a group of Christians who had a table up on campus. They were of all different Christian faiths, working together to spread the word. It was admirable. We tried talking to them, but they quickly denounced us as non-Christians. When I pointed out that they weren’t completely similar in their own beliefs of Christ, they quickly responded that they were similar in all of the important things. I found this extremely fascinating since some of them believed that baptism was essential to salvation and some of them did not believe this. You would think that this particular aspect would be classified as “important” since it was determining credentials for salvation, but I digress. Even within the same denomination, you can wander from congregation to congregation and find different beliefs.

This second spindle, this priesthood line, helps us know what the doctrine is. Yes, we do have random quotes from random priesthood leaders that are questionable, but true, canonized doctrine is repeated again and again and again and again. It is not hidden; we know what we believe. These two lines of communication help with the concept of fault tolerance.

Personal revelation

Now the fail safe of a priesthood line can be very helpful in finding out the doctrine of the kingdom. The personal line is still necessary; there are some revelations that only come from the Lord, and we all still have to receive our witness. However, the priesthood line can take us pretty far in establishing the stage.

But what about the personal decisions for which there is no doctrine? There is no “right” answer for what people should choose as careers. There isn’t any kind of doctrine about where we should live or how many kids we should have or who we should marry. There are guiding principles, but guiding principles aren’t always enough. I can be righteous as an accountant or as a fashion designer, but is there a specific direction I need to take? Maybe there isn’t a specific direction, but if there is, I definitely want to know about it.

So what are the fail safes for personal decisions? The priesthood line and personal line can help us with doctrine, but is there a fault tolerant system for our personal decisions? How do we know we’re on the right path if there is a “right” path for us to take? There are plenty of times when there isn’t necessarily a “right” option and we’ll be fine either way, but I’ve also lived long enough and been guided often enough to know He has specific instructions sometimes. What is my second spindle?

I kinda have two answers for this.

First, the Lord helped me understand a simple way to practice receiving revelation. I practiced it with the FSY kids I taught last summer. At FSY, we were given this incredible opportunity where the Lord wanted to speak to us and guide us and teach us. Not to mention, they were all given a journal to carry around anyway. That week, I challenged the kids to write down everything that even barely registered as a potential prompting. I told them that if a thought popped into their heads, they should write it down. They didn’t necessarily need to question whether it was a prompting. They should simply write it down. Was everything they wrote down going to be revelation? No. Would writing everything down help them establish the pattern? Absolutely. If you want to understand whether the Lord is speaking to you, you need a second spindle with which to compare it. Writing down everything could help you start to puzzle out those feelings very consciously and start to recognize the pattern of the Lord’s voice in your own life.

Second answer.

I can’t tell you what your second spindle looks like; it may take time to determine that. However, I can testify of a second spindle. If we learn nothing else from this fault tolerant system of the Lord, learn this: the Lord is capable of helping you know so have faith. When you have a big decision to make and you’re worried out of your mind about whether you’re doing the right thing in your life or whether you’re doing the right thing for your family, set your worry aside and trust the Lord’s ability to speak to you in a way that you can understand. If you don’t feel His voice, don’t fret. If you are regularly turning to Him, He will make His will clear to you if there is a will. Perhaps He will simply close a door that you were planning on taking, or He will open a different one. Perhaps He will guide your desires without you even knowing it, or perhaps you will get a big “warning” feeling that only goes away when you turn around. No matter how He chooses to answer you in any given circumstance, have faith and rejoice that the Lord has a second spindle that works very well. You can trust it.

And if all else absolutely fails, I testify of a third spindle. It’s called the atonement of Jesus Christ, and it makes up for mistakes. It turns all bad into good for those who are trying their hardest to follow the Lord. When I was getting ready to marry Conner and I desperately wanted an answer, I finally gave up and said, “If everything goes wrong and we get divorced and things go totally crazy, the Lord can’t be mad at me because I couldn’t have possibly tried harder to follow Him.” I don’t recommend getting married that way, and I have also learned a lot about marriage since then, but the key is this: you cannot truly fail when you remain close to the Lord. In the end, He can turn everything into a triumph. That third spindle is not fault safe; it is fault proof. It does not fail when we turn it on.

I testify of a Savior who revealed The Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith. I testify that He included the coolest, smallest details that can give us so much insight. I testify that He saw all ahead of time and created systems with which to protect us (but not at the expense of our growth), and I testify that He did that because He loves us.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 1 Nephi 16–22 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

I know I literally just said I was going to be better at making these posts a weekly feature again and then missed a few weeks, so I apologize for that. My dad was back in the hospital for a bit and there was holiday business. I also filmed an episode of the Come Back podcast, which should be out this coming weekend. And I was actually doing a lot of work a few weeks ago on another project for FAIR that I am very excited about. I am starting a new, investigative podcast series with two other FAIR faces you may be familiar with, Jennifer Roach and Zachary Wright. It’s going to be a podcast composed of multiple miniseries on different controversial topics in Church history and culture.

I admire and adore both of my co-hosts, and we’re already having such a great time working together. We met up before Christmas and laughed and planned and ate and filmed a few trailers, which should be out soon. We’re doing a bunch of filming this weekend, in fact. Our first miniseries should launch in early-to-mid February, and will consist of six episodes. I’ll have more to say on this soon, but we’re all very excited. The entire crew working on this project is amazing, and I couldn’t ask for a better group of people to work with.

Anyway, in the last post, we successfully wrapped up section 1 of the Letter For My Wife! We’re now on section 2: The Book of Mormon. The first subsection in this portion is on DNA. I’m glad we get the chance to talk about this, because so many people misunderstand the field and the data we have, and more importantly, the data we should have. So, it’s great to have the chance to dive into this a little bit.

Now, I’m not a geneticist, and I doubt many of you are, either. But here’s the thing: neither is Thomas Faulk, and neither is Jeremy Runnells, John Dehlin, or any of the other critics using this as an attack against our church. When I come up against a topic I’m not trained in, I dive into the research, and I turn to people who are trained. So, I’ll be doing both of those things throughout this section.

As usual, though, Thomas Faulk begins this section with an intro and a bunch of quotes:

The Book of Mormon story begins with Lehi, an Israelite, who fled to the Promised Land with his family and landed somewhere in Mesoamerica.

That should read “allegedly landed somewhere in Mesoamerica.” That’s just a theory at this point. It’s a good one with a lot of solid scholarship behind it, but the exact location of the Book of Mormon events is still unknown and opinions strongly differ on the topic.

Lehi’s descendents [sic] grew into two large populations, the Lamanites and the Nephites.

Again, there is a caveat on this. Those descendants intermarried and mixed with the local populations, and that’s how the groups grew so large. And remember, there were multiple smaller subdivisions under those larger banners. Jacob just lumped them all together for convenience, with those who were friendly to the people of Nephi being called Nephites and those who wanted to destroy the people of Nephi being called Lamanites.

So, there were not two large populations, but multiple smaller populations that were generally friendly to one of two camps, and those multiple populations were only partially descendants of Lehi. Most of the people were not his biological descendants.

By AD 385 the Lamanites had destroyed the Nephites and then grew to populate the entire Americas.

What? No. The entire geography of the Book of Mormon, including both the Land Northward and the Land Southward consisted of only a few hundred miles in any given direction. It was a tiny stretch of land. “All the face of the land” does not mean the entire Western Hemisphere. It just means all of the land that they inhabited, which, again, was only a few hundred miles long.

This unique claim lends itself perfectly to genetic testing.

It really doesn’t, because that’s not what the Book of Mormon claims. That’s just what Thomas Faulk claims.

Studies have been performed on the genetic history of Native Americans and the resulting information reveals inconsistencies in The Book of Mormon narrative.

No, they reveal inconsistencies in Thomas Faulk’s narrative. But his narrative and the Book of Mormon narrative are two very different things.

Covered in this chapter: the Church’s original claim, statements by LDS scientists, genetic evidence, and the Church’s attempt to distance itself from the original position.

We need to be careful about calling it “the Church’s original claim” and “the Church’s…original position.” That’s not entirely accurate, as we’ll go into in a minute.

The problem Faulk has in this section is the exact same problem certain outspoken members of our Church had: overstating the Church’s position and what the scriptures actually say.

Original Claim

Over the years, prophets, apostles, and the missionary department have preached an ancestral link between the ancient Hebrews and Native Americans.

Yep, absolutely. And that’s not a position the Church has recanted.

“It is a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains the fullness of the everlasting gospel. The record gives an account of two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C., and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.” (Book of Mormon Introduction, 1981 edition)

The introduction to the Book of Mormon is not and has never been scripture. It wasn’t on the plates or a part of the Book of Mormon for well over a century after it was written. It’s just a preface written in 1981 by Bruce R. McConkie about the same time he wrote the chapter headings. It was his opinion and his interpretation of what the text said, and it was a common interpretation.

It was a popular theory in the 19th Century that Native Americans may have descended from one of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Right from the beginning, many Latter-day Saints also believed in a hemispheric model for the Book of Mormon and shared the assumption that the family of Lehi were the very first inhabitants of the Americas. These were popular beliefs shared by the majority of the Saints right from the start.

But those opinions were not shared by everyone, and until the Gospel Topics Essay on DNA and the Book of Mormon was issued, there was never an official statement from the Brethren on the topic.

Before my critics freak out, let me explain what I mean by that. I mean, we never had a First Presidency statement, a proclamation, or any kind of canonized declaration. As far as endorsed statements go, we just have this introduction by Elder McConkie that was approved by the anonymous people on the Scriptures Publications Committee—and according to Dan Peterson, it was not even unanimously approved by that Committee. Some on the Committee felt that McConkie was reading more into the text than what it actually said.

Elder McConkie had a forceful personality and very strong opinions, not all of which were accurate. Anyone who knows of the controversies surrounding the publication and content of Mormon Doctrine knows what I’m talking about. Being strong-willed is not necessarily a bad thing, but in this case, it does mean that he was able to push through a statement that was not universally approved and that later was shown to be inaccurate.

Way back during the April 1929 General Conference, President Anthony W. Ivins of the First Presidency warned against this very thing:

“So, I say, one by one criticisms which have been made regarding the Book of Mormon are falling by the way through the investigation of scientists who understand their business. I thank the Lord for them and that which they are undertaking to do. I have never had any fear that a thing would be discovered to disprove the truths contained in this book.

“We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon teaches the history of three distinct peoples, or two peoples and three different colonies of people, who came from the old word to this continent. It does not tell us that there was no one here before them. It does not tell us that people did not come after. And so if discoveries are made which suggest differences in race origins, it can verily easily be accounted for, and reasonably, for we do believe that other people came to this continent. A thousand years had elapsed from the time the Book of Mormon closed until the discovery of American, and we know that other people came to America during that time period.”

We also know that people came to the Americas before that time period, as he previously said. So, instead of passing around our assumptions as fact, we need to make sure that we’re repeating what the Book of Mormon actually says about the people described inside its pages.

Remember, the Book of Mormon is only a tiny fraction of the stories from the communities in question, and doesn’t account for any other community in the surrounding area. There are a whole lot of narratives we don’t have, so to assume that what we do have is the entirety of the story is being shortsighted.

“As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi, whose sons and daughters you are…. This is but the beginning of the work in Peru.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, God’s Holy Work in Peru, Ensign, February 1997, p.73)

The citation on this quote is wrong. “God’s Holy Work in Peru” is a subheading. The actual article is titled “President Hinckley Visits South America, Florida, Washington, D.C.”

But yes, President Hinckley said that. We’ll probably address this in more detail next week, but we don’t know if this is an accurate statement or not. We don’t know where Lehi’s boat landed. We don’t know where the biological descendants of Lehi live. We don’t even know if President Hinckley was talking about biology and genetics. For all we know, he could have been speaking symbolically, like how we’re all adopted into the lineage of Abraham when we accept the Gospel.

As it says in the Church History Topic, “Lamanite Identity”:

While some early Latter-day Saints speculated about which specific groups were the descendants of Book of Mormon peoples, most considered the Native Americans broadly as heirs to Book of Mormon promises. … Just as the history of the northern ten tribes of Israel after their exile in Assyria is a matter of speculation rather than knowledge, the history of the Lamanites after the close of the Book of Mormon record is a matter of speculation. The Church asserts that all members are part of the covenant house of Israel either by descent or adoption but does not take a position on the specific geography of the Book of Mormon or claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific. Whatever the historical particulars, the Church continues its efforts to help realize the hopes of Book of Mormon prophets that the covenants of the Lord might be extended to all the lost sheep of Israel.

Remember, President Hinckley grew up in a time when all indigenous peoples were sometimes referred to as “Lamanites.” He was almost certainly not prophesying about the literal descendants of Lehi. He was using the term more broadly than that.

In fact, there has been a wide variety of opinions expressed by Church leaders in the past over whether every Native was a descendant of Lehi. The identity of the Lamanite descendants today is still unknown. It’s not even known if anyone from that biological bloodline still lives today.

“Central America, or Guat[e]mala, is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced by several hundred miles of territory from north to south. The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood up on this land as will be seen from the following words from the Book of Alma: ‘And now it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful, and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi, and the land of Zarahemla was nearly surrounded by water: there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward.’” (Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, October 1, 1842, vol.3, no.23)

That quote almost certainly wasn’t by Joseph Smith. He was the editor in name of the Times and Seasonsduring October 1842, but the paper was actually managed by John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff at the time. The article in question doesn’t have a name on it, which typically means it was written by the editor. In this case, it was almost certainly Taylor or Woodruff, rather than Joseph.

While he approved much of their work, it’s important to remember for most of October, 1842, Joseph was in hiding to avoid an extradition charge over the assassination attempt on Lilburn W. Boggs. He surely was not spending those days penning articles about Guatemala.

But even if he did, most of the Mesoamerican models for the Book of Mormon include parts of Guatemala, so that may well be accurate. At the very least, we can’t say for certain that it’s wrong.

LDS Scientists

It should probably be titled Formerly LDS Scientists. I don’t think any of them are still members of the Church.

Simon G. Southerton, a senior molecular biologist with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization in Australia and former bishop.

Southerton said genetic research allowed him to test his religious views against his professional training. He examined studies of DNA lineages among Polynesians and indigenous peoples in North, Central and South America. He mapped maternal DNA lines from 7,300 Native Americans from 175 tribes. Southerton found no trace of Middle Eastern DNA in the genetic strands of today’s American Indians and Pacific Islanders. In Losing a Lost Tribe, published in 2004, Southerton concluded that the LDS church, his faith for 30 years, needed to be reevaluated in the face of these facts.

While I’m sorry he felt the need to make such a rash decision, his quote below shows exactly how incorrect his assumptions were going into the project.

Additionally, as a molecular biologist, he should be very familiar with the reality of genetic drift, but he appears to ignore that entirely. That’s a topic we’ll discuss in detail in a future installment, though.

“The problem is that the Church cannot acknowledge any factual errors in the Book of Mormon because the prophet Joseph Smith proclaimed it the ‘most correct of any book on Earth.’ They can’t admit that it’s not historical. They would feel that there would be a loss of members and loss in confidence in Joseph Smith as a prophet.” (Simon G. Southerton, Bedrock of Faith is Jolted, Los Angeles Times, February 2006)

Bluntly, this quote is asinine.

The Title Page of the Book of Mormon says right on it that there may be flaws and mistakes of men in the book. Isn’t that in fact the Church acknowledging that there are potential factual errors in the Book of Mormon?

Also, I’ve made this point repeatedly before, but “the most correct of any book on Earth” does not mean free from any errors whatsoever. Joseph Smith meant it was the most doctrinally correct book, not the most grammatically or factually correct book. He meant that the principles and doctrine taught inside was more correct than that of any other religious text. Which should be obvious from reading the full sentence in question:

I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.

Thomas W. Murphy, Chair of the Dept of Anthropology at Edmonds College.

“In March 2000 Scott Woodward, a professor of microbiology at Brigham Young University, launched a multi-million dollar study … The Molecular Genealogy Research Group (MGRG) compiled a database of DNA records that identified connections between past and present humans…. Some optimism was expressed by church members that such research would vindicate the Book of Mormon as an ancient document…. For those who held such an expectation, the data collected by MGRG and results of similar research projects have been disappointing. So far, DNA has lent no support to the traditional Mormon beliefs about the origins of the Native Americans. Instead, genetic data have confirmed that migrations from Asia are the primary source of American Indian origins.”

“Now that quantitative scientific methods can indeed test for an Israelite genetic presence in ancient America, we learn instead that virtually all Native Americans can trace their lineages to the Asian migrations between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago. While molecular anthropologists have the technological capability to identify descendants of ancient Hebrews, no traces of such DNA markers have appeared in Central America or elsewhere among Native Americans” (Thomas W. Murphy, Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics, in American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon, 2002)

Again, the answer to this is genetic drift. To give a brief explanation of this concept, among other things, it says that a small population mixing with a much larger one would be quickly enveloped and would leave little-to-no genetic trace hundreds to thousands of years later.

As the Gospel Topics Essay explains:

The effect of drift is especially pronounced in small, isolated populations or in cases where a small group carrying a distinct genetic profile intermingles with a much larger population of a different lineage. … When a small population mixes with a large one, combinations of autosomal markers typical of the smaller group become rapidly overwhelmed or swamped by those of the larger. The smaller group’s markers soon become rare in the combined population and may go extinct due to the effects of genetic drift and bottlenecks as described above. Moreover, the shuffling and recombination of autosomal DNA from generation to generation produces new combinations of markers in which the predominant genetic signal comes from the larger original population. This can make the combinations of markers characteristic of the smaller group so diluted that they cannot be reliably identified.

Or, to quote non-LDS DNA scientist Daniel L. Hartl:

If a number of Semitic speaking people from the Middle East settled in North America about 2500 years ago, and the indigenous population was large, ‘the probability’ that the DNA markers of the Semitic speaking group would be lost ‘…is reasonably high.’

This is why you can’t find traces of Roman DNA among native Brits or Viking DNA among Native American populations from the Eastern US, despite known admixture between the groups. The much smaller population was encompassed by the much larger population and no traces of their DNA remain this many years later.

In a collaboration, Thomas W. Murphy and Simon Southerton, wrote:

“Investigation of mitochondrial DNA of more than 5,500 living Native Americans reveals that 99.4% can be traced back to Asia primarily via maternal lineages known as A, B, C, D and X. Only 0.6% came from Africa or Europe, most likely after 1492. Lineages A through D are only found in Asia. While the X lineage also is found in Europe and the Middle East, Asian and American lineages have distinctive markers that indicate an ancient separation long before the events described in the Book of Mormon. Similar results from nearly 1,000 paternal lineages substantiate a Northeast Asian origin of American Indians. Likewise, approximately 99% of the Polynesians surveyed to date can trace their maternal lineages back to Southeast Asia. The other 1% almost certainly came from Europe in the recent past… Folk biological claims of an Israelite ancestry, a curse with a dark skin, and a whitening of dark-skinned Native American and Polynesian Mormons fail to stand up to scrutiny among scientifically literate Latter-day Saints.” (Thomas W. Murphy and Simon Southerton, Genetic Research a ‘Galileo Event’ for Mormons, Anthropology News, February 2003)

Tell that to the multiple LDS scientists and academics who believe in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

There are several solid responses to these claims. Population bottleneck is a particularly big one that we know occurred throughout the Americas after European contact, where traumatic events such as disease, famine, natural disasters, and war can cause genetic lines to go extinct. Genetic drift, as I’ve said, is another one.

The fact is, this is only an issue if the hemispheric model of the Book of Mormon is the only model possible. The problem goes away with a limited geography model, as Kevin Barney explains:

Murphy and Southerton appear to be nice guys. They are sincere, and they believe in what they are doing. Both seem to have had a similar experience. They apparently grew up with narrow, fundamentalist assumptions about the Book of Mormon, believing in and presumably knowing only of the hemispheric model. When they learned that the hemispheric model was scientifically untenable, each experienced unfulfilled (unrealistic) expectations and an ensuing crisis of faith, upon which each lost his belief in the antiquity and historicity of the Book of Mormon, and the Church with it. Now they desire to enlighten others under the banner of science.

The extant DNA evidence simply confirms what scientists already knew: that most Native Americans ultimately derive from Asia. This is inconsistent with the hemispheric model of the Book of Mormon. To that extent, Murphy and Southerton are not arguing against a straw man; many contemporary Latter-day Saints (to the extent that they have thought of the issue at all) continue to uncritically accept a hemispheric model of the Book of Mormon. To the extent that the kind of DNA research publicized by Murphy and Southerton causes these people to reexamine their assumptions about the nature of the text, I think the effect will be a salutary one.

The problem is that Murphy and Southerton go beyond that. They recognize, as they must, that the extant DNA evidence is not inconsistent with a limited geography model of the Book of Mormon. When they reject a limited geography model, they must do so on other grounds. At this point, their argument stops being a scientific one and becomes a theological one. … Murphy’s and Southerton’s theological argument imposes the scientifically naïve assumption that Lehi and his family were the sole ancestors of all American Indians on their readers and argues that Latter-day Saints are not free to accept a limited geography model given various statements of past Church leaders. They also point, as in the article under review, to the statement in the introduction to the Book of Mormon that Lehi was the “principal” ancestor of the American Indians. I for one reject the adjective “principal” from that introduction, which was only added as a part of the 1981 edition and is not a canonical part of the scripture. I am perfectly free to reject that adjective, as well as the other similar statements Murphy and Southerton point to. Their inability to do so themselves simply reflects the fundamentalist character of the one-time faith they held in the Church…

In conclusion, for Murphy and Southerton to insist on holding the Book of Mormon only to a lowest common denominator, populist, folkloric reading would be like one judging contemporary anthropology by the opinions that average readers of Margaret Mead took from her columns in Redbook magazine.

This is the same approach that Thomas Faulk takes in this letter, and it’s the same approach Jeremy Runnells takes in the CES Letter. If you insist on caricatures and overly rigid assumptions, you can make anything look ridiculous. That’s what these authors are banking on. But their tactics fall flat when you take a step back and look at things through another lens. Yeah, the hemispheric model for the Book of Mormon is bad and full of holes. But a limited geography model has considerably more room to fit the facts.

Greater than 99% of the DNA lineages of Native Americans are only found among East Asians. The evidence suggests that they share a common ancestor and that American natives did not descend from Israeli lineage.

The Book of Mormon doesn’t say otherwise. That some leaders and lay members assumed it did does mean that it does. I’ve linked to it a few times already in this post, but the presentation by Mike Ash at last summer’s FAIR Conference addresses this issue very handily.

Jamie Hanis Handy, Brigham Young University, MS Biological Science and Genetics

“DNA is definitive. DNA is trusted. DNA is a part of our lives now. There is nothing in which to be afraid. DNA is just information, lots of information…. In my experience, each generation trusts and relies on DNA more than the previous generation, and my children are growing up in a world where DNA just is and has always been a wellspring of reliable information. Anything, any group, or any organization that tries to discredit DNA as a legitimate data source will with each passing year lose credibility with the rising generations. And so I am very, very concerned about the faith that I call my spiritual home. The Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter Day Saints.”

This person is badly misunderstanding the Gospel Topics Essay if they think that the Church is trying to “discredit DNA as a legitimate data source.” They’re using DNA science to support the Book of Mormon narrative as it actually unfolds in the text, rather than the inaccurate assumptions people hold about the narrative.

“This quote appears in the newest manual for seminary and institute students, “As an example, you may want to explain that one way modern enemies of the Church attempt to discredit the Book of Mormon is by using DNA evidence to try to discredit any link between Book of Mormon peoples and Native Americans.”

That’s not discrediting DNA science. It’s saying that enemies of the Church will twist the DNA science to imply things it doesn’t actually say. Much like the way the author of this letter attempted to do.

“DNA evidence has had a huge impact on the Mormon narrative. In my lifetime, a one-word change in the introduction to our holy scripture, The Book of Mormon, has had massive ripple effects while yet also remaining mostly undiscussed by the membership at large. Originally the introduction read, ‘The Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.’ The new introduction reads much the same, but says the Lamanites ‘are among the ancestors of the American Indians.’”

How is that a “massive ripple effect”? Other than to prompt some members of the Church to read the Book of Mormon more closely and to think more critically than they had before?

“How has this one word swap changed things? I was taught every week that the Native Americans were the descendents [sic] of the Lamanites. I was shown pictures of Mayan and Aztec ruins all the time as if those were evidence of the Book of Mormon civilizations. Once DNA evidence began to show clearly that today’s Native Americans did not descend from Middle Eastern Jews (as we originally claimed), everything changed.”

Weird. That’s incredibly different from my experience at Church. I was definitely not taught every single week that all Native Americans were descendants of the Lamanites, and I’ve never been shown Aztec and Mayan ruins at Church. Other than the initial buzz when the introduction was changed, I haven’t noticed a very big shift at all in the way it’s been discussed at Church—because we don’t really focus on Lamanite ancestry at Church. That’s not a common topic of discussion there. It might come up in Sunday School occasionally during Book of Mormon years, but even then, it’s not markedly different from how it was discussed when I was young.

“And yet, despite this drastic shift, we still insist on publishing something that says ‘modern enemies’ of the church use DNA evidence?”

That’s not what it said. It said that modern enemies of the Church will use DNA evidence to try to discredit any link between Book of Mormon peoples and Native Americans. Using DNA evidence is fine. Using it untruthfully or manipulatively is not. When you only give one side of the argument and you use “a lowest common denominator, populist, folkloric reading” of the Book of Mormon to bolster your claims, and you ignore geography models and parts of DNA science you don’t like, that doesn’t make you the good guy. It makes you a troll.

“… Our children will not see DNA that way. Instead they will see the church as afraid — afraid of the wonder and miracle that understanding DNA is. Afraid that truth cannot withstand study. Afraid that (for many of them) the very thing that brought them to this place, diagnosed their disease, treated their disorder, identified their parent, captured their rapist, freed their friend, gave them a healthy sibling, and that is trusted everywhere cannot be trusted at church?” (Jamie Hanis Handy, DNA and Mormonism, June 2015)

Hyperbole much? I don’t see the Church as being afraid. I see it as addressing these concerns and questions head-on. I see them being transparent about the fact that some leaders, such as Elder McConkie, got a few things wrong and didn’t look beyond their assumptions to see other possible answers. I see it publishing essays explaining how genetic testing in large populations works over time and what we can and can’t expect to find when looking for Book of Mormon DNA. I see it standing up to manipulative bullies and reinforcing its position.

I don’t see it saying anything at all about DNA science being untrustworthy. Please, show me where that claim appears in a Church publication? Notice that the source this person is supposedly citing doesn’t say at all like what they claim it says. How is that being honest and trustworthy?

Please look at cited sources more critically than that. Please don’t let someone manipulate you into doubting your testimony, especially when the arguments are this bad.

Sarah Allen is a senior researcher with FAIR, and the 2022 recipient of the John Taylor: Defender of the Faith Award. She works for Scripture Central on their research team. An avid reader, she loves studying the Gospel and the history of the restored Church. After watching some of her friends lose their testimonies, she became interested in helping others through their faith crises. That’s when she began sharing what she’d learned through her studies. She is a co-moderator the LDS subreddit on Reddit and the author of a multi-part series rebutting the CES Letter. She is also a co-host of FAIR’s “Me, My Shelf, & I” podcast. She’s grateful to those at FAIR who have given her the opportunity to share her testimony with a wider audience.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 26: DNA appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: The Book of Revelationby Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC

Oh my goodness, we have made it to Week 50. And we’re almost done with this project. The whole goal this year has been to give you a peek into how your Evangelical friends and family see things differently – and how we can approach conversation a little bit differently with them and perhaps have more success sharing the goodness of our faith with them. And it’s been an amazing year for me – I’ve clarified some of my own thinking on this topic and hopefully helped some of you too. I’ve received so many kind and thoughtful notes from some of you that I never could have met any other way, so I’m incredibly grateful for this project.

However, and I’ve alluded to this before, trying to same format with the Book of Mormon just doesn’t make sense. It’s worked this year because we’re doing the New Testament, and maybe we’ll do it again when Old Testament year comes around, but for now we’ve got 3 episodes left in this series. Today the topic is on the Book of Revelation, next week it’s about Christmas, and what I’d like to do the week after that, our final week, is to do quick question-and-answer for anything you would like to know that we haven’t covered yet, that you were hoping to have addressed, or that you’re still wondering about. You can either put questions in the comments below, or email me at jroach@fairlatterdaysaints.org. I’d like to fit in as many questions as possible so hit me up if you’ve got something.

And, just a tiny bit more business before we start, I’ve teased you already about what will happen next, and it’s 2 things. First, there will be a new concept taking over this weekly format that relates closely to the Book of Mormon, and it has to do with helping your loved ones who are in a faith crisis. I will not be hosting that one, but I know who is and I’m very excited for you to get to hear a lifetime of wisdom on this topic from them. AND, we have a new show with a new format coming out. The idea is that we’ll do 5-6 episodes on specific topics in scripture or church history analyzing them from multiple perspectives – historical, cultural, textual, psychological, and more. I am one of 3 hosts on that show and it’s been so fun to plan it out with our team. The other two hosts are 1) Sarah Allen – who is basically everyone’s research hero – she wrote that incredibly comprehensive response to the CES Letter that is something like 70 parts. There simply is not a more comprehensive collection of research on that than what Sarah has done…. 2) Zach Wright who is the young scholar who hosts the By Study and By Faith podcast. He’s so bright and so quick, if you don’t know Zach yet I think you will really enjoy his energy and perspective. Yesterday we filmed a couple of trailers for this new show that will come out later this month.

Last thing….this week I got to film episodes with two of our partners – Scripture Central’s show Let’s Get Real with Stephen Jones; and the Saints Unscripted show. Both were on my other research area which is sexual abuse in the church and they were great fun to do. You can check those videos out on their respective channels.

Okay, let’s get started for today. We’re going to talk about the Book of Revelation. The reality is that Latter-day Saints and Evangelicals alike are confused by this book, kind of afraid of it, and often prone to taking it out of context. Why? Well, frankly because it’s a weird book. It’s a vision, it’s a dream, and just like your dreams, sometimes symbols intermix in weird ways and then morph and mix again.

Another way to say the same thing is to say that it’s a book that has been mostly treated as a subjective text – that is, a reading the reader brings meaning to based on their own culture, perspective, time in history, personality, and life details. You know a Roarsch test is – the ink blot pictures a psychologist holds up and asks the client to say what they see – well, many of the treatments of Revelation have been little more than that. It’s a subjective text that the reader brings his or her own meaning to. Think about a scenario where you’re telling a group of friends about a dream you had, and each one offers a slightly different interpretation. Who’s right? Well, who is to say?

But this gets complicated for us, Latter-day Saints and Evangelicals alike, and honestly, for every other group out there. Revelation is a difficult-to-understand book. And we’re not going to dive into explaining it here today – that’s the task for plenty of other shows – but I do want to talk about the different ways we approach a text like this that is just so weird.

And really, the differences here come down to our beliefs about prophecy, covenants, and dispensations. But let me back up and tell you why that’s important. So, the book of Revelation is a very specific type of prophecy called apocalyptic literature. A regular prophecy foretells something in the future – but not necessarily on an epic global scale. For example, in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah, we get a prophecy that Babylon Will Rule Over Judah for 70 Years. Now, that’s a pretty earth-shaking prophecy if you happen to live in that time, especially if you’re living in Judah. But this type of prophecy is very specific to the people living in a certain time and place. Your life, and my life, are not significantly impacted by the face that Babylon ruled over Judah for 70 years. However, what we call apocalyptic literature is about events that will impact all of humanity. There is no way for the events of the Book of Revelation to unfold without it impacting every human being forever. And all of this applies to both Evangelicals and Latter-day Saints.

Where we have differences has to do with how our understanding of covenant theology and dispensationalism intersect. In the Evangelical world a person’s beliefs are either formed by the idea that God makes covenants with humanity OR the belief that God deals differently with humanity in different dispensations. But you generally can’t have both. It’s an either/or situation. You can find lots of Evangelicals, especially of the Calvinistic persuasion, who very much believe in covenants in a similar way to how we do. But those Evangelicals would absolutely cringe at the idea of talking about the different dispensations. And vice-versa, the Evangelicals who think about how God works in the various dispensations are very unlikely to see him also working through Covenants.

But Latter-day Saints don’t have this problem. We easily talk about how God deals with groups and individuals through covenant, and we also see how God works differently in different dispensations. It wasn’t until after I joined the church that I even put that together. Like, wait, they’re integrating both?!? It sort of blew my mind because in the Evangelical world those 2 are water and oil. So how does this impact how we read Revelation?

Well, an Evangelical dispensationalist is very likely to read Revelation literally. They try to see a one-to-one correspondence between the symbols in Revelation and the unfolding events of history. For example, “This symbol in the book of Revelation represents that nation of the Soviet Union, and this one represents the United States…” There is a lot of concern for making sure every person knows the saving message of Jesus before the Book of Revelation unfolds. They really deeply want everyone to hear about Christ. Meanwhile, the Evangelicals who think of their relationship with God as part of a covenant tend to think through Revelation really differently. They believe that certain human events can trigger the end times – primarily meaning here that every human being who is supposed to be saved, has been saved. Evangelicals in this camp – roughly 60% of all Evangelicals – believe that only some humans are able to be saved. The problem is that no one knows which humans are to be saved, and which aren’t. Only God knows if he made you for salvation or damnation. So the end times begin when the final person God has chosen for salvation is saved.

And Latter-day Saints kind of combine these two views. We believe that all are God’s children and he would like all of his children back and this promotes our entire missionary enterprise. This is our thinking about all of humanity as a whole. But at the same time, we believe in covenants and that God will keep his end of the covenant with us as individuals. We would agree with them that “God will save who he will save,” We just happen to believe he wants to save everyone.

In addition, our views about prophecy are different. Evangelicals don’t buy into the idea that God has further light and knowledge to give. So they have no modern teaching about what to do with Revelation, they’re kind of left on their own here. While the leaders in our church have given clarity on how to understand many things from the Bible, including this confusing book.

So, all of this to say, the Book of Revelation is rather confusing to most people, and having a conversation with an Evangelical friend might leave you both more confused than when you began! What to do? Here is my advice….The glorious end of the book is that God puts everything right and a place exists where his people can be with him forever. That part could certainly lead you to a good conversation.

Okay, 2 weeks left. Please let me know if you have questions specific to Evangelicals that I haven’t been able to answer yet, I’d be glad to use them in my wrap up episode in a couple weeks. See you next time.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – The Book of Revelation appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: Do You Have the Holy Ghost?by Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC

Hi friends, and welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions. If you wondered if you missed last week’s episode, it wasn’t you, it was me. And sometimes life is like that. Several of you reached out with kind notes asking if I was okay and I’m grateful for your caring. And here we are, back on track now.

As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common questions that Evangelicals ask about our faith as we go along. Our purpose here is not to fuel debate but to help you understand where your Evangelical friends and family are coming from so that you can have better conversations with them, and perhaps even be able to offer them a bit of our faith in a way they can understand.

I also wanted to tell you….I got to run up to Salt Lake this last week and participate in a preview of Come Follow Me for next year. There are some structural changes in the manual that will likely make it easier for families as well as new material that was not in the manual last time we went through it 4 years ago. I got to take home a physical copy and honestly, if you have kids I recommend getting a physical copy. The digital copies have access to all of the children’s activities, but you will have to print things out and the physical copy has everything in one place.

So, I’m behind a week and here is how I’m going to solve that problem. Today you’re going to get the content from last week, and I’m going to combine the text for this week and next into my episode for next week – they’re both in Revelation and it’s easy enough to cover in the same talk.

Okay, today we’re going to talk about the Holy Ghost from last week’s readings. One of the questions I’ve received at least a couple of times in the last year goes something like: How can Evangelicals claim to have the Holy Ghost, I thought our church was the only church with authority to give the gift of the Holy Ghost. And it’s a good question, you can see why it would be confusing because Evangelicals absolutely do claim to have the Holy Ghost, though they’re much more likely to refer to him as the Holy Spirit. So, what is that like for them?

We’ve talked about this a bit before on this show regarding the “charismatic” or “pentecostal” side of the Evangelical world, but what about the rest of them? Because here is their dilemma: There is no possibility for new authoritative revelation. So anything they feel from the Spirit does not have the same idea underpinning it that God can reveal new things. In fact, they are warned against believing that God might reveal something new to a person through subjective means. Whatever they hear from the Spirit will be echoed in the Scriptures, and that is now they know it’s true. The problem, of course, is that there are millions of choices a person has to make over the course of their lifetime that the Bible does not address, and can not address specifically. They have to take broad principles from the scriptures, apply them to what they feel the Spirit is saying, and only move forward if they see a match. Some of this is a very good safeguard – they have a good understanding that the Spirit is not going to tell them to do something wicked. If you boil the whole endeavor down to it’s most basic parts the idea you’re left with is that the Spirit can remind them of things that the Bible has already said, He can contextualize things the Bible has already said, but not much more.

And in some ways, dear Latter-day Saint friends, they have it easier. They view the scriptures as a check-and-balance against the subjective experience of hearing the Spirit. It’s a cleaner process, far less messy. There is another way they have it easier, but it doesn’t always work out fo them very well – that is they have no one above themselves telling them what the scriptures or Spirit are actually saying. The vast majority of them are going to make an honest attempt to listen to both scripture and spirit in an open way that allows God to guide them. But we little humans are excellent at self-deception, even when it comes to spiritual things. It’s very easy to mistake one’s own desires for the Spirit. We have this problem too – all humans do – but our risk is mitigated a tiny bit because we have a Prophet who can give a final word on big things. We don’t need – or want – to have a Prophet giving us exact directions on every single thing. But there is some rest available in the fact that we’re not left alone to figure it all out by ourselves. The difference here for Evangelicals is that they do accept pastors and others to teach them, but those teachers are employed by the will of the listener. If the Evangelical person does not want to listen to a particular teacher or pastor, they don’t. And they feel no compulsion to see that person in authority. While Latter-day Saints are much more likely to see the goodness of having someone with authority being able to teach us.

So, do Evangelicals have the Holy Spirit? I will speak for me, not the church, not FAIR, just myself. Long before I knew very much about our church at all, I know that I had the influence of the Holy Ghost in my life -guiding me, teaching me, leading me. At the most basic definition, that is the gift of the Holy Ghost. So, what’s different now that I’ve joined this church, been baptized and confirmed? Well, honestly, it’s not a lot different in terms of feeling the Spirit and allowing him to lead me. The difference is the presence of covenants.

In the Evangelical church someone can hear the Spirit, and as long as it confirms basically what is in scripture, then it’s considered a good thing. For me, now as a Latter-day Saint, the Spirit’s role is to provide a broader kind of guidance that allows me to do the things I’ve already been asked to do, or promised to do. It’s not about confirming the scriptures – it’s about how do I live out the covenants I’ve made. Now, there are Evangelicals who believe in covenant theology, but the role o the Spirit is still kind of stuck just being able to confirm what scripture says. And I’m sure other people’s experience is different than mine, I can only tell you my experience.

Okay, that’s about all I’ve got to say on that. Next week we’ll do Revelation – which is always weird, but that will be fun. See you then.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – 1–3 John; Jude appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Okay, guys, the topic this week is on failed prophecies from the latter-day prophets, but only one of these four quotes he gives is actually a prophecy, and it didn’t fail.

The author, Thomas Faulk, also uses an incorrect word as the title, so I corrected it. I won’t correct his usage going forward in the portions I quote from him, but I will be using the correct word myself. So, just to clear up any confusion this flipping between spellings may cause for those who don’t know the difference, “prophecy” and “prophesy” are two completely different words. A “prophecy” is a prediction from an oracle of God that has already been given, such as those given by Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. To “prophesy” is to give that prediction in the present tense. It’s an action, something somebody is currently doing. There’s only one letter’s difference between them, but they have different meanings and different pronunciations. I’m not trying to beat up on him for the error, because Heaven knows I’ve made my fair share of typos in this series. But in this case, I think the distinction is important. Also, I really don’t want to confuse anybody by constantly flipping back and forth between the two words.

This one gets into the weeds a bit, particularly on the first quote. There’s also a lot of misunderstanding on what a prophecy is, and what prophets are, from how it looks to me. I may take next week to discuss the role of prophets and our expectations about them, because a lot of people seem to misunderstand what a prophet actually is. They expect every word out of their mouths to be correct in every situation, and that just isn’t the case. I think a discussion about the nature of prophets and prophecy would be pretty beneficial, so right now, at least, I’m leaning in that direction.

Anyway, Faulk introduces this section like this:

While reading through History of the Church, Journal of Discourses, books by past prophets and historical Mormon periodicals, I would occasionally come across prophesies that didn’t quite make sense.

I know I hammer on the reliability issues with things like the Journal of Discourses and History of the Church, but it really is important to understand what these collections are and how they were created.

The History of the Church was collected from mostly second- and thirdhand account that were then rewritten into Joseph Smith’s voice, as if he was the one saying them. This was started under the direction and oversight of Joseph himself, though not finished until well after his death, and it is a solid, reliable source overall. It was a common scribal practice of the day, and they weren’t doing anything without his permission and approval. There are problems with some of the content, and it’s not perfect. But overall, it’s a decent source. There are many things in it that Joseph did not personally say, but if you know that going into it and you know how and where to source the original documents being paraphrased, this history collection is a good starting point. It’s just not guaranteed to actually be Joseph’s words.

The Journal of Discourses is a bit different. Again, there is a lot of wonderful, true, beautiful doctrine contained inside. There is also a lot in it that isn’t accurate or true. The off-the-cuff sermons were transcribed word-for-word, then edited and altered according to the reporters’ wishes as they were prepared for publication. Sometimes, it was just a few sentences here and there that were reworded, removed, or added, but sometimes, it was lengthy passages. None of the sermons we still have the original transcripts for match 100% with what was published, and many of them have “significant” departures, to use the word of the woman who re-transcribed and compared all of them. Again, this was a common practice of the day, but the original speakers were often not given the chance to approve them before publication, and they did not always approve of the changes after reading the finished product, when it was too late to object. It’s a decent resource, but unless you have the original transcript to compare it to—and we don’t have many—you can’t assume that what you’re reading is actually the words of Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, or any of the other speakers. What you’re reading is often the words of the reporters instead.

Different time periods had different recording standards, and issues like these are common in historical documents. These people were using the common techniques from their day, and they didn’t do anything wrong according to what they were taught. But for us today, trying to look back on the past and cobble together an accurate understanding, it does create problems. Historians are trained on how to use sources like this and evaluate them for truthfulness and integrity. But the vast majority of us are not trained historians. I’m certainly not, so I had to learn all of this stuff as I went along.

I’m not saying these sources are wholly unreliable and untrustworthy. I think there’s real value in reading them. But when you do, understand going into it that you may not be reading actual words by actual prophets. You may be reading the inserted thoughts of someone you don’t know anything about, or you may be missing multiples paragraphs of context that would make it make more sense. It’s one of those instances when “caveat emptor” is sound advice.

So, with that in mind, let’s take a look at these quotes.

Joseph Smith
Reflecting on a revelation given to him in Sec. 130 of the Doctrine and Covenants:

“There are those of the rising generation who shall not taste death till Christ comes… I was once praying earnestly upon this subject, and a voice said unto me, “My son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years of age, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man.” I prophesy in the name of the Lord God, and let it be written—the Son of Man will not come in the clouds of heaven till I am eighty-five years old. Then read the 14th chapter of Revelation, 6th and 7th verses—”And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come.” And Hosea, 6th chapter, After two days, etc.,—2,520 years; which brings it to 1890.” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol.5, p.336)

Joseph’s prophecy was mistaken in two ways: he did not live to be 85 years old and Jesus did not return in 1890.

There are a few different things being quoted and summarized, here. The first is D&C 130:14-17, which says:

14I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following:

15Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.

16I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face.

17I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.

Right off the bat, before we even look at the other sources, there are a few things worth pointing out. The first is that this is a conditional prophecy: if Joseph lives until he’s 85, he’ll see the face of Christ. Joseph didn’t live until he was 85, so the prophecy is moot. The second is that even Joseph didn’t know exactly what it meant. Did it mean that the Second Coming would happen when or after Joseph was 85, was it referring to a previous appearance he’d already had, or would Joseph die and then see Christ’s face? He didn’t know. The prophecy could have meant several different things, and Joseph wasn’t sure which one it was.

The second thing being quoted is the History of the Church, volume 5, pages 336-337:

Were I going to prophesy, I would say the end [of the world] would not come in 1844, 5, or 6, or in forty years. There are those of the rising generation who shall not taste death till Christ comes.

I was once praying earnestly upon this subject, and a voice said unto me, “My son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years of age, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man.” I was left to draw my own conclusions concerning this; and I took the liberty to conclude that if I did live to that time, He would make His appearance. But I do not say whether He will make his appearance or I shall go where He is. I prophesy in the name of the Lord God, and let it be written—the Son of Man will not come in the clouds of heaven till I am eighty-five years old. Then read the 14th chapter of Revelation, 6th and 7th verses—”And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come.” And Hosea, 6th chapter, After two days, etc.,—2,520 years; which brings it to 1890. The coming of the Son of Man never will be—never can be till the judgments spoken of for this hour are poured out: which judgments are commenced. Paul says, “Ye are the children of the light, and not of the darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief in the night.” It is not the design of the Almighty to come upon the earth and crush it and grind it to powder, but he will reveal it to His servants the prophets.

Judah must return, Jerusalem must be rebuilt, and the temple, and water come out from under the temple, and the waters of the Dead Sea be healed. It will take some time to rebuild the walls of the city and the temple, &c. and all this must be done before the Son of Man will make His appearance. There will be wars and rumors of wars, signs in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, the sun turned into darkness and the moon to blood, earthquakes in divers places, the seas heaving beyond their bounds; then will appear one grand sign of the Son of Man in heaven. But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, &c. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east.

Look at what Joseph is actually saying. He’s saying that, if he had to guess, it meant that the Second Coming would not happen before the year 1890, because there was too much still that needed to happen first. He also said that when it was coming, the prophets would be able to warn the valiant members of the Church to prepare for it, even if they didn’t know the exact hour. Well, he was right. The Second Coming didn’t happen before 1890. The signs haven’t all been fulfilled yet.

What did he mean when he said that some of the rising generation wouldn’t taste of death until Christ came? Well, we don’t know for sure. Maybe the Second Coming would have happened much sooner had Joseph actually lived until he was 85. Or maybe we don’t know what Joseph actually meant by “rising generation.” Did he mean the youth who were already alive at the time, or did he mean a coming generation? He didn’t specify. The idiom typically means those who are currently in their youth, but can we say with 100% certainty that’s how Joseph meant it? No. Can we say that this comment wasn’t also conditional on his surviving until he was 85? Nope.

The last thing quoted in Faulk’s comment was Hosea 6:1-3:

1Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.

2After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

3Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the Lord: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latterandformer rainunto the earth.

This seems to be about repenting before the Messiah comes. Joseph’s quote appears to be equating the three days mentioned with 1,000 years each, the way the scriptures say. He said that 2,520 years after that prophecy was given would be the year 1890.

I don’t know the significance of it being 2,520 years, unless it’s referring to a prophecy by a Baptist minister named William Miller which some more fringe Christians believe in. Most do not—with good reason—but for a while between 1840-1845, it was quite the national craze in the United States. It was similar to Y2K, for those who remember what that was like. So, it would make sense that is in fact what Joseph was referring to, since it was a common theory of the day.

Discussion of this prophecy opens a can of worms I don’t really want to get into. I don’t want any mention of it by me to be seen as an endorsement either by myself or by FAIR, because it’s some extreme stuff. I’ll give a brief overview of the idea, but I want to be clear that I do not put any stock into this theory and I’m actually kind of surprised to see Joseph Smith alluding to it.

The basic gist is that there is some Biblical numerology that points to the number 2,520 as being indicative of the date of the Second Coming. This math is based on obscure passages from the books of Leviticus and Daniel. It claims that every 2,520 years, there’s a major event in Jewish history, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, etc., and that the final 2,520 year will culminate in the Second Coming of Christ to the Earth.

In Leviticus 26, Jehovah threatens several times to curse the Israelites seven times. Since the prophetic year of the Israelites is 360 days rather than 365 days, 7 x 360 = 2,520.

In Daniel 5, King Belshazzar and his cronies stole the temple wine and got drunk off of it, and praised their false gods at the expense of the God of Israel. Belshazzar then saw the hand of God writing the words “Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin” on the temple wall. Daniel interpreted that writing as basically meaning the end of the king’s reign, which happened immediately. The idiom “seeing the writing on the wall” for the moment you realize the inevitable end of something comes from this story. This is also where the phrase “you have been weighed, measured, and found wanting” comes from. That’s a rough translation of the phrase that over time, entered into colloquial speech.

However, the words are also a math equation. “Mene” is from “mina,” which is a weight of measurement equal to 50 shekels. So, “mene, mene” is 100 shekels. Tekel or “teqal” is another word for shekel, so it’s equal to 1 shekel. And “upharsin” means “to divide.” Half of 50 is 25. Therefore, the total amount of this equation is 126 shekels (50+50+1+25). Ezekiel 45:12 tells us that 1 shekel is worth 20 gerahs, so 126 x 20 = 2,520.

These two instances combined together have been taken by some to indicate that in the Bible, the number 2,520 means the end of an era, or sometimes being a portent of doom and destruction. So, in fringe circles, this can be a prophecy of the end of times or the Apocalypse. This is not mainstream today by any means, though in the early 1840s, it was.

This minister, William Miller, used this equation to predict the end of the world in early 1843. People across the country freaked out over the idea. When the Apocalypse didn’t happen, people began using other equations to extend the deadline every few months until the end of 1844. When it still never came, most people largely abandoned the belief and there are not many at all who still hold to the idea today.

What Joseph seemed to be saying in this quote from History of the Church is that not only was Miller’s math wrong, but that Christ would definitely not come in 1843 or 1844, and would actually not come until at least 1890. To me, it’s clear he wasn’t saying he believed this 2,520 prophecy. I think he was actually saying, “No, he’s wrong. Don’t panic because it’s not happening. When it does happen, the prophets will know it and I’ve been told it won’t happen this quickly.”

So, that is not a failed prophecy by any means. Miller’s prophecy is failed, but Joseph’s was fulfilled. The Second Coming did not happen in 1843-44, just like he promised it wouldn’t. And because Joseph died well before he reached the age of 85, the conditions placed on the verses in D&C 130 could not be fulfilled. That prophecy was rendered void the moment Joseph was murdered.

Faulk continues:

Prominent early saint, Elder Oliver B. Huntington, lived with Joseph Smith in Kirtland, OH and served four missions for the Church. He wrote an article for The Young Woman’s Journal, the official magazine for the Young Ladies Mutual Improvement Association of the Church, recounting a teaching by Joseph Smith.

Oliver B. Huntington is the brother of Dimick and Zina Huntington, two other prominent early Latter-day Saints. He’s also an interesting character in his own right, and his autobiography is kind of a cool read.

“Nearly all the discoveries of men in the last half century have… contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a prophet. As far back as 1837, I know that he said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they live to a greater age than we do – that they live generally to near the age of a 1,000 years. He described the men as averaging near six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style.” (Joseph Smith – The Young Woman’s Journal, vol. 03, no. 6, March 1892. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/YWJ/id/11651)

This is not a prophecy, and there’s no way to attribute it to Joseph Smith. Huntington first wrote this down in his journal in 1881, and his source was not Joseph. It was Philo Dibble. So, not only was it first recorded 44 years after it was supposedly said, but he didn’t even hear it from the actual source. This article that Faulk cited is a thirdhand record that was given 55 years after the comment was supposedly originally made, and 11 years after Huntington first recorded mention of it in his journal. We have no idea whether Joseph actually said it or not.

If he did, it’s still not a prophecy. A prophecy, as we already discussed, is a prediction of a future event. This is just a statement of the possible present.

The article quoted goes on to mention that Huntington’s patriarchal blessing, which he says was given by Joseph Smith, Sr., said that one day he might serve a mission on the moon. The FAIR article cited above, however, quotes part of the blessing:

“[T]hou shalt have power with God even to translate thyself to Heaven, & preach to the inhabitants of the moon or planets, if it shall be expedient.”

We don’t know if that means literally that they were incorrectly talking about inhabitants of our moon or whether they were referring to an unnamed celestial body such as the spirit prison or the place where God dwells, or whether it was a metaphor of some kind, or what.

And according to Dan Vogel, who arrives at poor conclusions in my opinion but who is a solid researcher nonetheless, that blessing was given by Huntington’s father, not Joseph’s.

So, there’s at least one discrepancy in his recollections, which is to be expected half a century later. It’s entirely possible that Philo Dibble had discrepancies in his recollections too, when he passed them on to Oliver Huntington.

It was a fairly common belief at the time that the moon was inhabited. Hyrum Smith apparently believed the moon was inhabited, and Brigham Young apparently believed the sun was. So, it’s entirely possible that Joseph said it, and it’s entirely possible that he didn’t. Maybe he was talking about the inhabitants of the Celestial Kingdom or the city of Enoch. We don’t know enough about whatever prompted this memory of Dibble’s to say whether this was speculation on Joseph’s part, an actual vision that Dibble mistook for being the moon when it was really something else, or a false memory of Dibble’s that was distorted by time.

Either way, though, there is a very big difference between speculation and prophecy.

Brigham Young
“So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets’ and so will this earth when it is celestialized.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.13, p.271)

This one is just silly. The usual caveats about the Journal of Discourses aside, “Do you think it’s inhabited? I rather think it is,” is not prophecy. That is pure speculation. There’s no debating that. Brigham was giving an opinion, which he was allowed to do. He was not declaring a fact or announcing a new revelation or making a future prediction under the mantle of prophethood. We all have opinions, and some of those opinions are objectively wrong. That happens to all of us occasionally.

This is the quote in context:

I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon, a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us. We are called ignorant; so we are: but what of it? Are not all ignorant? I rather think so. Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed “the man in the moon,” and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized. Every planet in its first rude, organic state receives not the glory of God upon it, but is opaque; but when celestialized, every planet that God brings into existence is a body of light, but not till then. Christ is the light of this planet. God gives light to our eyes. Did you ever think who gave you the power of seeing? who organized these little globules in our heads, and formed the nerves running to the brain, and gave us the power of distinguishing a circle from a square, an upright from a level, large from small, white from black, brown from gray, and so on? Did you acquire this faculty by your own power? Did any of you impart this power to me or I to you? Not at all. Then where did we get it from? From a superior Being. When I think of these few little things with regard to the organization of the earth and the people of the earth, how curious and how singular it is! And yet how harmonious and beautiful are Nature’s laws! And the work of God goes forward, and who can hinder it, or who can stay His hand now that He has commenced His kingdom?

He’s pretty clearly saying that God created everything for a purpose and that it didn’t happen by chance. Those who refuse to see God’s hand in the universe and the way everything works together are blind to reality. But he never declared it was a fact that people lived on the sun or the moon. He just said he “rather thinks” so.

Personally, I “rather think” that Thomas Faulk is a dishonest actor stretching words far beyond their definitions in an attempt to discredit the prophets of God. But again, that’s just opinion, not a declaration of fact or a future prediction given under the mantle of prophethood.

Joseph Fielding Smith
“We will never get a man into space. This earth is man’s sphere and it was never intended that he should get away from it. The moon is a superior planet to the earth and it was never intended that man should go there. You can write it down in your books that this will never happen.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1954, vol.3, p.203)

On July 20, 1969 U.S. Astronauts are the first men to walk on the moon.

Yep, he said that at a stake conference in Hawaii, although it’s not in Doctrines of Salvation, volume 3. That’s because volume 3 was published in 1956, not 1954, and the statement in question was given in 1961.

Again, though, sloppy sourcing aside, this was clearly opinion, not prophecy. He believed it would diminish faith if men were to ever reach the moon.

There are two other things worth noting about this opinion. First, it was given in 1961, as I said. Joseph Fielding Smith did not become the President of the Church until 1970, nine years later. He was an apostle in 1961, and was called as a prophet, seer, and revelator, but he was not the leader of the Church. He was not authorized to give binding prophecies on behalf of the Church unless it was in agreement with the other members of the Quorum of the Twelve.

Second, when he was later asked about this after the moon landing, he reportedly said, “Well, I was wrong, wasn’t I?”

It is important to note that the report of his response came 40 years after it was supposedly given, and was a personal reminiscence of someone who was there. This reply is something we can’t definitively source, so take it with a grain of salt. He may well not have ever even said it. Just like with some of the other statements coming decades later as secondhand recollections, we do need to be cautious with accepting it as fact when we can’t confirm it. But, if true, it shows that he didn’t consider it a prophecy any more than I do.

So, of these four supposedly failed prophecies by prophets of the Church, only one was actually a prophecy, and it wasn’t failed. If taken to literally mean that the Second Coming would take place in 1890 if Joseph lived until that time, it was a conditional prophecy whose conditions were not met and was therefore not binding. If taken to mean that the Second Coming would not occur until after 1890, well, that’s a fulfilled prophecy because it hasn’t happened yet and we’re well beyond 1890. The other three quotes were opinion, and opinion, even when given by an apostle or prophet, is not binding on the members of the Church.

I know this post wandered off into some conspiracy theory content, and I know it got kind of weird. But I do think the context of the tangent was necessary to explain what Joseph was trying to say with that first quote. Otherwise, it’s easy to misunderstand the point the same way that Faulk did.

There are a lot of things that Heavenly Father and the Savior leave for us to work out on our own, after giving us the basics. This can naturally lead to speculation when we’re trying to fill in the gaps. Prophets and apostles are not immune to that tendency. In recent decades, our leaders have abandoned open speculation over the pulpit precisely because people were mistaking opinion for prophecy or settled fact. They’ve also taken great pains to clarify repeatedly what constitutes official doctrine and what does not.

Our critics constantly use that speculation by prior Church leaders as evidence that our church is not true. Please do not fall into the same trap that our critics do and mistake their opinion for revelation. We have to remember that they’re fallen human beings just like we are, and sometimes, they make mistakes. If we don’t allow them the grace to make those mistakes, it can do real harm to our testimonies when those mistakes happen. But the Atonement of Christ is bigger than that. It applies to prophets just as much as to the rest of us. Don’t hold these men to impossible standards they can’t possibly live up to. That isn’t fair to them, and it isn’t fair to you.

Sarah Allen is relatively new in her affiliation with FAIR. By profession, she works in mortgage compliance and is a freelance copyeditor. An avid reader, she loves studying the Gospel and the history of the restored Church. After watching some of her friends lose their testimonies, she became interested in helping others through their faith crises. That’s when she began sharing what she’d learned through her studies. She’s grateful to those at FAIR who have given her the opportunity to share her testimony with a wider audience.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 25: Prophecies appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Hey, guys. Long time, no see! This week should hopefully mark the return of weekly segments of this blog series. My life has been insane this summer, and I apologize for being so absent. My dad was dying of pulmonary fibrosis, and then miraculously, got a new set of lungs a few weeks ago that saved his life. He just came home from the hospital a week ago, and is still very weak. During that same time period, I also had to move, and there were two FAIR conferences, work and family obligations, and boy drama to wade through. Some of you have asked why I’m still single—it’s because I’m a magnet for Crazy. Things do appear to finally be settling back down, though, thankfully.

Speaking of the two FAIR conferences, the digital one on the Book of Mormon was a lot of fun. The talks from that one will be put into a book which should be coming out soon. The videos are being released on the FAIR YouTube channel every other Wednesday, alternating with the talks from the main conference this past August.

We’ve already begun planning next year’s main conference, and it’s shaping up to be a great conference. We’re talking about changing things up a bit with some interesting new ideas, and I will be presenting for the first time. I think I’ll be speaking on ways to navigate a faith crisis, or helping loved ones work through theirs. This will probably include subtopics like responding to anti-LDS material, studying with the Spirit, evaluating sources, and reputable resources you can turn to help you find answers to your questions. It’s a topic I’m passionate about, and unfortunately, it needs to be addressed often. It’s still very much up-in-the-air, though, as I’m still praying about what to say. I hope all of you can either come to the conference in person or catch it online afterward, because there are always some excellent talks at those conferences.

In addition to this series and that presentation next summer, I have an exciting new project in the works for FAIR that I’ll be doing alongside some of my friends, Jennifer Roach and Zachary Wright. We aren’t ready to talk about it openly yet, but if you follow me on Facebook, you probably saw me ranting recently about some of the more frustrating research the project required. We’ll have some trailers out at the beginning of the year, and hope to launch the project in February.

My lovely friend DeLayna is also planning a project that I’m very pleased with. It’s still in the early stages, but I really love and admire her, and can’t wait to see what she comes up with. So, keep your eyes open, because there are a lot of fun, exciting new projects coming to FAIR over the next year!

We also just lost our dear President Ballard. I just wanted to take a brief moment to share my love and gratitude for him. He has been an Apostle and member of the Quorum of the Twelve for as long as I can remember, as he was called just a few weeks before my fifth birthday. It absolutely will not be the same without him. He was a quiet, steady presence in my life, and he will be greatly missed. His last testimony of the Restoration, given last month at General Conference, was beautiful. I look forward to the day when we can all see him and learn from him again.

So, with all of that being said, let’s dive in, shall we?

This week, the Letter For My Wife moves into discussing blood atonement. This is one of my favorite “weird” doctrines, just because it led to so many ridiculous myths about our ancestors. Some of those myths are horrifying and some are hilarious, but all of them are absurd.

Thomas Faulk begins with a quote from Joseph Fielding Smith:

“Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their bloodshed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine, and is taught in all the standard works of the Church.” (President Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1954, vol. 1, pp.135-136)

Yes, he did say this. What Faulk doesn’t say is that the passages before and after this paragraph list different scriptures and expound teachings that discuss capital punishment for those who know the commandments of Christ and still commit murder.

While today, we disagree with the phrasing that anyone could be “beyond the power of the atonement of Christ,” we do know from the example of King David that there are sins we can commit that mean we will lose some of the glory we may have qualified for had we not committed them. David was fully forgiven for his sins, but some of the blessings he would have received in his exaltation were conditional. That seems to be what President Smith was talking about here in this section of the book.

This is a common interpretation of blood atonement, and it’s important to understand that during the second half of the 1800s when this kind of rhetoric was common, it was exaggerated and meant to encourage repentance and to keep outsiders hostile to the faith from staying in Utah territory. Brigham Young and other leaders at the time specifically said not to practice it, and always encouraged repentance rather than vigilante justice. It was a rhetorical device. While some individuals may have taken matters into their own hands in a few instances, this was not sanctioned by the Church. The state execution of John D. Lee for his role in the Mountain Meadows Massacre is cited by some as an example of blood atonement, but again, that was capital punishment more than anything else.

The idea behind blood atonement is that, when you murder someone, you can’t make restitution for that because you can’t restore someone’s life to them. So, you would voluntarily allow your own blood to be shed by the government as a way to repent for what you’d done. Obviously, we can’t atone for our own sins, only Christ can do that. But the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary entry for “atone” talks a lot about making amends for something you’ve done and answering for your actions. Those are both necessary parts of the repentance process.

Brigham Young took the doctrine of blood atonement even further. While Joseph might have emphasized the practice of blood atonement against sinful Mormons, Brigham inspired his followers to murder in God’s name both Mormons and non-Mormons alike.

That is a pretty tall claim, and Faulk doesn’t do much to back it up. During the Utah War, there were certainly killings in defense and out of necessity, as in all wars. There were executions of spies and informants, and there were harsh judgments made that might not have been made during a period of peace. But that’s a far cry from saying that a prophet of God was calling for premeditated murder in God’s name.

The Saints who came West and settled Utah and other surrounding areas were not living in a Rage Against the Machine song. There was not widespread “killing in the name of” going on, and Brigham Young was certainly not calling for it over the pulpit.

He was employing a rhetorical device common during periods of religious “Great Awakenings” called hellfire or fire-and-brimstone preaching. The basic idea was using exaggerated and terrible imagery to scare someone straight. It was popular during both the First and Second Great Awakenings, but much less so now. It’s strange to our ears today, but it was very common in the 1800s.

Most of the following quotes are taken from the Journal of Discourses, so the usual caveats about the accuracy and reliability of the JoD apply to them all.

Brigham Young
“Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them. You would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the Kingdom of God. I would at once do so, in such a case; and under the circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands…. There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.1, pp.108-109)

You can read this quote in context here, but these all say basically the same thing so I’m going to address them all at once at the end of the batch.

“All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, pp.219-20)

Again, you can read this full talk here.

“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; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world … I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.53)

To read this one in context, you can find the talk here.

“This is loving your neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.220)

And this one, which is from the same talk as the second quote, can be found here.

Now, despite the exaggerated nature of the rhetoric, he was not saying that we should murder other members of the Church whom we know are sinning. In fact, just a few paragraphs before this comment, Brigham said:

“And I will say that the time will come, and is now nigh at hand, when those who profess our faith, if they are guilty of what some of this people are guilty of, will find the axe laid at the root of the tree, and they will be hewn down. What has been must be again, for the Lord is coming to restore all things. The time has been in Israel under the law of God, the celestial law, or that which pertains to the celestial law, for it is one of the laws of that kingdom where our Father dwells, that if a man was found guilty of adultery, he must have his blood shed, and that is near at hand. But now I say, in the name of the Lord, that if this people will sin no more, but faithfully live their religion, their sins will be forgiven them without taking life.”

He was saying that we should remain true to our covenants and utilize the Atonement in our lives. Moreover, we should not just be concerned with ourselves and our families, but should love our brothers and sisters in the Gospel enough to help them repent of their sins, too. We should work together to keep all manner of sin out of our societies.

There are some sins we can commit that, if left unrepented for, can have serious eternal consequences, not just for ourselves but for others. Sometimes, those sins require a temporary removal from the membership of the Church of Christ. This is both for our own protection (our covenants are canceled so that if we backslide, we won’t be held responsible to the same degree that we would otherwise) and for the protection of the rest of the Saints (so that we don’t pull others away with us).

It’s a meme in our society today that a true friend is one who would help you bury the body after you commit a terrible sin. In reality, a true friend is one who would help you repent and make amends to the best of your ability.

Obviously, that doesn’t mean we should murder each other to speed along the repentance process, but that was the analogy that Brigham Young used to make this point. We shouldn’t tolerate and approve of sin, but help each other eradicate it from our lives. We should support and encourage each other to become the best versions of ourselves that we can be, to stretch and grow and to become as sanctified as it’s possible for a fallible mortal being to become. A real friend would help you become that person, not help you run from it.

Along with Porter Rockwell, William Hickman was bodyguard to Joseph Smith then Brigham Young. In his autobiography, Hickman confessed that he was often tasked by Brigham to take the lives of men.

“I found him, used him up, scalped him, and took his scalp to Brigham Young … He took it and thanked me very much. This was my first act of violence under the rule of Brigham Young.” (William Hickman, The Autobiography of William Hickman, Brigham’s Destroying Angel: The Life Confessions and Startling Disclosures, Salt Lake City, 1872, p.47)

After feeling remorse later in his life, Hickman confessed his crimes to R. N. Baskin, mayor of Salt Lake City and member of the Utah Supreme Court. Justice Baskins states,

“The Danites were an organization in the Mormon church. Its existence was stated by Bill Hickman in his confession made to me. He stated that the members were bound by their covenants to execute the orders of the priesthood, and that when a direct order or intimation was given to ‘use up’ anyone, it was always executed by one or more of the members. Hickman confessed to me that he personally knew of thirteen persons having been murdered, some of them by him … that at one time he murdered a man by the name of Buck at the personal request of Brigham Young.” (R.N. Baskin Reminiscences of Early Utah, 1914, p150)

William “Wild Bill” Hickman was a pretty controversial figure in Utah history. He served under Brigham Young during the Utah War, but later led a gang of horse thieves and murderers, was denounced by Brigham, wrote a tell-all book exaggerating his exploits and naming Brigham as the mastermind behind all of them, and was excommunicated over it all.

Taking his words at face value when he was known to exaggerate his crimes and Brigham’s involvement in them is poor scholarship. Obviously, not all sources who are critical of the Church are wrong in everything they say. There are certainly some things in his book that are true, just like there are some things that are true in William Chase’s book and in Ann Eliza Webb Young’s book. But just like in both of those other books, there are also a lot of things in Hickman’s book that are untrue. You can’t just accept everything he says uncritically if you want to find out the truth.

According to a biography on Hickman by Hope Hilton, there was some correspondence between Hickman and Young after the excommunication. Hickman was looking to secure a railroad contract, while Brigham wanted a confession and an apology, and offered rebaptism if Hickman would meet those terms. Hickman claimed ignorance of any wrongdoing at the time, though according to his descendants, he did later admit to lying over Young’s involvement. He was eventually rebaptized by proxy in the mid-1930s, some 50 years after his death, on the strength of that apparent confession.

While it’s impossible to know exactly how much of his story is exaggerated, we know for a fact that some portions of his autobiography are exaggerated. If the Church leadership had evidence to believe that he had confessed to lying about Brigham and eventually rebaptized him because of that confession, why should we believe those earlier accusations instead? That doesn’t make any sense.

Heber C. Kimball
“If men turn traitors to God and His servants, their blood will surely be shed, or else they will be damned, and that too according to their covenants.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.375)

I’m going to do the same thing with Heber C. Kimball’s quotes and give you the links to read them in context, then discuss them all at the end. This quote from comes this talk.

“Judas was like salt that had lost its saving principles—good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men…. It is so with you, ye Elders of Israel, when you forfeit your covenants…. I know the day is right at hand when men will forfeit their Priesthood and turn against us and against the covenants they have made, and they will be destroyed as Judas was.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol.6, pp.125-26)

This quote can be read in context here.

“These are my views, and the Lord knows that I believe in the principles of sanctification; and when I am guilty of seducing any man’s wife, or any woman in God’s world, I say, sever my head from my body.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, p.20)

And this one can be found here.

With these three, the first two quotes are talking about something completely different than the last one is. Faulk lumps them all together here as they’re talking about the same thing for some reason. The first two are about how the enemies of the Church of Christ will one day have to face the consequences of their actions. Unless they repent they will be destroyed, whether physically or symbolically, according to the Lord’s promises. That’s obviously not something we want to happen to anyone, but unfortunately, some people earn that reward.

The final quote was Heber saying that he would rather die than fail to live up to his covenants. The entire talk about was standing strong and apart from the rest of the world, and living up to our responsibilities as children of God. We have been called to a righteous calling, and it takes sacrifice and dedication. But if we fall short and succumb to the temptations of the world, and we fail to repent whenever that happens, we disappoint our Father and we potentially lose some of our blessings. When we take the Lord’s great sacrifice in vain, there are eternal consequences for that. Heber would rather lose his life than his integrity. That’s something to admire, not something to attack.

Jebediah M. Grant
“I say, there are men and women that I would advise to go to the Presidency immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their care; and then let a place be selected, and let that committee shed their blood. We have amongst us that are full of all manner of abominations, those who need to have their blood shed, for water will not do, their sins are too deep a dye … I believe that there are a great many; and if they are covenant breakers we need a place designated, where we can shed their blood … Brethren and sisters, we want you to repent and forsake your sins. And you who have committed sins that cannot be forgiven through baptism, let your blood be shed, and let the smoke ascend, that the incense thereof may come up before God as an atonement for your sins, and that the sinners in Zion may be afraid.” (Apostle Jebediah M. Grant, 2nd counselor to Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, pp.49-51)

This quote can be read in context here, in a talk fittingly titled “Rebuking Iniquity.” This talk goes directly after those hypocrites who engage in all manner of things that are against the commandments, including attacking the Church, but who come to meetings on Sundays and claim to be faithful, recommend-holding members of the ward. We all know people like that. They even have a name on Reddit: PIMO, or “physically in, mentally out.” The Savior had some pretty harsh words for hypocrites during His earthly ministry, too.

President Grant was saying that we needed to stay vigilant against those wolves in sheep’s clothing, to keep them from preying on the vulnerable among us. Was his phrasing sharper than what you’re likely to hear today? Yes. Was his ultimate message any different from talks we hear today? No. We all know what’s eventually going to happen to those who spend their time trying to lead the Saints away from God, especially those who do so in secret.

Joseph Fielding Smith

“Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine, and is taught in all the standard works of the Church.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1954, vol.1, pp.135-136)

This is the same quote from Joseph Fielding Smith he quoted before, so we’ve already covered this.

This is horrifying!

Why? Obviously, it’s not rhetoric we employ today. There’s a reason why Church leaders today are a lot more cautious in their phrasing, and it’s because people like Thomas Faulk deliberately misconstrue their meaning. But there’s nothing horrifying about understanding that people taught lessons differently 150 years ago than they do today.

Lives have been taken under the direction of the Church and in the name of the Lord.

Name one. You’ll notice that Faulk didn’t do that, and that’s because he can’t. While there was certainly violence and vigilante justice in the American West, and Utah was no exception to that, if there was any credible evidence at all to suggest that Brigham Young ordered the death of anyone, Faulk would have presented it here and hammered that point home repeatedly. He’d have gloated over it for pages, and yet, he hasn’t come up with a single name. The only name given by anyone at all is “Buck,” aka Horace Bucklin, a man Hickman killed as part of the Aiken massacre, and Hickman’s account can’t be fully trusted or corroborated. Faulk doesn’t even mention “Buck” by name or claim that Brigham Young directly ordered his murder or anyone else’s. Ask yourselves why that is.

Does merely claiming divine authority give someone a free pass to murder?

Obviously not, but contrary to common refrains of the day, words are not violence. Nothing Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Joseph Fielding Smith, or any of the other past or present Church leaders said was equivalent to murder. If critics could provide any actual proof of our Church leaders murdering anyone, don’t you think they would have done so by now?

If so, many terrorist organizations around the world that commit horrific acts in the name of God should also get a free pass. Should we feel that the Prophet Brigham Young and the early saints are justified for their actions?

And what terrorist activity did Brigham Young engage in? Give specifics that are backed up by actual proof. We’ll wait.

Imagine if Thomas S. Monson were to preach this at general conference and task local authorities to follow through with this council.

Where’s the evidence that any of the other prophets ever asked local authorities to have anyone in their stakes murdered for their sins? Brigham repeatedly taught that blood atonement wasn’t something to be acted upon in this life.

It is obvious why the Church would not want this part of the history to become common knowledge. Does this practice sound like it was truly the will of a loving Heavenly Father?

How is blood atonement not common knowledge? It’s repeated in the Journal of Discourses, it’s published in a Gospel Topics Essay on the Church’s website, Saints volume 2—also on the Church’s website—discusses it, the Brethren have discussed it in interviews, there have been multiple statements made by the Church denouncing it as a practice, etc. It hasn’t exactly been hidden.

As for the second question, many people today seem to forget that while God is loving and merciful, He is also just. The demands of justice are equal to the demands of mercy. He perfectly balances both sides of the equation. Remember, the same Savior who selflessly sacrificed Himself to grant salvation to all of mankind also came to bring a sword instead of peace. And the Savior does the will of the Father. Our Heavenly Father is a loving God, but He is also a just God. If we’re unrepentant for our sins, we will lose out on many of the blessings He has offered us.

It is a prophet’s duty and calling to warn of us that. Different prophets have different styles of teaching, because we each learn in different ways. Different styles appeal to different people. If you don’t like Brigham’s brash, hyperbolic technique, there are a lot of other prophets to choose from. They’re all teaching the same message: that the only way to return to our Father’s kingdom in full glory, reaching our highest potential, is through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 24: Blood Atonement appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Some Old Testament scriptures tell about a latter-day “Davidic King,” “Davidic Servant,” or “Marred Servant.” The consensus of mainstream scholarship and teaching from leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that this refers to Jesus Christ, when He rules the earth after His Second Coming. But some claim the “Servant” will be a mortal man who may or may not be a regularly-ordained Church leader. Because of the name “David,” some speculate Apostle David Bednar will be the Servant, and the same was said decades ago about the prophet David O. McKay.

Many who are not Apostles or Church leaders have claimed to be the “Davidic Servant.” Recently it was reported a woman and her brother kidnapped her teenage son because they believed him to be the “Davidic Servant.” The belief in a “Davidic Servant” is controversial and has been associated with criminal and tragic outcomes. To an unstable individual who feels entitled to power or special spiritual gifts, the “Davidic Servant” belief can be used to justify immoral and unscriptural actions. To an ordinary member of the Church, belief in a coming “Davidic Servant” can cause frustration with actual Church leaders, a feeling of spiritual superiority to them, and an eventual loss of faith in the restored gospel altogether.

A Mortal Davidic Servant: Refuting the ArgumentsBelievers in a coming mortal “Davidic Servant” use several arguments to support their claim. Most are completely wrong.

Continued Here

The post A Mortal Davidic Servant? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

While traveling to western Missouri in the fall of 1830, Oliver Cowdery, Parley P. Pratt, Peter Whitmer Jr., and Ziba Peterson made a stop in Kirtland, Ohio to preach the gospel to some of Parley’s friends and former religious associates. While there, they taught and baptized more than a hundred individuals! They then ordained some of the men as Elders and placed them in charge of the affairs of the Church in that area. The missionaries then continued on to their assigned mission in Missouri.

Left to their limited understanding of the restored gospel, which included a renewal of the gift of the Holy Ghost and spiritual gifts, a few of these newly ordained Elders and members began experiencing unusual spiritual phenomena during their worship services. These included ecstatically jumping up and down, swinging from ceiling joists, falling into trances and unconsciousness, seeing visions of parchments with written messages from heaven, crawling around like snakes on the floor, preaching in tongues to invisible congregations of Lamanites, wielding invisible swords of Laban, and so forth.

Of course, these practices drew the ridicule of outsiders in the community, including in the local press, and gave plenty of fodder for the first anti-Mormon book, Mormonism Unvailed.

Partly in response to the large conversion in Kirtland in the fall of 1830, Joseph Smith and his family moved there the following February. After attending worship services in Kirtland and seeing some of the practices that had developed among these new members, the prophet wrote a letter to his brother Hyrum Smith, stating, “the devil had made many attempts to overthrow” the church there. It is in this context that he received the revelation recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 46 which warns the members to “not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils. Wherefore, beware lest ye are deceived” (Doctrine and Covenants 46:7).

Two months later, he received another revelation on this topic:

Hearken, O ye elders of my church … and attend to the words of wisdom which shall be given unto you. … Behold, verily I say unto you, that there are many spirits which are false spirits, which have gone forth in the earth, deceiving the world. And also Satan hath sought to deceive you, that he might overthrow you. Behold, I, the Lord, have looked upon you, and have seen abominations in the church that profess my name. … [W]o unto them that are deceivers and hypocrites, for, thus saith the Lord, I will bring them to judgement. Behold, verily I say unto you, there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some, which has given the adversary power; but behold such shall be reclaimed; But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world. Wherefore, let every man beware lest he do that which is not in truth and righteousness before me” (Doctrine and Covenants 50:1-9).

The Lord then laid forth how “the elders of his church” could discern between deceiving spirits that are “not of God” and the “Spirit of truth,” so that they could “chase darkness from among [them]” and “overcome all things which are not ordained of [the Father]” (vv. 10-34).

Later, Joseph Smith would state,

A man must have the discerning of spirits, before he can drag into daylight this hellish influence and unfold it unto the world in all its soul destroying, diabolical, and horrid colors: for nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit, when they think they have the spirit of God” (1 April 1842, Joseph Smith Papers).

It should come as no surprise that these “false spirits” are still “abroad in the earth” today and are “deceiving the world” (D&C 50:1-2). Unfortunately, as Joseph Smith warned, these “abominations” sometimes show up “in the church” among those “that profess [God’s] name” (v. 4), and members may “think they have the spirit of God” when, in fact, they are “under the influence of a false spirit” that is “diabolical.”

These false spirits lead to controversy, confusion, and division among church members. And, like in 1831, this gives plenty of fodder for critics and the media to ridicule the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Thankfully, although some Latter-day Saints may at times be misled by “deceivers and hypocrites” who are under the influence of false spirits, the Lord has promised that “such shall be reclaimed,” but “the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death” (D&C 50:7-8).

The use of the term “hypocrite” in this revelation is interesting.

The word hypocrite ultimately came into English from the Greek word hypokrites, which means ‘an actor’ or ‘a stage player.’ The Greek word itself is a compound noun: it’s made up of two Greek words that literally translate as ‘an interpreter from underneath.’ That bizarre compound makes more sense when you know that the actors in ancient Greek theater wore large masks to mark which character they were playing, and so they interpreted the story from underneath their masks” (The Origin of ‘Hypocrite’).

In other words, these “hypocrites” aren’t individuals who fail to live up to what they believe, but they are spiritual “actors” who hide behind masks with the intent to deceive. Thus, “there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some” (v. 7).

In the Church, these hypocrites may be people who pretend to have special spiritual gifts, like happened in Kirtland in the winter of 1830-1831. Perhaps they claim special spiritual manifestations such as receiving the Second Comforter or seeing visions of the future like those recorded in the extremely problematic book, Visions of Glory. These hypocrites may also be those who pretend to have special insight into the scriptures or doctrines of the church, or they may claim divine authority outside of the divinely established order of the church (See FairMormon Conference Speaker Identifies a Spiritual Threat on ChurchofJesusChrist.org). Latter-day Saints should not be “seduced” by such “false spirits” and “hypocrites” since the Lord has clearly revealed how we can discern truth from error.

For example, we should never forget the Lord’s rebuke of David Whitmer, saying, “you have not given heed unto my Spirit, and to those who were set over you, but have been persuaded by those whom I have not commanded” (D&C 30:2). Safety comes from giving “heed unto [God’s] Spirit, and to those who [are] set over [us]” while rejecting the seductive voices of “those whom [God] has not commanded.” And how can we know if they are commanded of God?

And this ye shall know assuredly—that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until [Joseph Smith] be taken. … And this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any [other] that shall come before you as revelations or commandments; And this I give unto you that you may not be deceived, that you may know they are not of me. For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me shall come in at the gate and be ordained as I have told you before (Doctrine and Covenants 43:3, 5-7).

The apparent antecedent to the phrase “as I have told you before” is in the previous revelation:

[I]t shall not be given to any one to go forth to preach my gospel, or to build up the church, except he be ordained by some one who has authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority and has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church (Doctrine and Covenants 42:11).

This is an unambiguous “law unto” the members of the Church.

In 2017, M. Russell Ballard taught,

Today I repeat earlier counsel from Church leaders. …

Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church. (See Doctrine and Covenants 26:2; 28:13; 43:6–7.)

Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand” (M. Russell Ballard, The Trek Continues!).

As I’ve written elsewhere, “if we are to avoid deception, we are commanded by God to not listen to anyone who purports to reveal his doctrine or his will other than the properly called, sustained, and ordained leadership of the church. Nobody talks for God but God and those properly called by Him, sustained by the membership of the church, and regularly ordained by those in authority.”

In our day of social media influencers and instantaneous mass communication, there are many individuals that are like Almon Babbitt, of whom the Lord said, “he aspireth to establish his counsel instead of the counsel which I have ordained, even that of the Presidency of my Church; and he setteth up a golden calf for the worship of my people” (D&C 124:84). It does not matter whether these individuals have impressive scholarly training or insight, or whether they profess to have visions, manifestations, or dreams — if we “give heed” to “those whom [God] has not commanded,” we will be deceived (D&C 30:2).

Any individuals who proclaim that they have special, revealed insight, or who try to supplant the direction given by church authorities, are simply deceived and/or deceiving. They are the “deceivers and hypocrites” we were so clearly warned of in Doctrine and Covenants 50.

“Wherefore, beware lest ye are deceived” (Doctrine and Covenants 46:7).

Recommended Reading

“Try the Spirits,” Joseph Smith
“Spiritual Gifts,” Dallin H. Oaks
“Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall,” Dallin H. Oaks
“Alternate Voices,” Dallin H. Oaks
“The Trek Continues!,” M. Russell Ballard
“Beware of False Prophets and False Teachers,” M. Russell Ballard

Andrew I. Miller is a FAIR volunteer from Crystal City, Missouri. He has served as a bishop and currently serves as the stake young men president. By profession he is a High School teacher.

The post “Beware lest ye are deceived” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: The Husband of One Wifeby Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC

Welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions. My name is Jennifer Roach and today we’re going to talk about polygamy. As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common questions that Evangelicals ask about our faith as we go along. Our purpose here is not to fuel debate but to help you understand where your Evangelical friends and family are coming from so that you can have better conversations with them, and perhaps even be able to offer them a bit of our faith in a way they can understand.

We are on Week 43 of this 52-week project. I’ve teased you a little about what will happen next year. I’m still not ready to spill the beans, but we had a planning meeting for it yesterday and I’m really encouraged.

Our jumping-off point is 1 Timothy 3:2:

Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach…

Before we start, let me set some expectations. This is not an apologetic for polygamy. This is not to pretend there are not hard issues with polygamy. If you yourself, Latter-day Saint friend, are struggling over the history of polygamy there are so many resources to help you. Let me just briefly touch on 3 of them. 1) The work of Brian Hales on this topic is the the very best source for learning the history here. His site JosephSmithsPolygamy.org should be your first stop if you’re wanting to see the most in-depth display of original documents as it relates to Joseph’s polygamy specifically. Brian and his then-wife Laura Harris Hales (now passed) created the site. Laura was amazing and kind. I gave my first formal talk for FAIR in 2020 and Laura was the speaker right before me. We had never met but she just sort of told me, “You and I are going to be friends because you need to know the things I can tell you.” Maybe not that blunt, but in essence, that’s what it was. Laura’s talk that year was on Helen Mar Kimball’s later-in-life reflections on polygamy. Helen was sealed to Joseph when she was 14, which gets really complicated for us today. But Helen’s own words, written after a lifetime of living polygamy, are the essence of what it means to embrace faith in the midst of something really messy. And if I had not already been completely swept off my feet over this church, I would have become so right then and there. My very favorite genre of speaking or writing is from the standpoint of, “You can maintain faith even if things are messy, even if you have doubts, even if you have questions. Those things in no way disqualify you from having a strong faith.” So, resource 1 is: check out Brian’s site (Brian is very much alive and well – just this last week he released a paper on Joseph Smith’s education called, “Joseph Smith’s Education and Intellect as Described in Documentary Sources.” Our friends at the Interpreter Foundation have it up on their website. It’s 8,000 words and over 120 footnotes. Brian’s site and Laura’s talk on HMK at the 2020 FAIR conference. 2) Second resource you should know about is the 2023 talk at FAIR by Don Bradley. Don is a proper historian and did the deep research for Brian and Laura’s work. And he has continued on in that work. Don’s talk at FAIR a couple months ago brings new information into play that changes the timeline of Joseph’s polygamy – which snaps several previously problematic ideas into place. It is well worth your time. 3) Finally Brittany Chapman Nash’s book, “Let’s Talk About Polygamy.” Brittany worked in the church history department for a long time, she was on the YW General Advisotry Board. She makes the topic very accessible and this is a very easy read. I think it’s less than 150 pages, in plain language, and it’s a great resource if you are struggling here. Ok, those are 3 great resources if you’re struggling in general with the topic as a Latter-day Saint. But what we are going to do today is different. We, as always, are going to talk about this topic as it comes up for Evangelicals.

So, before I was interested in the church, I knew some rough details about polygamy – mostly from movies or tv shows. I couldn’t have sketched out an overview of why it started or when. I just knew it was a thing, and supposedly wasn’t a thing anymore. But even that small amount of knowledge is more than a good percentage of Evangelicals have. As evidenced by this reality….Since joining the church I’ve received a handful of messages from friends about various tv shows that go something like this: “Hey, I’m watching such-and-such tv show about your church. There’s a lot going on there – you okay?” And they mean that with the kindest of intentions, they really do. They just don’t realize they’re watching a show about the members of a different group who practice polygamy, not our church. And I would say most Evangelicals have an understanding that is somewhere between what I knew and the knowledge that my friends displayed in their messages. So when they think about polygamy you need to know that their imaginations are populated by what they see on television and not by actual historical realities.

But even if you can explain all of that to them, and I think many (most?) Latter-day Saints could, you still have a problem…They interpret this verse in 1 Timothy to mean that all expressions of polygamy are bad for all places and all times. They get real squeamish explaining the polygamy of almost every prophet in the Old Testament and will usually say something like, “Yeah, they might have done that, but God didn’t like it or allow it – they just did it.” You can point out that 30% of the countries in the world still allow it today. They just…it’s usually been a hard no for them. But even that is changing.

In 2003 Gallop does a survey and finds 7% of adult Americans thought polygamy was morally acceptable – by 2020, 20% of adult Americans said it’s morally acceptable. And 35% of adults who consider themselves politically liberal say it is morally acceptable. This is sort of the spot where I walked in. I wouldn’t describe myself as particularly liberal, but I lived in a very liberal West Coast city for 25 years and that exposes you to a wide variety of people and lifestyles where the automatic response of most people is, “love is love.” So when I was investigating the church, that’s the cultural soup I was living in, so when the issue of polygamy came up my response was something like: Love who you want to love, why should I care? When the conversation came up with 2 women friends that are members of the church I was surprised. So surprised. I asked how they thought about the history of polygamy or the issue in general and they kind of fell all over themselves trying to tell me how bad they thought it was. They wanted to put lots and lots of distance between today and the 1800’s. I was confused. My liberal culture had taught me: You don’t get to have an opinion on how other people structure their marriages. Now, I get what they were doing – I was an investigator and they were trying not to freak me out – and I see the goodness in that. But I was far less worried about the issue than they were. As time went on, and I learned more, there were parts of the topic that I struggled with harder than others – I struggled with Joseph’s polyandry and if you struggle with that one too you must watch Don’s talk that I referenced earlier. But my initial reaction to the topic of polygamy was kind of, “So?” And I really haven’t moved too far from that. I understand the problems, I understand that the theological framework that supported polygamy is still found in places in our church. I listened to 100 episodes of a popular podcast talking about polygamy. And perhaps I’m not the typical example here, but what I’ve observed is that people inside the church are more touchy about this topic than people outside of it. So, all of that to say, you might be surprised that this conversation could go an entirely different way than you imagine. You, Latter-day Saint, might have far more complicated feelings about this than someone outside of our faith. You’re allowed to have complicated feelings here, and there is plenty of help for that, but Evangelicals don’t necessarily walk in with the same baggage.

And here is the other direction I want to go. I think sometimes we Latter-day Saints look at Protestants widely, and Evangelicals specifically as being a people who don’t have to grapple with history as hard as we do in our church. Since we’re talking about polygamy we’ll use that as the example. There are 2 reasons for this.

1) Evangelicals are perfectly aware of polygamy in the Old Testament. But, that was a very, very long time ago. Meanwhile, in our church, there are people alive today whose grandparents practiced polygamy. So stories about polygamy (and all of its challenges) are not just random stories about stuff that happened 3,000 years ago. Evangelicals have the luxury of not thinking about this topic very much because 3,000 years is a long time. And, to be honest, in general, they’re fairly unaware of the events that have happened in the interim. For example, Martin Luther, the great reformer and father of Protestantism, said, “I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.” But even that was 500 years ago, so it just doesn’t feel as relevant for them.

2) Evangelicalism is very young as a faith community. Younger than ours. They really didn’t start gaining steam until post-WW2. And what was the cultural zeitgeist in post-WW2 America? Everything is modern and new. Everything is about the future. New is better than old. So they’ve culturally been able to tell their origin story that way. Think of the biggest Evangelical church in your town, I can almost guarantee you that their origin story is something like, “Well, Pastor So-and-So just wanted to study the Bible with some friends so they started a Bible study group in his living room. And pretty soon it grew into a church, and now here we are.” Well, that’s a pretty tidy history. But you understand that it’s an edited history. “Jesus did some stuff, died and rose again, then fast-forward 2000 years and we started this church.” And that’s the end of the history lesson. Because its culturally allowed (even expected) for the story to be told that way, they mostly just accept it, and no one asks harder questions based on history. They actually really do have it easier here than we do. But this is sort of the pay off on this topic and what I want you to hear….

Faith in messy. History is messy. People are messy. There was a time in our church’s history when a more sanitized version of history was being told – that happened for a lot of reasons, and it seems we’ve mostly moved past that mentality. And now we grapple with this stuff. And yes, some people leave over these issues. But have you met the people who know the depths of these issues and don’t leave? Don’t abandon their faith? People who can struggle through these issues, faith intact? If you’re watching this, I suspect there is at least some of that in you too. And you have no idea what a gift that is. A person who goes to a church whose origin story is Pastor Bill and his living-room Bible study, well they don’t develop the same skill in the same way. They don’t have to because the messier details are obscured from sight. My very favorite people in the world are people who model this for me – they want to know all the details of everything, and they still choose faith.

My point here is not even to prep you on how to talk about polygamy with outsiders. I don’t think that’s even a very interesting conversation, and a pretty large number of them won’t even care. But there’s a pretty easy pivot from that conversation to how one keeps faith alive while also acknowledging the messy. This is one of the gifts of our faith that you might not see, but in my opinion, helping other people build their faith by modeling how to wade through complex issues is one of the holiest things you can do in this world. I hope and aspire to be able to do that for other people, and I know you do too.

Okay, well, there you go. And seriously, if you are hurting or struggling over this issue please check out the resources I listed at the top of the show. Sometimes I’ve seen this cynical attitude from critics of the church that says, “Well, if you knew everything I knew, you’d leave too.” Which is just ridiculously untrue. And the folks in the sources I mentioned can really show you what its like to know all the details and still maintain faith.

Next week, “the priesthood of all believers” is up. That will be a great conversation. See you then.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – 1 and 2 Timothy; Titus; Philemon appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Craig Lindquist

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

Have you ever felt that the proverbial “windows of heaven” are too often fastened tightly shut for you? You would not be alone, as most of us have. Assuming that they are not shut because of serious misdeeds, what do we do when we need the revelation that flows through those windows but cannot get it? There is no easy answer. Even after much prayer, fasting, studying the scriptures, or conversations with priesthood leaders, answers can still be hard to find. Nevertheless, in our own struggle we can gain much understanding and appreciation for others who also search for answers from above.

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: How Do I Deal with Questions I Don’t Have the Answers To? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

FAIR has a service where questions can be submitted and they are answered by volunteers. If you have a question, you can submit it at https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/contact. We will occasionally publish answers here for questions that are commonly asked, or are on topics that are receiving a lot of attention.

Question:In the time since General Conference, we have had several questions about the resurrection – whether our bodies will be resurrected in their perfect form, and what the difference would be between a Celestial versus a Terrestrial or Telestial resurrected body.

Answer from FAIR Volunteer David Smith:Resurrected BodiesIn his October 2023 general conference message, President Nelson reminded us: “Your choices today will determine three things: where you will live throughout all eternity, the kind of body with which you will be resurrected, and those with whom you will live forever.” President Nelson reemphasized scriptural teachings about resurrected bodies, as explained in a Church manual:

The scriptures are clear that all of God’s children will be resurrected (see 1 Corinthians 15:22; Alma 11:42; 40:4). The eternal kingdom inherited by a resurrected person, as well as the nature of a person’s resurrected body, however, will be determined by his or her faithfulness and obedience to God’s laws (see 1 Corinthians 15:40–42; D&C 76:96–98; 88:22–24, 28–31). Those who will inherit the celestial kingdom will have bodies that are celestial, “whose glory is that of the sun” (D&C 76:70). Those in the terrestrial kingdom will have bodies that differ from those in the celestial kingdom, “even as [the glory] of the moon differs from the sun in the firmament” (D&C 76:71; see also D&C 76:78). Telestial bodies will have a lesser glory, “as the glory of the stars differs from that of the glory of the moon in the firmament” (D&C 76:81). (“Chapter 28: Doctrine and Covenants 76:50–119,” in Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual [2018])

Restored to a Perfect FrameWe know from ancient and modern prophets that in the resurrection we shall receive our bodies as they were except in a perfected, flawless state. Here are just a couple of relevant quotes: “The spirit and the body shall be reunited again in its perfect form; both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper frame, . . . and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body.” (Alma 11:43–44) * “Every fundamental part of every body will be restored to its proper place again in the resurrection, no matter what may become of the body in death. If it be burned by fire, eaten by sharks, no matter what. Every fundamental part of it will be restored to its own proper place.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, “Chapter 3: The Plan of Salvation,” in Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Fielding Smith) Procreation Only Among Exalted Beings*We also learn through modern revelation that the opportunity to have children after the resurrection is a privilege available only to those who have an exalted body (see Doctrine and Covenants 131:1–4; 132:16–19). The Prophet Joseph Smith taught:

Except a man and his wife enter into an everlasting covenant and be married for eternity, while in this probation; by the power and authority of the Holy Priesthood; they will cease to increase when they die, that is, that they will not have any children after the resurrection; but those who are married by the power and authority of the Priesthood in this life, and continue without committing the sin against the Holy Ghost, will continue to increase and have children in the celestial glory. (“History, 1838–1856, volume D-1 [1 August 1842–1 July 1843],” page 1551, entry for 16 May 1843, josephsmithpapers.org )

Echoing these teachings, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles stated:

So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds will pass in due sequence through the several stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained exaltation. (“The Father and the Son: A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles,” reprinted in Ensign, April 2002)

Differences in Resurrected BodiesAlthough we do not have much clear revelation what the difference is between Celestial/exalted bodies and other resurrected bodies, we do know that one difference is the ability (or lack thereof) to have children. President Joseph Fielding Smith taught:

Some of the functions in the celestial body will not appear in the terrestrial body, neither in the telestial body, and the power of procreation will be removed. I take it that men and women will, in these kingdoms, be just what the so-called Christian world expects us all to be – neither man nor woman, merely immortal beings having received the resurrection. (Doctrines of Salvation 2:287–288)

In light of the doctrines quoted above, I interpret this statement by President Smith to mean not that these resurrected bodies will have been changed so that they no longer have any gender but rather that they will not be able to do fundamentally what men and women can do through a difference in gender (i.e., procreate).The post FAIR Questions: What did President Nelson mean by “the kind of body with which you will be resurrected” in his General Conference talk? appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: Is this a Gnostic Church?by Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC

Welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions. My name is Jennifer Roach and today we’re going to talk about Gnosticism. As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common questions that Evangelicals ask about our faith as we go along. Our purpose here is not to fuel debate but to help you understand where your Evangelical friends and family are coming from so that you can have better conversations with them, and perhaps even be able to offer them a bit of our faith in a way they can understand.

We are just going to jump right in with this week’s verse Col 2:8-9:

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ. For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity dwells in bodily form.

Okay, normally I don’t exegete passages for you, that’s not what we’re doing here, but I do feel like a little guidance is helpful here in order for you to understand where we’re going. Paul’s statement here in Col 2 is kind of weird if you don’t understand what’s happening in the background. He makes this statement that you shouldn’t be deceived by human philosophy and traditions. Okay. And then if you don’t know what he’s doing it seems as if he makes a strange left turn by adding in the reminder that Christ had a body. No one would blame you if you read that passage and wondered if the pages got stuck together or something. It’s odd on the face of it.

But what Paul is doing here is addressing Gnosticism. What is Gnosticism, why should you care, and what does it have to do with Evangelicals?

Gnosticism is a philosophy that covers many things, and we only have time to talk about 1 part of it. The Gnostics believed that it really only matters that you get the correct knowledge in your head. Thinking correctly and having knowledge is not just the most important thing, it’s everything – to the degree that the world which exists outside of the invisible things going on in your head just don’t matter. The only things that really matter are things you can think about – things you do with your actual physical body have nothing to do with it, they certainly don’t need to be regulated, and something that’s just pointless to worry about. If thinking in your head is everything….then the things that happen outside of your head are nothing. There was a very specific version of this in Paul’s day that he’s fighting against – and that idea was that Jesus either didn’t have a body, or maybe he only appeared to have a body. In this view, Jesus had obtained enough knowledge that he was able to be body-less because of his advanced knowledge. And someone with that much knowledge shouldn’t even be bothered with a body – it distracts from the really important thing, knowledge in your mind. So when Paul says, “Hey, don’t get distracted by this philosophy, Jesus actually had a body,” he is responding to this issue.

So, what does this have to do with our conversation about Evangelicals? As you know, Evangelicals reject the idea that anyone can choose to accept ordinances done on their behalf after the person has died because of their view that the afterlife is a binary between Heaven and Hell. But that’s only the first part of why they get confused about proxy ordinances. Gnosticism is the other reason why.

To Evangelicals having a body is not considered a gift, it’s not something they even think about all that much. They tend toward a kind of dualism that says belief is more important than behavior. What you think in your head is more important than what you actually do with your body. Now, to be fair, most people don’t study philosophy, and probably couldn’t tell you much about Gnosticism, but you can see the impact it has on their faith in the way they don’t value doing good works in the same way that we would in our church, or they don’t think baptism is important – it’s a nice thing, but accepting baptism is not really required for entrance into Heaven. They’re happily less restrictive on clothing, language, substances, and more because as long as you’re believing the correct things, it doesn’t really matter all that much if your physical body is allowed to do other things. So even though most of them won’t know the word “gnostic” they live in a system greatly influenced by it. The theologically trained folks know what it is – and they understand that Gnosticism is a bad thing. In that world, it is a legitimate and devastating blow to call someone out for being “too gnostic.” So it’s not like the leaders and theologically educated folks are embracing the idea that your body dosn’t even matter, but to preach about that doesn’t really go very far in that world. What you wear doesn’t matter, what you say or where you go doesn’t matter, what you do doesn’t matter – as long as you say the right things.

Okay, why should you care about any of this….It is a fair question for those outside our faith to ask why proxy work is how it has to be. If they can set aside the idea that there are no chances after death to believe (which is hard for them to set aside) they still get stuck on exactly why it requires a person who still has a physical body to get baptized, for example, on their behalf. Couldn’t God just accept their confession of faith after death? Why involve the people who are alive today and have bodies? This truly makes no sense to them. They might bring up the thief on the cross to whom Jesus spoke and said, “today you will be with me in paradise.” No baptism, no proxy work for that guy was required in what Jesus said. Though to be fair, Jesus was a bit busy at the moment when this conversation was taking place.

So, if you’re having a conversation about proxy work with an Evangelical this concept of Gnosticism is in the background, even if either one of you know it. So, what do you do?

Well, one interesting way to address this is to wonder with them: Why was it important that Jesus had a body through which he suffered greatly? Couldn’t God have just decided to forgive the sins of anyone who would come to the correct cognitive beliefs about their sin? They will probably tell you that God could have done that – but he didn’t. Why was it important to Paul that Jesus had a real body when he did his proxy work for us?

The other piece that comes up here is something I want to be really careful and kind with. There is a piece of Gnosticism – and especially the kind that is at the heart of modern-day evangelicalism – that says not only is knowledge important, but MY version of knowledge is the most important. For example, the key to salvation in the Evangelical world is that each person makes a “personal profession of faith in Christ.” And that is good. We believe that too – no one can decide about Christ for you, you have to decide for yourself. But from there, the Evangelical faces some different challenges. If MY personal salvation is based on MY own thinking – then everything can be. And there’s no one to tell me otherwise. If I don’t like what my pastor teaches, I go find a pastor who teaches what I like. When I get mad at him – or when he’s too old or not cool enough – I can go find another one. No one gets the final word but me. They’re not being self-centered or egotistical about this – its a theological expression for them and they feel the great responsibility of having to decide every single thing in their own head. There is no authority. No prophet. The first time I heard the phrase, “the authority of God was taken from the Earth,” I remember being confused because I had been so indoctrinated in the idea that God really wanted us to figure everything out on our own. In the Evangelical way of thinking that’s not seen God’s authority being taken – but that the very concept of authority doesn’t matter anymore. It’s postmodernism – the author is dead, and with him the concept of authority. You yourself have to be your own authority. Shoot, today in our Western culture we don’t even like the idea of saying that someone who has spent decades studying is an “authority” when I person can spend 5 min on Google and piece together a loud opinion. Evangelicals aren’t just up against this in our culture, they’re up against it as part of their faith system.

If you’re thinking ahead, you can already see how this same dilemma causes them to reject having a Prophet. They DO value prophets – they just value the ones who they can read and not see. The ones who lived so long ago they couldn’t possibly understand life today. Having a living prophet – another way to say that is to say we have a human Prophet who lives in a human body – feels much more dangerous to them than reading dead Prophets who are now disembodied.

That’s a lot of philosophy for today. So I’m not going to go on too much longer. But I hope this has helped you see how these differences play out. And really, if anything, I want you to recognize the goodness of the water you’re swimming in but probably don’t even realize.

Next week, I don’t remember what we’re doing, but in 2 weeks we’re talking about polygamy. So that’ll be fun. See you next time.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Philippians; Colossians appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Matthew C. Godfrey

One of the seminal events of Wilford Woodruff’s life was his participation in the Camp of Israel (later known as Zion’s Camp) expedition in 1834. Wilford was recruited to participate in the camp after he had been a member of the Church for only a few weeks. The camp was the first time he got to meet individuals such as Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Heber C. Kimball, and it taught him several lessons. Wilford transmitted these lessons to the Saints throughout his life, and they are teachings that can benefit Church members today as well.

Zion’s Camp Overview

Zion’s Camp had its roots in the expulsion of the Saints from Jackson County, Missouri, in the fall of 1833. In late October and early November, Jackson County citizens organized and violently attacked settlements of the Saints in the county. Ultimately, members were forced to flee into surrounding counties, the majority of them going to Clay County. In January 1834, the Missouri Saints sent Parley P. Pratt and Lyman Wight to Kirtland, Ohio, to inform Joseph Smith and other Church leaders of their plight.

At the February high council meeting where Pratt and Wight spoke, Joseph Smith declared his intent of “going to Zion to assist in redeeming it” and then “called for volunteers to go with him.”1 That same day, a February 1834 revelation (section 103 in today’s Doctrine and Covenants) instructed Joseph to recruit up to five hundred men to go to the aid of Church members who had been expelled from Jackson County. The group would settle on land purchased in the county and vicinity and provide protection against any “enemies” that sought to drive the Saints from the “goodly land.”2

To fulfill these instructions, Joseph Smith and a contingent of men from Kirtland, Ohio, departed in May 1834; another contingent was recruited in Pontiac, Michigan Territory, by Hyrum Smith and Lyman Wight and joined the Kirtland group in June 1834 at the Allred settlement in Missouri. The camp totaled approximately 205 men and around twenty-five women and children. The march was at times grueling, with camp members walking as much as forty miles a day. Sometimes camp members did not have enough food or water, but for the most part, they had adequate provisions.

At other times, the expedition was threatened by individuals, most notably at Fishing River in Missouri where a storm prevented a mob from attacking the camp. At the end of June 1834, the camp was disbanded after a revelation stated that it was not yet time for Zion’s redemption (Section 105 in today’s Doctrine and Covenants). An outbreak of cholera hastened the camp’s dispersal and ended up killing thirteen participants and two other Church members.3 Joseph Smith led the expedition as the “Commander in Chief of the Armies of Israel.”4

Wilford Woodruff -1849Wilford Woodruff’s Experiences

When the Lord instructed Joseph Smith and other Church leaders to recruit individuals for Zion’s Camp, Wilford Woodruff had been a member of the Church for just a few weeks. Wilford was baptized near Richland, New York, where he was living, by Zera Pulsipher on December 31, 1833, at the age of twenty-six. About two months after Wilford’s baptism, Joseph Smith and Parley P. Pratt left Kirtland for the eastern United States to recruit men for the expedition. On March 19, 1834, they separated. Joseph Smith returned to Kirtland while Parley continued his efforts in New York.

One of the places Parley visited was Richfield. Here he met Wilford and Wilford’s brother Azmon. Parley told them about the proposed expedition to Missouri. According to Wilford, Parley said “it was the will of the Lord that the yong men & middle aged what could be spared should go up to Zion.”5 However, Azmon and Wilford had only recently purchased a farm in Richland, and they were concerned about leaving it just as spring was coming. Wilford expressed his concern to Parley, who responded that it was Wilford’s “duty to try to prepare [himself] and go up to Zion.”6 Wilford and Azmon were at a crossroads. Would they do what Parley said was God’s will or would they stay on their farm?

Wilford chose to go while Azmon chose to stay—and Wilford did not look back. “I used evry exertion,” he stated, “to settle my accounts arange my affairs and prepare myself to join my Brethren to go to Missourie.”7 He later remembered that after Parley had preached about the necessity of helping the Saints in Missouri, he knew that he had to go. “My feelings were such,” Wilford recalled, “that if all the gold in the world had been presented to me, I could not have been hired to stay at home.”8

Having made the decision to go, Wilford traveled with Harry Brown and Warren Ingalls to Kirtland, where they arrived on the night of April 25. “There,” Wilford declared, “for the first time I had a view of our beloved Brother Joseph Smith the Prophet & Seer which God hath raised up in these last days through whom the saints receieve Revelations from time to time.”9 Wilford’s opinion of Joseph only increased as he became better acquainted with him—something that happened easily since Wilford stayed with Joseph the week he was in Kirtland.

On May 1, 1834, Wilford left with the first company of the expedition, consisting of about twenty men and four baggage wagons, one of which was Wilford’s. They traveled to New Portage, Ohio, that first day, where they waited for the rest of the group to join them a few days later. Then the expedition set out across Ohio for Missouri.

While on the journey, Wilford experienced all of the hardships and good times of Zion’s Camp, including the long days of walking, the cholera outbreak, the uncovering of a skeleton in a burial mound that became known as Zelph, and the Fishing River storm.10 He considered his experiences as important to his spiritual growth and tried to educate the Saints about Zion’s Camp for the rest of his life.

One of the Church’s most diligent recordkeepers in the nineteenth century, Wilford provided several accounts of Zion’s Camp. One account came in his journal. This was not something he kept contemporaneously while he was on the expedition, but he wrote a summary of his experiences probably in late 1834 or early 1835, although he inserted some details later than that. This account provides some good details about the camp, especially about the cholera epidemic.11

Wilford Woodruff – 1881In 1882, Wilford composed a history of the expedition titled “The History and Travels of Zion’s Camp,” based on several sources, including the manuscript history of the Church and his own memory and writings. This 124-page manuscript, written from Joseph Smith’s perspective, contains a daily account of the expedition’s travels, as well as copies of pertinent correspondence.12 Wilford also occasionally related episodes from Zion’s Camp in his discourses to the Saints. A few of these appear in Journal of Discourses. Many of these recollections focused on how the expedition allowed Wilford to interact with Joseph Smith. These interactions convinced him that Joseph was a prophet of God.

Another account came in Leaves from My Journal, the third installment of George Q. Cannon’s “Faith Promoting Series.” Cannon published Leaves from My Journal in 1882. It was a condensed version of Wilford’s autobiographical writings from the 1850s and 1860s and contained examples of Wilford listening to the Spirit throughout his life, as well as his testimony of the Restored Gospel. This history contains several stories about Wilford’s experiences in Zion’s Camp, including details about his impressions of Joseph Smith.13

In all of these accounts, Wilford portrayed Zion’s Camp as one of the most important events in his life pertaining to his spiritual growth. He came to know that God was with the Saints just as he had been with the children of Israel in Old Testament times. He saw the Lord intervening on behalf of the camp. His experiences clearly solidified Wilford’s testimony of the Restored Gospel. “Had I not gone up with Zion’s Camp,” he once declared at a time when he was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, “I should not have been here today.”14

Lessons from Wilford’s Experiences with Zion’s Camp

Wilford learned many lessons from his time in Zion’s Camp. One of these is that the Saints in the latter days were not that different from the children of Israel in the Old Testament. In some of his accounts, Wilford compared Zion’s Camp to the children of Israel’s exodus from Egypt. For example, after the expedition reached New Portage, Ohio, and set up camp, Wilford “went to the top of the hill and looked down upon the camp of Israel.” After praying on the hill, “I rejoiced and praised the Lord that I had lived to see some of the tents of Israel pitched, and a company gathered by the commandment of God to go up and help redeem Zion.”15

Wilford also equated the Fishing River storm to the Lord destroying the armies of Pharaoh in the Red Sea. “The Lord delivered Israel in the days of Moses by dividing the Red Sea, so they went over dry shod,” he explained. “The Lord delivered Zion’s Camp from their enemies on the 19th of June, 1834, by piling up the waters in Fishing River forty feet in one night, so our enemies could not cross. He also sent a great hail-storm which broke them up and sent them seeking for shelter.”16

In addition, Wilford believed that Zion’s Camp was similar to the journeys of Book of Mormon peoples, specifically the Jaredites. “Every night before retireing to rest,” he explained in his history of Zion’s Camp, “at the sound of the trumpet we bowed before the Lord, in the several tents; and presented our thank and offerings with prayer and supplications.” Each morning, he stated, “every man was again on his knees before the Lord, imploring his blessings for the day.” In this way, he declared, “our journey was like the ancient Jaredites pitching our tents by the way.”17

Wilford’s connection of the camp with ancient Israel and the Jaredites showed him that we are all the covenant children of God, who interacts with us in the same ways that he interacted with the children of Israel or Book of Mormon peoples. This gave Wilford—and can give us—the confidence that we are just as important in the Lord’s eyes as those people of scripture were. And the events of our lives can be as significant for those who follow as the accounts of God’s people in the scriptures are for us today.

Wilford also learned about the necessity of sacrifice in developing spirituality through his Zion’s Camp experiences. His willingness to leave his and his brother’s farm behind to do his duty to the Lord was one example of this sacrifice—and it had a great impact on Wilford’s life. It is interesting to think about why Wilford became one of the Church’s great leaders—even the prophet of God—while his brother Azmon struggled with his testimony for much of his life. There are certainly many reasons for this—matters of faith are complicated things—but Wilford’s willingness to sacrifice for the Gospel, expressed early in his Church membership, was one factor.18

While on the expedition, Wilford had other experiences that taught him the importance of sacrifice. One of these came after the cholera epidemic broke out among camp members. When the expedition arrived in Clay County, Missouri, Wilford and his group went to the residence of Church member John Burk. He had an extra room in his house that he said Wilford’s company could have if they would clean it. “Fearing some other company would get it first,” Wilford remembered, the group “left all other business and went to work, cleaning out the room, and immediately spread down our blankets, so as to hold a right to the room.” However, not long after, several men suffering from cholera “were brought in and laid upon our beds. None of us ever used those blankets again, for they were buried with the dead.” Wilford concluded, “We gained nothing but experience by being selfish, and we lost our bedding.”19

Wilford then explained the lesson that he learned from this, one that he believed was especially important to youth: “Whenever you are blessed with any good thing, be willing to share it with others. By cultivating these principles while you are young, you will lay a foundation to do much good through your lives, and you will be beloved and respected of the Lord and all good men.”20

Another key lesson Wilford learned from Zion’s Camp was how much God was interested in His life. There were several examples of divine intervention throughout the expedition, but none more pronounced than what happened to the group at Fishing River. While the expedition was camped there, a small contingent of men threatened that the Saints would “see hell enough before morning.” After the men left, “a small black cloud appeared in the northwest and it began to unroll itself like a scroll.” In just a few minutes, Wilford stated, “the whole heavens were covered with a pall as black as ink,” and a gigantic thunderstorm hit “with wind, rain, thunder, lightning and hail.” Observing the storm, Joseph Smith, according to Wilford, declared, “Boys, there is some meaning in this—God is in the storm.”

The rain and hail, together with a drastic rise in the river, prevented any mob from attacking the camp. “It was reported,” Wilford related, “that the Captain of the company” hoping to fight the expedition “said that it was a d—d strange thing that they could do nothing against the d—d Mormons but what there must be a d—d hail storm or some other d—d thing to hinder them from doing anything.” Yet, Wilford continued, the captain “did not feel disposed to acknowledge that God was fighting our battles.”21 To Wilford, that lesson was obvious—God was with the camp and helped it in its time of need. God’s interest in the camp—and in Wilford personally—was a great lesson that remained with Wilford for the rest of his life.

Wilford was also grateful that Zion’s Camp allowed him to interact with Joseph Smith and observe the Prophet closely. For a recently baptized member, this deepened his testimony of Joseph as a prophet. “I went up to Missouri in Zion’s Camp; I saw the Prophet every day, and I knew he was a Prophet of God,” he stated to a group of Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah, in 1862.22 On another occasion, he explained that Zion’s Camp provided him with “an experience that we never could have gained in any other way.” He continued, “We had the privilege of beholding the face of the prophet, and we had the privilege of traveling a thousand miles with him, and seeing the workings of the Spirit of God with him, and the revelations of Jesus Christ unto him and the fulfillment of those revelations.”23

Wilford concluded that Zion’s Camp showed him that in Joseph’s “public and private career he carried with him the Spirit of the Almighty.” Indeed, Joseph “manifested a greatness of soul which I had never seen in any other man.”24 We may not have the opportunity to interact with the Prophet every day like Wilford, but we can observe his teachings and see “the workings of the Spirit of God with him.” As we do so, our testimonies of the prophet can deepen just as Wilford’s did.

Finally, Wilford’s experiences with Zion’s Camp—and his careful chronicling of them—teaches us the importance of keeping records. We can benefit spiritually from Wilford’s accounts of the expedition because he was willing to keep such records. It is sometimes difficult to find the time to write in a journal or compose a brief history of our lives, but doing so will bless the lives of those who follow. In 2007, President Henry B. Eyring counseled Church members to “find a way” to preserve experiences that demonstrated God’s love and His hand in our lives. These would then become cherished records to buoy us up when we “need to remember how much God loves us and how much we need Him.”25

Wilford found a way to record his experiences, and if we can also find a way, our experiences can have just as much of a spiritual impact on those who follow as Wilford’s have on us. We can be a blessing and strength to those that come after us as well.

Endnotes

Minutes, February 24, 1834, josephsmithpapers.org/minutes/1834-02-24.
Revelation, February 24, 1834 [D&C 103:20, 24–26], josephsmithpapers.org/revelation/1834-02-24.
Matthew C. Godfrey, “‘The Redemption of Zion Must Needs Come by Power’: Insights into the Camp of Israel Expedition, 1834,” BYU Studies Quarterly 53, no. 4 (2014): 126–127.
Minutes, February 24, 1834, josephsmithpapers.org/minutes/1834-02-24.
Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, April 11, 1834, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/journal/1834-04-11.
Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, April 11, 1834, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/journal/1834-04-11.
Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, April 11, 1834, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/journal/1834-04-11.
Wilford Woodruff, “Early Events of the Church, Etc.,” Journal of Discourses 7:98.
Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, April 25, 1834, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/journal/1834-04-25.
For more information about the expedition’s travels, see Matthew C. Godfrey, “The Camp of Israel’s March to Missouri,” in Zion’s Camp, 1834: March of Faith, ed. Matthew C. Godfrey (Sandy, UT: History of the Saints, 2018), 33–65, and Alexander L. Baugh, “The Camp of Israel in Clay County, Missouri,” in ibid., 67–101.
Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, p. 1, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/journal.
“History – The History of Zion’s Camp,” p. 1, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/the-history-of-zions-camp.
“Leaves From My Journal,” p. 1, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/leaves-from-my-journal.
Wilford Woodruff, “The Holy Ghost—Laboring in Faith—The Kingdom of God—Patriarchal Marriage,” Journal of Discourses 13:156.
“Leaves From My Journal,” p. 17, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/leaves-from-my-journal.
“Leaves From My Journal,” p. 18, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/leaves-from-my-journal.
“History – The History of Zion’s Camp,” p. 7, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/the-history-of-zions-camp.
Thomas G. Alexander explores this question—as well as Wilford’s experiences in Zion’s Camp—in his excellent article “Wilford Woodruff and Zion’s Camp: Baptism by Fire and the Spiritual Confirmation of a Future Prophet,” BYU Studies 39, no. 1 (2000): 130–146.
“Leaves From My Journal,” p. 18, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/leaves-from-my-journal.
“Leaves From My Journal,” p. 19, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/leaves-from-my-journal.
“History – The History of Zion’s Camp,” pp. 62–64, Wilford Woodruff Papers, wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/the-history-of-zions-camp.
Wilford Woodruff, “Fulfilment of Prophecy—Power of the Gospel—Consistency of Its Principles,” Journal of Discourses 10:9.
Wilford Woodruff, “The Holy Ghost—Laboring in Faith—The Kingdom of God—Patriarchal Marriage,” Journal of Discourses 13:162.
Wilford Woodruff, “Early Events of the Church,” Journal of Discourses 7:98.
President Henry B. Eyring, “O Remember, Remember,” Ensign, ChurchofJesusChrist.org/ensign.

Matthew C. Godfrey is a general editor of the Joseph Smith Papers and senior managing historian for outreach and engagement with the Church History Department. He holds a PhD in American and public history from Washington State University. He previously served as managing historian of the Joseph Smith Papers and was the lead historian on three volumes of the Documents series. He has authored or coedited several books and articles, including Religion, Politics, and Sugar: The Mormon Church, the Federal Government, and the Utah-Idaho Sugar Company, 1907–1921 (2007); The Earth Shall Appear as the Garden of Eden: Essays in Mormon Environmental History (2018); Zion’s Camp 1834: March of Faith (2018); and Know Brother Joseph: New Perspectives on Joseph Smith’s Life and Character (2019). He serves as an Advisor to the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

The mission of the Wilford Woodruff Papers Foundation is to digitally preserve and publish Wilford Woodruff’s eyewitness account of the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Thousands of transcribed pages are available at wilfordwoodruffpapers.org/documents, including Wilford’s journals, missionary records, dreams and visions, autobiographies, and histories.

The post Sacrifice and Obedience: Lessons from Zion’s Camp appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: Obedient in Everything by Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC Welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions. My name is Jennifer Roach and today we’re going to talk about obedience. As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common questions that Evangelicals ask […]

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – 2 Corinthians 1–7 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This post will be the last in the section about race and the Priesthood restriction. I apologize for not getting this up sooner. My offline life has been a little crazy this summer, and I just didn’t have the time to do this post justice until today. It’s an important topic, and I wanted to make sure I was able to treat it with the respect it deserves.

The bulk of the conversation this week is about the idea that the prophets can never lead the Church astray:

Follow the Prophet

The Church reminds us to give strict obedience to the prophet because he speaks for God and is incapable of misconduct.

No, the Church absolutely does not teach either of those things. If you run a search on the Church’s website for the phrase “strict obedience,” do you know what you find? A whole bunch of scriptures, talks, and lesson manuals advising strict obedience to the commandments of God and the covenants we make with Him. I went through several pages of search results and didn’t find a single entry teaching strict obedience to the prophets.

For my entire lifetime, multiple prophets and apostles have counseled us to pray over their words for confirmation from God that they’re speaking the truth. In fact, when I wrote my response to the CES Letter last year, I spent a decent chunk of one post listing multiple quotes by Brigham Young, saying that he fearedthat the Saints would trust him without bothering to ask the Spirit for confirmation that he was teaching them correct doctrine. Here are some of the things he had to say about blindly trusting your leaders:

“Ladies and gentlemen, I exhort you to think for yourselves, and read your Bibles for yourselves, get the Holy Spirit for yourselves, and pray for yourselves.” (Source)
“What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.” (Source)
“I do not wish any Latter–day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied. I wish them to know for themselves and understand for themselves, for this would strengthen the faith that is within them. Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, ‘If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,’ this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord.” (Source)
“The First Presidency have of right a great influence over this people; and if we should get out of the way and lead this people to destruction, what a pity it would be! How can you know whether we lead you correctly or not? Can you know by any other power than that of the Holy Ghost? I have uniformly exhorted the people to obtain this living witness each for themselves; then no man on earth can lead them astray.” (Source)
“It is your privilege and duty to live so that you know when the word of the Lord is spoken to you and when the mind of the Lord is revealed to you. I say it is your duty to live so as to know and understand all these things. Suppose I were to teach you a false doctrine, how are you to know it if you do not possess the Spirit of God? As it is written, ‘The things of God knoweth no man but by the Spirit of God.’” (Source)
“… [B]e faithful, live so that the Spirit of the Lord will abide within you, then you can judge for yourselves. I have often said to the Latter-day Saints—’Live so that you will know whether I teach you truth or not.’ Suppose you are careless and unconcerned, and give way to the spirit of the world, and I am led, likewise, to preach the things of this world and to accept things that are not of God, how easy it would be for me to lead you astray! But I say to you, live so that you will know for yourselves whether I tell the truth or not. That is the way we want all Saints to live. Will you do it? Yes, I hope you will, every one of you.” (Source)
“Now, let me ask the Latter-day Saints, you who are here in this house this day, how do you know that your humble servant is really, honestly, guiding and counseling you aright, and directing the affairs of the kingdom aright? … [H]ow do you know but I am teaching false doctrine? How do you know that I am not counseling you wrong? How do you know but I will lead you to destruction? And this is what I wish to urge upon you—live so that you can discern between the truth and error, between light and darkness, between the things of God and those not of God, for by the revelations of the Lord, and these alone, can you and I understand the things of God.” (Source)
“… ‘How are you going to know about the will and commands of heaven?’ By the Spirit of revelation; that is the only way you can know. How do I know but what I am doing wrong? How do I know but what we will take a course for our utter ruin? I sometimes say to my brethren, ‘I have been your dictator for twenty-seven years—over a quarter of a century I have dictated this people; that ought to be some evidence that my course is onward and upward.’ But how do you know that I may not yet do wrong? How do you know but I will bring in false doctrine and teach the people lies that they may be damned? Sisters can you tell the difference? I can say this for the Latter-day Saints, and I will say it to their praise and my satisfaction, if I were to preach false doctrine here, it would not be an hour after the people got out, before it would begin to fly from one to another, and they would remark, ‘I do not quite like that! It does not look exactly right! What did Brother Brigham mean? That did not sound quite right, it was not exactly the thing!’ All these observations would be made by the people, yes, even by the sisters. It would not sit well on the stomach … [i]t would not sit well on the mind, for you are seeking after the things of God; you have started out for life and salvation, and with all their ignorance, wickedness and failings, the majority of this people are doing just as well as they know how; and I will defy any man to preach false doctrine without being detected; and we need not go to the Elders of Israel, the children who have been born in these mountains possess enough of the Spirit to detect it. But be careful that you do not lose it! Live so that you will know the moment the Spirit of the Almighty is grieved within you.” (Source)
“How often has it been taught that if you depend entirely upon the voice, judgment and sagacity of those appointed to lead you, and neglect to enjoy the Spirit for yourselves, how easily you may be led into error, and finally be cast off to the left hand?” (Source)

(And, just as a quick caveat, most of those were taken from the Journal of Discourses, so be careful about accepting them as word-for-word quotes.)

So, because of multiple statements just like these ones described here, I reject Faulk’s framing here. The prophets themselves tell us they’re fallible and that they want us to seek their confirmation from the Spirit that what they’re teaching us is true.

In fact, when President Spencer W. Kimball heard that Sister Elaine Cannon had taught the young women of the Church that when the prophet speaks, “the debate is over,” he was so alarmed that he met with her the very next day and asked her not to say things like that again. She explained what she actually meant, but he worried that people would think they wanted to take away their agency, because that wasn’t at all true.

Remember, it was Lucifer’s plan to leave us as choiceless automatons who did everything we were told to do. God’s plan was one of free will. And because we do have free will, none of us mortal humans are free from making the occasional error.

Faulk then quotes some statements about prophets never leading the Church astray:

“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.” (President Wilford Woodruff, General Conference, October 1890)
“Keep your eye on the Prophet, for the Lord will never permit his Prophet to lead this Church astray.” (President Ezra Taft Benson, General Conference, October 1966)
“Follow your leaders who have been duly ordained and have been publicly sustained, and you will not be led astray. (Elder Boyd K. Packer, General Conference, October 1992)
“Follow the prophet, follow the prophet, Follow the prophet; don’t go astray. Follow the prophet, follow the prophet, Follow the prophet; he knows the way.” (Children’s Songbook)

This quote was initially taken from Official Declaration 1, the Manifesto officially ending plural marriage in the Church.

However, it was a teaching that actually originated with Joseph Smith. In a 2014 post on the Ether’s Cave blog, Matthew Roper cited multiple accounts of people remembering Joseph and also Oliver Cowdery teaching that by following the majority of the church membership and the majority of the Twelve, who kept the records of the Church, a person would never be led astray into apostasy.

President James E. Faust elaborated that this is because the Twelve hold the Priesthood keys.

And in an excellent devotional given to students at Ensign College last year, Keith Erekson said:

“In its complete original context, Wilford Woodruff’s teaching emphasized that the prophet would not … lead people ‘astray from the oracles [or revelations] of God and from their duty.’ Prophets will not lead us away from their true witness of Jesus Christ, from His revelations or from the path, however hard it may be, to follow Him.

If you follow these thoughts to their natural conclusion, you arrive at President Woodruff’s statement in the Manifesto. If the main body of the Church was ever led too far astray, the Priesthood keys would be lost and removed from the Earth just like they were back during the Great Apostasy. Because the Lord has promised us that the Priesthood would never again be taken from the Earth, this means that the prophet and the majority of the apostles can’t lead us astray.

So, as you can see, the way that Faulk presents that line is not the way that the Church treats it. It’s not that prophets can never make a mistake. It’s that prophets can never lead the Church into such deep apostasy that the Priesthood keys will again be removed from the Earth.

In that same devotional cited above, Erekson also taught some wrong assumptions people have about prophets, which I think is worth repeating here. This is a bit long, but I thought it was important to share because we see all of these things throughout this letter:

Erekson asked his listeners what expectations they might have about prophets, how those expectations might be influenced by their upbringing and culture, and if they are assuming things that are incorrect.

“Admitting the errors in our own thinking is sometimes the most difficult part of understanding Church history because it takes humility to change our expectations and assumptions after we learn they are incorrect.” … Many oversimplify living prophets to a simple binary of being inspired or uninspired….

Many cultures have models of prophets. For some, a prophet is a sphinx, riddler or soothsayer who speaks in anonymous riddles. For others, a prophet is a “lone voice who speaks out against all evil and oppression” and denounces every wrong. Another model is that of a cable news pundit who pins the blame for tragedies on the sins of an enemy group, offering harsh condemnations.

Some Latter-day Saints come to expect prophets to act like these models. “Then, if prophets speak too clearly in favor of vaccination, or if they fail to stand with or against the internet’s outrage of the day, or if they offer kindness instead of criticism of refugees, some turn away in rage like Naaman,” Erekson said.

Another unhelpful expectation is a distrust in a person who is influenced by culture. Every human is shaped by the language, customs, knowledge and experiences of individuals, families and societies, making it impossible for anyone — including prophets — to not be influenced by culture….

“Prophets do not urge us to follow or imitate them, but to follow and imitate the Savior,” Erekson said.“Stated another way, the prophets do not teach us to follow them, but to ‘hear Him’!” …

Why do prophets need the grace of Christ? “For the same reasons that you and I depend on His grace — to forgive our sins, succor our infirmities, mitigate our shortcomings, expand our capabilities, turn weaknesses into strengths,” Erekson said.

Prophets make mistakes and they disagree. In extreme cases, their differing perspectives can lead to disputes. “Most of the time,” Erekson said, “the differences of opinion serve to bring all perspectives on issues into the discussion.”

The only person to ever live a mistake-free life was Jesus Christ. Prophets are aware of their own shortcomings, Erekson said, citing Moses who worried over his speaking inadequacies, Moroni who felt the same about his writing, and Joseph Smith who published his errors and divine rebukes. … Simply citing the many instances of when prophets disagreed, made mistakes or were tricked is incomplete, Erekson said, “without understanding that prophets serve ‘through the … grace of [our] Lord Jesus Christ.’ His grace is sufficient to bring them to unanimity, refine their souls and succor them.”

Prophets don’t know everything about the future. “While it is true that God reveals some of His secrets to prophets, and that some prophets including Moses, Enoch and Nephi received sweeping visions, that does not mean that every prophet knows everything about everything,” Erekson said. The things they do know are not always spelled out for them.

“As the ‘mouthpiece’ of the Lord, they do not simply open their mouths and the word of God flows out,” he said. “Sometimes revelation has come as dictated wording, but prophets also receive inspiration, feelings and impressions that they must put into words and actions. Sometimes they explore paths that don’t work out.” …

Prophets work to be inspired of the Holy Ghost because they don’t know everything, and they gain light and truth from the Lord line upon line…

“We should rightly expect prophets to be called through the will of God and the grace of Jesus Christ and receive ongoing guidance through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost,” Erekson said. “As we do so, we can, like Naaman, shed incorrect expectations and assumptions about prophets that both impede our ability to be blessed and prompt divisive anger.”

There are a lot of incorrect assumptions given about prophets and their roles and abilities in this section of the LFMW. We need to be able to spot them and to know how to challenge them, because if we don’t ward against this kind of manipulation, it’ll eventually infect our minds. It’s how we sway from righteous teachings and beliefs into unrighteous ones.

Today the Church says the past leaders were in error because their statements were just “theories”.

Not exactly. Church leaders today say that those statements were theories because they were speculative statements based on opinion and ignorance rather than revelation. They may have thought at the time that they were preaching revealed doctrine, but we know today that they were not.

It’s okay to make mistakes and to be wrong occasionally. Most of us know what it feels like to receive personal revelation from God. He doesn’t often appear to us in person and dictate word-for-word what we record in our journals. He points us in the right direction and nudges along, and He gives us inspiration and understanding, but He also often gives us the basics and lets us figure out the details. It’s how we learn and grow, by stretching ourselves and discovering how to recognize His direction. Sometimes, we get those details wrong, because we’re still learning how to recognize His voice and what He’s saying to us.

It works the same way for our prophets. They may occasionally hear God’s voice or meet with the Savior face to face, but most of the time, their spiritual experiences are just like ours. They need to figure out what their impressions and directions mean, the same way we do. Sometimes, that involves trial and error. Sometimes, it means making the wrong choice before correcting their mistake and making the right one. Sometimes, it means relying on assumptions and inferences that turn out to be incorrect once more light has been shed.

We’ve all been there. We know what it’s like. We know that we’re not perfect and that sometimes, we get things wrong even when we’re trying our hardest to get it right. So, we need to grant our prophets and apostles that same level of understanding and grace. They’re trying their hardest to get it right, too. And you know what? They usually do get it right.

But expecting perfection from fallen, mortal men is an exercise in futility. Why do we insist on holding our prophets and apostles to an impossible standard that even God Himself doesn’t hold them to?

When I ask this question, the response I usually get is, “They’re prophets of God. They’re supposed to be better/smarter/wiser/more attuned to the Spirit than the rest of us.”

Well, where did they ever get that idea? Have they ever even read the Old Testament? Those prophets surely made their fair share of errors.

Yes, there are many areas in which President Nelson is more knowledgeable than I am. He knows considerably more than I do about the way the human body works, particularly the heart and lungs. He also has nearly 60 more years of experience in recognizing and following the Spirit than I do. He has a lot to teach me.

But if I don’t allow him the chance to be human and to make mistakes sometimes, I do both of us a huge disservice. It holds him to an impossible standard he can’t possibly live up to. For me, it weakens my capacity for charity and gives me a distorted view of not only the Priesthood keys but also personal and prophetic revelation, and even the Atonement itself.

Another common refrain is, “What do you expect when the Church teaches us songs like ‘Follow the Prophet, he knows the way’?”

What we expect is that when we teach kids simple, black-and-white concepts, their understanding will expand and deepen as they grow older.

For example, we teach kids not to talk to strangers, but as they get older, we expect them to realize that sometimes, they have to converse with strangers. When you buy something at the store, you usually have to talk to the cashier. When your internet goes down, you have to talk to the guy who comes out to fix it. When you take your car in for repairs, you have to speak to the mechanics. You have to speak to strangers in job interviews. Some of us have to engage with customers at work. Etc.

We teach children by degrees, the same way that the Spirit teaches us. We give them basic concepts when they’re young, and as their maturity and understanding grows, so does the way we discuss these topics.

So, if your thinking on this particular topic hasn’t grown or expanded since you were four years old and singing simplistic songs in Primary, that’s a problem. You should probably talk to somebody about that, because that isn’t normal cognitive function.

Applying the idea that the priesthood ban on blacks was just a theory also doesn’t make much sense when considering what Pres. David O. McKay stated, “…discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God.”

This is dishonest framing with a cherry-picked and cropped quote. If you read the full statement, a very different picture of President McKay’s words appears. I’ll quote the relevant portion here:

From the beginning of this dispensation, Joseph Smith and all succeeding Presidents of the Church have taught that Negroes, while spirit children of a common Father, and the progeny of our earthly parents Adam and Eve, were not yet to receive the priesthood, for reasons which we believe are known to God, but which he has not made fully known to man.

Our living prophet, President David O. McKay, has said, “The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back to the beginning with God…

“Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man’s mortal existence, extending back to man’s preexistent state.”

President McKay has also said, “Sometime in God’s eternal plan, the Negro will be given the right to hold the priesthood.”

Until God reveals his will in this matter, to him whom we sustain as a prophet, we are bound by that same will. Priesthood, when it is conferred on any man comes as a blessing from God, not of men.

We feel nothing but love, compassion, and the deepest appreciation for the rich talents, endowments, and the earnest strivings of our Negro brothers and sisters. We are eager to share with men of all races the blessings of the gospel. We have no racially segregated congregations.

Were we the leaders of an enterprise created by ourselves and operated only according to our own earthly wisdom, it would be a simple thing to act according to popular will. But we believe that this work is directed by God and that the conferring of the priesthood must await his revelation. To do otherwise would be to deny the very premise on which the Church is established….

We join with those throughout the world who pry that all of the blessings of the gospel of Jesus Christ may in the due time of the Lord become available to men of faith everywhere. Until that time comes we must trust in God, in his wisdom, and in his tender mercy.

They were in error regarding the Priesthood restriction coming from the days of Joseph Smith, but these are not the words of hateful racists trying to hold Black people down. They believed they were following the direction of God, and we can’t say for certain that they weren’t.

Brigham Young said that this was ordained/decreed by the Lord and that he could not change it until the Lord Himself did. We don’t know if that belief came from a direct revelation or not, because Brigham believed that all knowledge or belief was revelation from God, whether it actually was or not. That muddies the water and makes it very difficult for us to figure out exactly what happened.

It does seem clear that however it began, the Lord did need to reverse it by revelation. Remember, President McKay told a room full of witnesses that he prayed for it repeatedly until the Lord told him to stop asking because, while it would change someday, it wouldn’t be under his tenure.

After that experience, I think the First Presidency was justified in saying in the statement above that it needed to be changed by revelation and that they couldn’t do it themselves. Whether that was just the Savior using a man-made policy for His own purposes or not, I don’t know.

I can’t say that the Priesthood restriction came about because of a revelation, and I can’t say that it didn’t come about because of a revelation. There’s conflicting, unclear information. What I can say for certain is that before 1978, multiple prophets believed it came from revelation and that the Lord would not allow them to change it.

If prophets claim to speak the will of Heavenly Father when their words can be later disavowed, then how was it that they were prophets at all?

What makes someone a prophet is not their ability to reason, to be infallible, or to always say everything exactly the way God would say it. A prophet is a prophet because he was called of God and holds all of the Priesthood keys to direct God’s church on Earth.

Part of a prophet’s job is to correct misunderstandings that have crept in—even if those misunderstandings came from a prior prophet who shared information that he believed was true before more light and knowledge was given to clarify the situation.

Prophets preach the Gospel according to their own understanding of the scriptures and their personal revelation. They go into their new calling the same way we all do, with our prior knowledge and beliefs backing us up. They aren’t suddenly gifted with infinite knowledge and wisdom when they’re set apart.

We can trust that these are men who love the Lord and are doing their utmost best to serve Him the very best they can. We can’t trust them to be perfect in all they say or do or think, but we can trust that they take their callings seriously and are doing the very best they can with the knowledge and light they have.

I trust them, and that’s why I’m willing to follow them. I don’t do it blindly, but I choose to do it, even knowing that they may make an occasional mistake.

This completely undermines the ‘prophet will never lead us astray’ principle.

No, it doesn’t, because “the prophet will never lead us astray” does not mean “the prophet will never make a mistake about anything.”

As we discussed above, that statement was regarding Priesthood keys and prophets leading the Church into widespread apostasy to the point where those keys were taken again from the Earth.

What doctrines currently attributed to God by today’s prophet can be discredited as just “theories” by future general authorities?

I guess we’ll find out, won’t we? That’s the beauty of a church led by modern-day prophets and ongoing revelation. As more revelation comes to light, older beliefs are clarified and corrected or deepened, depending on the situation.

We’re not members of a church that clings to revelation given to a specific group of people 5,000 years ago pertaining to their specific circumstances. Universal truths are still taught in every dispensation, but for revelation specific to our society and world today, we look to our current-day prophet. We don’t look to prophets who have been dead for decades, centuries, or millennia.

That’s a feature of our church, not a bug. If new light, knowledge, and understanding wasn’t waiting to come into the world, we wouldn’t have needed a single prophet since Adam.

It’s weird that Faulk is pushing the idea that revelation shouldn’t change over time. Do you see how manipulative that is? If he can cement that idea into your head, and you think about it for even two seconds, you start wondering what the point is of having prophets at all. Don’t fall into that trap. You’re smarter than that.

God sends us prophets because He still has much, much more to teach us. We just need to open ourselves up to embrace it. If we refuse to listen to our current prophets because we prefer the teachings of dead ones, He won’t give us any new revelation. If we don’t read the scriptures we already have, He won’t give us the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon or any other records He has waiting in the wings for us. If we won’t embrace His way of teaching us line by line, He won’t continue to teach us anything.

I’m not personally willing to give that up for Thomas Faulk or Jeremy Runnells, or any of the other ex-Mormon “prophets” out there. I prefer to listen to real ones.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 23: The Early Church – Blacks and the Church [D] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: If you believe the Bible, why do you also need the Book of Mormon? by Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC Welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions. My name is Jennifer Roach and today we’re going to talk about scripture, what is it, how we read it, […]

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Acts 16–21 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

As we pick up with the difficult racial quotes this week, I want to start again with the disclaimer that neither I nor anyone else at FAIR agrees with or condones the words and attitudes on display in these comments. I am not defending their use. I am just putting some history and context back […]

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 21: The Early Church – Blacks and the Church [B] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

We’re now moving into one of the most controversial topics in our church’s history, the Priesthood restriction for black members of African descent. Like plural marriage, this is a topic that comes with a lot of emotion behind it. People have very strong feelings about this part of our history, and for good reason. I’m […]

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 20: The Early Church – Blacks and the Church [A] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

One of the Church history topics I find the most fascinating is that of the Nauvoo Expositor and the lead-up to and aftermath of the martyrdom. My first real exposure to the story of the Expositor was as a sophomore in high school in Utah. An anti-LDS substitute math teacher decided to take it upon […]

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 19: The Early Church – Polygamy [D] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Sorry for taking so long to get this posted! I’ve been putting in more than 60 hours a week at work lately, and I just didn’t have time to properly research this post until now. This week, the topic under discussion is Joseph’s wives and the way that he personally practiced plural marriage. It’s true […]

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 18: The Early Church – Polygamy [C] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In early 2012, the economy wasn’t feeling all that good. The Great Recession had technically ended in 2009, but the recovery was weak. The Center for American Progress lamented “the slowest growth during the first eight quarters of an economic recovery since World War II.” Unemployment was still high–9.1% in August 2011–and job growth had slowed. The European sovereign debt crisis was keeping markets nervous. And DJIA, which had climbed to 20,000 in 2007 before plunging to 10,000 in 2009, was only back up to around 17,000.

I remember being a newlywed then, discussing with my husband how on earth to plan for the future when things seemed so uncertain. But we were at least a few years out from graduation, with a decent toehold in the job market. It must have seemed much more daunting to anyone just graduating college.

Against this backdrop, Elder M. Russell Ballard traveled to Rexburg to give the commencement address at BYU-Idaho.

Elder Ballard acknowledged the difficulty: “The conditions in the world are uncertain and dangerous, and the economies of the world are unstable and unpredictable.” But he continued: “Face the future with optimism.”

It’s hardly ground-breaking to encourage graduates to be brave and optimistic, but what absolutely floored me about this address is how specific he got. He was bold, and prophetic.:

I believe we are standing on the threshold of a new era of growth, prosperity, and abundance. Barring a calamity or unexpected international crisis, I think the next few years will bring a resurgence in the world economy as new discoveries are made in communication, medicine, energy, transportation, physics, computer technology, and other fields of endeavor…With these discoveries and advances will come new employment opportunities and prosperity for those who work hard and especially for those who strive to keep the commandments of God.

Elder Ballard was so bold in predicting economic success that he included a lengthy warning to the graduates that their wealth would tempt them to pride and worldliness:

I believe many of today’s young adults will be active participants in temporal blessings if they keep the commandments of the Lord. With prosperity will come a unique challenge—a test that will try many to their spiritual core…The trial of your faith in the next few years will likely not be that you lack the material things of this world. Rather it will be in choosing what to do with the temporal blessings you receive.

He was also clear that the coming economic boom was not an accident, but a blessing from God to accomplish His specific purposes:

In addition, many of these discoveries will be made to help bring to pass the purposes and work of God and to quicken, including through missionary work, the building of His kingdom on earth today…

As the gospel is carried to billions of spiritually hungry souls, miracles will be performed by the hand of the Lord. Missionaries of many nationalities will serve the Lord throughout the earth. New chapels and many more temples will be built to bless the Saints, as has been prophesied regarding premillennial growth of the Church. You may ask, ‘Where will the financial resources come from to fund this growth?’ The resources will come from faithful members through their tithes and offerings. As we do our part, the Lord will bless us with prosperity…

So for yet a season, possibly a short season, it will seem as though the windows of heaven will have truly opened so that ‘there shall not be room enough to receive it.’

Again, that was on April 6, 2012.

I’m not much of a Facebooker anymore, but one big reason I’ve kept a perfunctory account is to follow the pages from various saints all over the world–the Ghana MTC, Area pages for various regions in Africa and Asia, a few scattered branches in Nepal and Pakistan and Sri Lanka and India and Uganda, etc. It’s a daily dose of straight-up miracles in my newsfeed. The constant stream of pictures of missionaries coming through the Ghana MTC is the first thing that came to mind when I read Elder Ballard’s promise that “missionaries of many nationalities will serve the Lord.” They’re preparing to serve in almost every country in Africa, and it’s so amazing and lovely to see their faces and think of the miracles they’re about to be the Lord’s hand in bringing about.

So many of those missions and branches didn’t exist in 2012.

In 2012, there were about 140 temples. We’re up to 315 now.

And shortly after April 2012, what did the stock market proceed to do?

Fwoom. Even with the huge Covid dip in 2020, the peak at nearly 40,000 is just amazing. As Elder Ballard predicted, the windows of heaven opened so that there was hardly room enough to receive it.

A lot of news orgs have figured out “Mormon” = clickbait. Put Mormon in your headline and clicks increase. That’s part of the reason why the Church’s recent tussle with the SEC over how it reports its investment funds is getting so much attention. I don’t think the Church did anything morally wrong, and only biffed a couple of regulatory issues out of a good-faith desire to keep naive members from concluding “I’m going to copy the prophet’s investment strategy!” when it wouldn’t be good for them to do so.

Some people have reacted negatively to the mere fact that the Church has a lot of money. To them, I wanted to highlight this mostly-forgotten speech by Elder (now President) Ballard. The Church has a lot of money because it has missionaries to send, and temples to build, and students to educate. It has a worldwide kingdom to build.

The Church has a lot of money because the Lord blessed the Church with a lot of money.

This was foreseen in Elder Ballard’s prophetic address. Church leaders are using the money to carry out God’s will. The Good Ship Zion is not a luxury cruiser, and its crew are not amassing personal wealth. But it takes a lot of dough to carry out the most epic, most important mission in the history of seafaring, just before she pulls into her Millennial port. Literal prophets and seers are at the helm, literally prophesying.

Stay on board and grab an oar.

Cassandra Hedelius serves on the board for FAIR. She has a JD from the University of Colorado and has practiced domestic and business law. She is currently raising and homeschooling her three children.

The post A Prophecy Fulfilled: Church finances are a blessing from God appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In full disclosure, I’ve been concerned about this post this week. There are some things coming up today that I am not very comfortable discussing in a public setting. It involves questions I feel are important to address, but I do take temple covenants very seriously and I don’t know that this is the best place to address them. There will be things from the Letter For My Wife that I can’t copy and paste directly, and things I’ll have to skim over and paraphrase. It’s going to be a difficult needle to thread, and I can’t guarantee I’ll do it well. I’m trying to follow the counsel we’ve received in recent years to be more open about what happens inside the temple, while still not crossing the lines we’ve covenanted to keep sacred.

We’ll start off with a little bit more temple history, and from there, Faulk will move into the difficult portion. He picks up with more discussion of Freemasonry:

LDS Masons

Joseph’s family and several of the first members of the Church were Masons. Joseph Smith Sr. was a documented member in upstate New York. He was raised to the degree of Master Mason May 7, 1818 in Ontario Lodge No. 23 of Canandaigua, New York. His older brother Hyrum was a member of Mount Moriah Lodge No. 112 at Palmyra, New York. Other prominent members include: Joseph’s other brothers Samuel and William Smith, Brigham Young (2nd president of the Church), John Taylor (3rd president), Wilford Woodruff (4th president), Lorenzo Snow (5th president), Sidney Rigdon (first presidency), William Law (first presidency), John C. Bennett (first presidency), Newell K. Whitney (Presiding Bishop), Heber C. Kimball (first presidency), Orson Pratt (apostle), Parley P. Pratt (apostle), Orson Hyde (apostle), Lyman Johnson, (apostle), William Clayton (Joseph’s secretary), Porter Rockwell (Joseph’s bodyguard) and many more.

Yes, while there was a strong anti-Mason sentiment in various parts of the country, Masonry was also a popular organization for many men. In fact, in the Northeastern United States, the organization experienced “rapid growth” between 1800-1830, the time period in which several of those men listed above were inducted.

During the early part of the United States’ history, it was basically the most popular way for men to gather socially and hang out together. It’s not surprising that many early Saints—who were friends with one another in Joseph’s inner circle—would seek other ways to spend time together. Many of us today do the same thing with our friends, whether it’s game nights or movie nights or book clubs or whatever. Freemasonry was kind of like the pre-Civil War version of a modern D&D group. Obviously, it’s more a serious organization than that, but on its face, it was a social group for men to bond with one another.

You can see a list of members of the Nauvoo Lodge from 1841 in the Nauvoo Masonic Lodge Minute Book, pages 27-28 of the cited link. It’s not comprehensive and it’s difficult to read, but most of the men listed above are on it.

As soon as the saints erected the Nauvoo lodge, Joseph Smith also sought membership in the fraternity.

“15 March 1842 Tuesday – I officiated as grand chaplain at the installation of the Nauvoo Lodge of Free Masons, at the Grove near the Temple. Grand Master Jonas, of Columbus, being present, a large number of people assembled on the occasion. The day was exceedingly fine; all things were done in order, and universal satisfaction was manifested. In the evening I received the first degree in Free Masonry in the Nauvoo Lodge, assembled in my general business office.” (Joseph Smith, Journal 1841–1842. Also in History of the Church, vol.4, p.550)

Yes, Joseph Smith joined as an Entered Apprentice the night the Nauvoo Lodge was officially instituted.

Just seven weeks after his initiation as a first-degree mason, on April 4, 1842, Joseph introduces the endowment ceremony in the upper room of his red brick store; the same room where his Masonic initiation took place. Present were Hyrum Smith, Brigham Young, William Law, Heber C. Kimball and others.

I personally think this is because he was excited by the things he saw in the Masonic lodge. He’d finally figured out how best to teach the Endowment. I spoke last week about the message and the messenger, or the gift and the wrapping paper. Joseph had the message/gift already. But the Lord didn’t give him explicit instructions on how to implement it, and let him figure it out for himself. The ritual drama he saw at the Lodge, along with the ancient elements that he would have known about, gave him the messenger/wrapping paper/delivery method.

He already knew the Endowment would be happening in the new Nauvoo Temple that was being built. After all, on October 12, 1841, the Quorum of the Twelve published a letter in which they declared that the Nauvoo Temple “would be a place for proxy baptism, worship, endowment, the revelation of God’s laws, and the manifestation of ‘all the ordinances.’”

I don’t consider this an odd or unusual move, considering the things that had already been revealed to Joseph about the Endowment by that point. We covered this last week, but by March of 1842, Joseph had been receiving segments of revelation concerning the Endowment for thirteen years. Portions of it had already been instituted in the Kirtland Temple six years prior. Joseph had already lamented that he’d never had the opportunity to give the Saints the full plan that God had revealed to him before they were forced to flee Kirtland and abandon the Temple. It was also 11 months after the revelation now known as D&C 132, the celestial marriage revelation, was starting to be taught to select members of the Church that Joseph knew he could trust. The first documented plural marriage of the Nauvoo period was in April of 1841. There were things echoing temple language in many early revelations and sermons. As Jeffrey Bradshaw explained:

It appears that the Prophet learned much about temple ordinances through personal experiences with heavenly beings and revelations associated with his inspired translation of scripture. His revelations contain many unmistakable references to significant components of priesthood and temple doctrines, authority, and ordinances. Many of these date to the early 1830s, a decade or more before the Prophet began bestowing temple blessings on the Saints in Nauvoo. And given Joseph Smith’s reluctance to share the details of the most sacred events and doctrines publicly, it is certainly possible he received specific knowledge about some temple matters even earlier than can be now documented. These matters include: 1) the narrative backbone, clothing, and covenants of the modern temple endowment; 2) the sequence of blessings of the oath and covenant of the priesthood; and 3) priesthood keys and symbols expressed in keywords, names, signs, and tokens.

So, given all of that, of course Joseph was excited to finally have a way to teach those things to the Saints. And we know that’s likely how he viewed it, because Joseph Fielding told us:

Many have joined the Masonic institution. This seems to have been a stepping stone or preparation for something else, the true origin of Masonry [or, rather, the Priesthood]. This I have also seen and rejoice in it.

They viewed Masonry as a stepping stone to something greater, something true and restored. Bradshaw explains what Joseph might have been trying to teach the Saints by using Masonic elements:

One aspect of this preparation apparently had to do with the general idea of respecting covenants of confidentiality. For example, Joseph Smith once told the Saints that “the reason we do not have the secrets of the Lord revealed unto us is because we do not keep them.” But as he later observed, ‘“The secret of Masonry is to keep a secret.” Joseph may have seen the secret-keeping of Masonry as a tool to prepare the Saints to respect their temple covenants.

In addition, the rituals of the Lodge enabled Mormon Masons to become familiar with symbols and forms they would later encounter in the Nauvoo temple. These included specific ritual terms, language, handclasps, and gestures as well as larger patterns such as those involving repetition and the use of questions and answers as an aid to teaching. Joseph Smith’s own exposure to Masonry no doubt led him to seek further revelation as he prepared to introduce the divine ordinances of Nauvoo temple worship.

Finally, although Freemasonry is not a religion and, in contrast to Latter-day Saint temple ordinances, does not claim saving power for its rites, threads relating to biblical themes of exaltation are evident in some Masonic rituals. For example, in the ceremonies of the Royal Arch degree of the York rite, candidates pass through a series of veils and eventually enter into the divine presence. In addition, Christian interpretations, like Salem Town’s description of the “eighth degree,” tell of how the righteous will “be admitted within the veil of God’s presence, where they will become kings and priests before the throne of his glory for ever and ever.” Such language echoes New Testament teachings. Thus, apart from specific ritual language, forms, and symbols, a more general form of resemblance between Mormon temple ritual and certain Masonic degrees might be seen in the views they share about the ultimate potential of humankind.

Steven Harper gave a great presentation at the 2013 BYU Church History Symposium in which he explained how Joseph “translated” the Masonic imagery for Latter-day Saint audiences the same way he translated ancient scripture, or “restored” it the way he restored the Church and Priesthood. (He also made a truly hilarious joke about “hermetic sealing” that you guys really should check out. It makes me laugh every time.) Samuel Morris Brown agrees and says something very similar in his book, In Heaven As It Is On Earth: Joseph Smith and the Early Mormon Conquest of Death.

That’s also how Heber C. Kimball explained it to Parley P. Pratt in a letter dated June 17, 1842:

We have received some precious things through the Prophet on the priesthood that would cause your soul to rejoice. I cannot give them to you on paper, for they are not to be written. So you must come and get them for yourself. We have organized a lodge here of Masons since we obtained a charter. … There is a similarity of priesthood [ordinances] in Masonry. Bro. Joseph says Masonry was taken from priesthood but has become degenerated. But many things are perfect.

Bradshaw puts a slightly different spin on it:

However, sometimes it may be more accurate to see the process by which revelation came to the Prophet in an inverse fashion. In other words, we might see the revelatory process, at least in some cases, not primarily as a “translation” of elements of Masonic ritual into Mormon temple ordinances, but rather as a “translation” of revealed truths — components of temple ordinances that Joseph Smith had previously encountered in his translation of the Bible and through his personal revelatory experiences — into words and actions that the Saints in Nauvoo could readily understand because their intuitions had already been primed by their exposure to the Bible and to Freemasonry.

It should be no more a surprise to Latter-day Saints if some phrasing of the rites of Freemasonry parallel selected aspects of restored temple ordinances than the idea that wording similar to that of the King James Version was adopted in the English translation of scriptural passages from the Old Testament included on the Book of Mormon plates. In both cases, the use of elements already familiar to the early Saints would have served a pragmatic purpose, favoring their acceptance and understanding of specific aspects of the ancient teachings better than if a whole new and foreign textual or ritual vocabulary had been introduced.

So, Bradshaw believes that seeing the Masonic rituals and drama allowed Joseph to convert the revelations he’d received over the years into something concrete and understandable to the Saints of the Nauvoo period. He did that by using elements they were familiar with through participation in Masonry.

Heavenly Father often gives us direction to do something without telling us how. He leaves that up to us, because things like that are how we learn and grow. If He told us exactly what to do in every situation, we’d never be able to become like Him, because He’s taking all of the difficulty out of it. We don’t truly learn until we stand on our own feet. By teaching us to “study it out in our minds” and come up with solutions beforegoing to Him, He’s letting us learn to stand on our own, rather than carrying us.

I believe that’s precisely what He left Joseph to do here. And Joseph followed the model Heavenly Father had already given him when He used the seer stones to help Joseph learn how to become a prophet. Joseph then packaged the Endowment, something new and overwhelming and confusing, into something digestible by using the familiar packaging of Masonry they were used to.

Similarities between Masonic rituals and LDS Temple Ceremony

What exactly was Joseph exposed to during this initiation and is it possible that any of it made its way into the endowment ceremony? Two expository books on Masonry written by William M. Morgan and Jabez Richardson disclose various temple ceremonies. (Illustrations of Masonry by One of the Fraternity, 1827 and Monitor of Free-Masonry. www.themasonictrowel.com/ebooks/freemasonry/eb0348.pdf) They show that the words, actions and symbols used in Masonic rituals are nearly identical to LDS temple ordinances. Below is a small collection of those that bare most striking resemblance.

Okay, obviously, this is the part we’re not delving into in any kind of detail. He goes on from here, showing pictures and describing signs, symbols, and tokens. I’m going to bypass all of that. I will just say first that the Church’s website has an entire section on temples that is full of solid information. It even lists out the temple covenants, and as is an excellent resource.

Second, while there are similarities, there are also instances of Joseph Smith using those same symbols and signs in Latter-day Saint theology before becoming a Mason. Matthew B. Brown’s book, Exploring the Connection Between Mormons and Masons spends several chapters and appendices going through those evidences.

These include things like the all-seeing eye being described as early as 1829; the handclasp as early as 1832, with a more specific teaching of using that handclasp to determine whether an angel is one of the light or of the darkness in 1839; “Holiness to the Lord” as early as 1830; and bees were obviously first mentioned in 1829 in the Book of Mormon, but as a specific symbol of the Saints as early as 1832. Joseph was also using the sun, moon, and stars in multiple documents, including in the capacity of scripture, as early as the late 1820s. Additionally, in D&C 124:42, during a revelation given in January of 1841, the Lord says He “will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house” (the Nauvoo Temple). Joseph later stated that the symbols on the outside of the temple were given to him in revelation, fulfilling this prophecy.

Brown also explains why Joseph would not have taken the Endowment ordinance itself from the Masons:

About one year and give months before Joseph Smith became a Freemason (5 October 1840), he told the congregants at general conference in Nauvoo, “God will not acknowledge that which He has not called, ordained, and chosen. … [T]he ordinances must be kept in the very way God has appointed, otherwise [the] priesthood will prove a cursing instead of a blessing.” On 22 January 1843—just a little over eight months after giving the Nauvoo endowment for the first time—the Prophet taught the very same concept, saying, “All the ordinances, systems, and administrations on the earth [are] of no use to the children of men unless they are ordained and authorized of God. For nothing will save a man but a legal administrator, for none others will be acknowledged either by God or angels.”

Since the Prophet was teaching near the time of his Masonic initiation that the system of the Masons was “degenerated” and had been “taken from [the] Priesthood,” he certainly would not have viewed its administrations as being ordained and authorized of God, nor efficacious in matters of personal salvation. It should also be emphasized that there is no primary, secondary, or tertiary historical source where Joseph Smith states that he borrowed elements of the Masonic ceremonies….

So, if Joseph had declared on multiple occasions that no ordinance was valid unless it was ordained, given by those holding authority, and performed exactly as God decreed, and he was teaching at the same time that Masonic rites were “degenerated” and corrupted, why would he copy them for use in the Temple? That makes no sense at all. Corrupted ordinances by their very nature cannot be performed exactly as God decrees.

I found it interesting that it was not until after Joseph Smith’s exposure to Masonry that he introduced the endowment ceremony. Just seven weeks separated Joseph’s Masonic initiation and the instructions for the first endowment.

I don’t. He’d been searching for a way to teach it, as he implied in that 1839 letter mentioned above. This gave him an idea on how to do that. And again, that is just the “messenger,” or the outer packaging for delivering the ordinances and covenants. The actual ordinance is not adapted from Masonic ritual at all.

He used certain elements to teach people how to keep sacred things private, and to teach certain concepts like the eternal progression of man.

According to Steven Harper:

Joseph seems to have used Masonry as a point of departure, a beginning rather than an end in itself. Several scholars of differing degrees of belief in Joseph Smith’s teachings have analyzed the evidence and arrived at this conclusion. Michael Homer argued that “the rituals of Freemasonry provided a starting point for the Mormon prophet’s revelation of ‘true Masonry.’” David Buerger argued that the pattern of resemblances was too great and the content of the endowment too unique to explain simply. “Thus,” he concluded, “the temple ceremony cannot be explained as wholesale borrowing from Masonry; neither can it be explained as completely unrelated to Freemasonry.” Allen Roberts concluded that “Joseph’s Masonry was not a conventional one. He attempted to restore it in much the same way the gospel was restored. That is, he saw Masonry like Christianity, as possessing some important truths which could be beneficially extracted from what was otherwise an apostate institution.”

Joseph modified one ritual drama into another one, changing it and using it to teach a completely different concept and story. I don’t think that’s very scandalous, personally, but I know this is an issue that bothers some people quite a bit.

March 15, 1842 – Joseph Smith became a Mason in his general business office. (History of the Church, vol.4, p.551)
May 4, 1842 – Joseph instructed the other leaders on the washings, anointing, signs and tokens. (History of the Church, vol.5, p.2)

And, as we went over, many of those were already taught by Joseph a decade or so before the Endowment was first taught as a whole. All the Masonic rites did was give him a vehicle he could adapt for his own purposes to teach the Saints.

Steven Harper explained:

It requires a logical leap to bridge the evidentiary gap between similarity, which was obvious to those who knew both Masonry and the endowment, and dependence, which is assumed—not known. Some people reason that Joseph Smith initiated men and women into the endowment ordinances after he was initiated into Freemasonry; therefore, the temple rituals derived from Masonry. One problem in this theory is that Freemasonry itself borrowed much of its ritual and ceremony from elements preserved since antiquity. There is ample similarity and difference not only between Freemasonry and LDS temple ordinances, but in many other ancient and more modern stories and rituals as well. Disentangling the complex relationships between them is not possible and should not be oversimplified.

It is possible to discern differences in the functions (however similar in form) of Masonic and LDS temple ordinances. Masonic rituals use aprons, door-knockings, and unusual handshakes to foster brotherhood. Bonds are made between men, not between people and God. LDS temple ordinances endow believers with power to regain the presence of God as they make and keep covenants with him. The ritual is not the endowment of power itself. It may be that some ritual forms were adapted from Masonic traditions, but the endowment teaches a divine plan of creation, Fall, and redemption through Christ—promising those who covenant to keep God’s laws that they will gain power over the effects of the Fall. As Heber Kimball was perfectly positioned to know, the endowment did not simply mimic Masonry.

The Endowment and the Masonic rites are not the same thing. As I said last week, “Yes, there are some elements of Masonic ceremony in the endowment. But those elements link back at least to early Christianity, and some are far older than that. Additionally, those elements are small things, like signs, tokens, symbols, minor phrasing, and the fact that there’s a ritual drama to teach us important lessons. They do not include the lessons themselves or the ordinances and covenants.”

It appears that every LDS temple ceremony has a nearly identical Masonic ceremony with the corresponding symbols. This brings up the question – Who is the real author of the endowment? Parallels between Masonry and the endowment seem to be problematic. Could Joseph Smith have simply borrowed this “revelation”?

It doesn’t bring up that question unless you’re reaching for it, and to me personally, it’s not problematic when you actually study the details around it. Joseph Smith obviously didn’t “borrow this revelation” if he was discussing prominent elements of it as far back as 1829 and all throughout the 1830s. Greg Kearney gave a great overview of all of the similarities and, more importantly, some of the major differences between Masonic ritual and the Latter-day Saint Endowment. Scott Gordon also gave a fantastic presentation on this at the 2017 FAIR Conference.

I also have to take exception to the scare quotes around “revelation.” Joseph received the Endowment in many revelations across more than a decade, and there is documented proof of that. Jeffrey Bradshaw’s paper gives a good timeline of that, and so does Matthew Brown’s book. Just because Thomas Faulk doesn’t believe that the Endowment came from God, does not mean he’s right. He’s not.

The Endowment is a beautiful gift, the bestowal of God’s power to us.

President Nelson once taught:

When we realize that we are children of the covenant, we know who we are and what God expects of us. His law is written in our hearts. He is our God and we are His people. Committed children of the covenant remain steadfast, even in the midst of adversity. When that doctrine is deeply implanted in our hearts, even the sting of death is soothed and our spiritual stamina is strengthened.

The greatest compliment that can be earned here in this life is to be known as a covenant keeper.The rewards for a covenant keeper will be realized both here and hereafter. Scripture declares that “ye should consider on the blessed and happy state of those that keep the commandments of God. For behold, they are blessed in all things, … and if they hold out faithful to the end they are received into heaven … [and] dwell with God in a state of never-ending happiness.”

God lives. Jesus is the Christ. His Church has been restored to bless all people. … And we, asfaithful children of the covenant, will be blessed now and forever.

And Brigham Young said:

Your endowment is to receive all those ordinances in the House of the Lord, which are necessary for you, after you have departed this life, to enable you to talk back to the presence of the Father, passing the angels who stand as sentinels, being enabled to give them the key words, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the Holy Priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation in spite of earth and hell.

There is so much for us to learn and understand about the temple. It’s a lifelong process, and it’s easy to feel overwhelmed or inadequate. But when questions arise, or when you see the attacks of critics, just remember the very wise words of President Nelson:

Now a little word of warning. There are those who would undermine your ability to call upon the power of God. There are some who would have you doubt yourself and minimize your stellar spiritual capacity as a righteous woman [or man].

Most certainly, the adversary does not want you to understand the covenant you made at baptism or the profound endowment of knowledge and power you have received or will receive in the temple—the house of the Lord. And Satan certainly does not want you to understand that every time you worthily serve and worship in the temple, you leave armed with God’s power and with His angels having “charge over” you.

A friend and I recently had a conversation in which he said that there are no guarantees in this life. I have to respectfully disagree. This is a guarantee: God has gifted us His power, and He will go before our faces, on our right hand and our left, and His Spirit will be in our hearts. He will send His angels to watch over us and gather round us, to bear us up. Because of that, we “need not fear.”

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 15: The Early Church – The Endowment [B] appeared first on FAIR.

In Heaven as It Is on Earth: Joseph Smith and the Early Mormon Conquest of Death

View Details

While the Endowment is a subject that I find comforting and fascinating to study, I will admit upfront that I’ve been feeling some trepidation regarding this section. In his Letter, Faulk actually describes and shows images of many of the temple signs, symbols, and tokens, and those are not things I’m comfortable discussing in a public setting. I take our temple covenants very seriously, and I don’t want to put myself or FAIR or any of the readers here in the position of potentially breaking those covenants. Because of that, there will be a large section of this topic that will just be skimmed over without the usual level of detail and documentation I try to provide.

And frankly, I’m actually appalled that Faulk would post that information for everyone to read and look at. I don’t believe in mocking someone else’s sincerely held religious beliefs, even when I find those beliefs strange or off-putting. Unfortunately, that’s what Faulk’s Letter leads to deeper in this section. While I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that wasn’t his intent, he does air these things publicly where they can and will be mocked by those who belittle them.

This week, however, we’ll be focusing most of our attention on the idea that the Endowment was copied from Freemasonry. There is some truth and a lot of untruth behind that charge.

Before diving in, I’d like to again thank Jeffrey Bradshaw, Brandon Cole, Trevor Holyoak, and Ryan Mercer, who all offered me assistance on this topic. Some gave it this week, while others passed along information as I was working on the response to the CES Letter with similar accusations. I’ll be drawing on a lot of that same information again, so I appreciate their input and the resources they provided.

Was the temple endowment really a revelation from God or could it have another origin? This chapter covers the origin of Freemasonry, founders of the Church and their Masonic membership, and similarities between Masonic temple ceremonies and the LDS temple endowment.

There are absolutely links between the ritual, symbols, and tokens of the Endowment and those of Freemasonry. That’s not really in dispute. It’s also indisputable that the covenants and teachings of the Endowment are far, far more ancient than that and were revealed, at least in part, to Joseph well before he ever became a Mason, or even moved to Nauvoo, for that matter.

Before we go into some of the details, it’s important to recognize that there are different parts to the Endowment ceremony. There’s the Endowment ordinance itself, with the covenants and the endowment of Priesthood power, and then there’s the ritual, which is full of symbolism. It’s the method used to teach the Endowment, not the Endowment itself.

This separation has been described in various ways by Latter-day Saints. For example, Greg Kearney, a Latter-day Saint and a Mason, refers to it as “The Message and the Messenger.” David O. McKay has referred to it as the “mechanics” of the temple vs the “symbolism.”

The analogy I personally used to describe this before was that of a birthday gift. You have the present itself, which is the covenants and ordinances, and the Priesthood power we’re endowed with, and then you have the wrapping paper. The gift wrapping is the outer covering, something that we put time and effort into making. We want it to look beautiful and enticing, but ultimately, it’s just the disguise the gift hides in. This is much like the ritual that the teachings, ordinances, and covenants of the Endowment are housed in. We learn those teachings through rituals and repetition, through symbols and tokens. Those things are not the Endowment; they’re just the packaging the Endowment comes in.

However we describe it, it’s important to know that those are separate things. When you purchase a package off Amazon, it often comes in a cardboard box. The box is part of the package, but it’s not the important part. The important part is what’s in the box.

And to further explain some of the terminology we’ll be using over the next few weeks, here are a few other examples. First, think of an elder raising his arm to the square when he baptizes someone. That’s a sign of the ordinance he’s performing. Second, the rainbow is a symbol representing God’s covenant with Noah to never again flood the Earth and destroy the people. And third, a wedding ring is a token, a physical reminder of the vows you made to your spouse when you got married.

These are all immediately recognizable to us because we’re familiar with them. But when we first go to the temple, the signs, symbols, and tokens we find there are brand new to us, and it can throw us off. It takes time to learn to understand them and what they represent.

So, with all of that said, let’s dive into the LFMW and see what Thomas Faulk has to say:

Origin of Freemasonry

“The earliest Masonic texts each contain some sort of a history of the craft, or mystery, of masonry. The oldest known work of this type, The Halliwell Manuscript, dating from between 1390 and 1425.” (Grand Lodge of British Columbia, The Halliwell Manuscript. http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/texts/regius.html)

“Some are also told that King Solomon ruled over Masonic lodges as grand master. The stories they weave around the building of the temple are obviously not literal or historical facts but a dramatic means of explaining the principles of Freemasonry. Freemasonry neither originated nor existed in Solomon’s time. The general agreement amongst serious Masonic historians and researchers is that Freemasonry has arisen, either directly or indirectly, from the medieval stonemasons who built great cathedrals and castles. Those who favor the direct descent from operative masonry say there were three stages to the evolution of Freemasonry. The stonemasons gathered in huts (lodges) to rest and eat. These lodges gradually became not the hut but the grouping together of stonemasons to regulate their craft. In time, and in common with other trades, they developed primitive initiation ceremonies for new apprentices.”

“As stonemasons could easily travel all over the country from one building site to another, and as there were also no trade union cards or certificates of apprenticeship they began to adopt a private word which a traveling stonemason could use when he arrived at a new site, to prove that he was properly trained and had been a member of a lodge. It was, after all, easier to communicate a special word to prove that you knew what you were doing and were entitled to the wages it deserved that to spend hours carving a block of stone to demonstrate your skills.”

“We know that in the early 1600s these operative lodges began to admit men who had no connection with the trade – accepted or gentlemen masons. Why this was done and what form of ceremony was used is not known. As the 1600s drew to a close more and more gentlemen began to join the lodges, gradually taking them over and turning them into lodges of free and accepted or speculative masons, no longer having any connection with the stonemasons’ craft. This is based on evidence from Scotland. In England, the first evidence of a lodge completely made up of non-operative masons is found. English evidence through the 1600s points to Freemasonry existing apart from any actual or supposed organization of operative stonemasons. This was a period of great religious and political turmoil and intolerance. Men were unable to meet together without differences of political and religious opinion leading to arguments. Opposing views split families and the English civil war of 1642-6 was the ultimate outcome. As their central idea was one of building a better society they borrowed their forms and symbols from the operative builders craft and took their central allegory from the Bible, the common source book known to all, in which the only building described in any detail is King Solomon’s Temple. Stonemasons tools also provided them with a multiplicity of emblems to illustrate the principles they were putting forward. The formation of the premier Grand Lodge in 1717 had been followed, around 1725, by the Grand Lodge of Ireland and, in 1736; the Grand Lodge of Scotland. These three Grand Lodges did much to spread Freemasonry throughout the world, to the extent that all regular Grand Lodges throughout the world, whatever the immediate means of their formation, ultimately trace their origins back to one, or a combination, of the Grand Lodges within the British Isles.” (http://www.mastermason.com/jjcrowder/ history/history.html)

That’s a pretty good overview of the history of Masonry. I don’t really have much to add. It used to be taught that the Masons began with the stonemasons working on Solomon’s Temple, but history has not born that out. We can only trace it back as far as the late 1300s. Could it be somewhat older than that? Sure, yeah. Does it date back thousands of years? That’s highly doubtful.

However, that doesn’t mean that certain elements of Freemasonry can’t stretch back that far into the past. Certain signs and symbols could predate the Freemasons by quite some time.

Church leaders claim that the connection between Masons and Mormons date back to the stonemasons who built Solomon’s temple in the Old Testament.

That’s not exactly true. Certainly no contemporary leaders are making any such claims. Additionally, Faulk reads more into their statements than they actually said.

“Modern Masonry is a fragmentary presentation of the ancient order established by King Solomon. From whom it is said to have been handed down through the centuries. …that he was not sorry there was such a similarity, because of the fact that the ordinances and rites revealed to Joseph Smith constituted a reintroduction upon the earth of the divine plan inaugurated in the Temple of Solomon in ancient days. Masonry is an apostasy from the ancient early order, just as so-called Christianity is an apostasy from the true Church of Christ” (Elder Melvin J. Ballard, The Salt Lake Herald, December 29, 1919)

This citation is impossible to corroborate online. Some of this information was found by me, and some by my friend, Reddit user WooperSlim. The long and short of it is, the Salt Lake Herald may or may not have existed in 1919. It was founded in 1870 and lasted until 1909, when it merged with the Inter-Mountain Republican to form the Salt Lake Herald Republican. That combined paper only lasted until 1918. It appears as though it potentially reverted back to the Salt Lake Herald from July of 1918 to July of 1920, but this is the only source I can find stating this and those archives are not online anywhere that I can find. Neither Newspapers.com nor Utah Digital Newspapers has the relevant dates. And the existing archives for the Salt Lake Herald show that in 1909, the paper ended in August, not December, so it’s not just a tiny typo in the year, either.

When googling the quote, every single citation I can find is copied from a book called Mormonism and Masonry: Origins, Connections and Coincidences Between Mason and Mormon Temple/Templar Ritual by S.H. Goodwin. No one has the primary source documents available. The archives may be available on microfilm somewhere, but again, this can’t be corroborated by any other source than the one cited above.

So, I can’t verify this quote at all, nor do I know what was removed by that ellipsis. I don’t even know for sure who that “he” was who was supposedly not sorry for any similarities. If anyone can locate the primary source document that this quote came from, please let us know.

As far as Masonry being a fragmentary part of the ancient order established King Solomon in the temple, the Lord did confirm ancient Hebrew origins of the Endowment rites and rituals. As Matthew B. Brown explains in his book, Exploring the Connections Between Mormons and Masons:

The nature of the Nauvoo Temple ordinances was plainly spelled out by the Lord before they were introduced among the Saints and before Joseph Smith was received into the Masonic fraternity. At the beginning of 1841, the Lord said that Nauvoo Temple activities would be a restoration of rituals once practiced in the Tabernacle built by the prophet Moses and the temple constructed by King Solomon (seeD&C 124:37–39). In other words, they would be Hebrew in their basis and content, not Masonic. And this points to another historical fact that needs to be remembered. The Kirtland Temple rituals were a precursor of the Nauvoo Temple ordinances. The Kirtland washing and anointing ceremonies predated Joseph Smith’s Masonic membership by six years and four months, and they were specifically, and contemporaneously, linked—by the Saints themselves—to the initiation rites experienced by the priests of ancient Israel. Again, the basis and content of these ceremonies was Hebrew, not Masonic.

And if you follow that link to the scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord explains that those ordinances are “from before the world was.” So, the ordinance—the endowment and covenants and teachings—is older than the foundations of the world. But the rites and rituals may not be that old. At the very least, they have some origins in ancient Israel, but we don’t know exactly when they were created or what those elements were that are taken from those old rituals.

“We have the true Masonry. The Masonry of today is received from the apostasy which took place in the days of Solomon, and David. They have now and then a thing that is correct, but we have the real thing.” (Heber C. Kimball, Heber C. Kimball and Family, The Nauvoo Years. Brigham Young University Studies. 1975, p.458)

This is a quote I can verify, because this is a great paper that I have cited many times myself.

As we can see from these words, Heber C. Kimball believed—as was common in his day—that Masonry was handed down from the days of Solomon. He believed that our Endowment ceremony was the perfected version, while the Masons had a corrupted version. We know now that he was wrong, at least in the belief that Masonry is that ancient.

However, at no point did Kimball ever say that the connections between the Mormons and the Masons extended back to the days of Solomon. He believed, as we all do, that this Church was restored to the Earth after a long absence. He also believed that apostate groups had been around since the days when the real temple rites were being performed in Solomon’s Temple, and that those apostates handed down those rites and rituals over the centuries. During that time, those rituals became just as corrupted as the rest of the doctrines of the true and living Church of Christ had become. In short, he believed that those connections between true temple rites and apostate ones were severed back in the days of Solomon and not restored until the days of Joseph Smith.

We don’t know when those temple rituals were last performed with true authority. We can’t trace them from the beginning of recorded history down until today. We don’t know where the Masons really learned them. There are ancient Christian practices that are similar to Masonic ceremonies, such as some signs and symbols of the Catholic liturgy. There is some evidence that early Christians had the Endowment. And Masonic tradition was rooted in early Christianity before becoming a completely secular organization.

But if Christ did teach true temple ordinances to the early Christians (and they did worship in temples for decades after the Resurrection, until the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem), there’s still a gap of about 1200 years where we don’t know for sure how those signs and symbols were passed down. Aside from the ones that are similar to Catholic tradition, of course.

The thing we need to take away from Kimball’s comments, however, is that long before he became a Mason, Joseph Smith knew that he was being allowed to restore very, very ancient ordinances, going back to the days of Adam. Even more than that, the Lord Himself declared that those ordinances, and the way in which they are performed, have existed since “before the foundation of the world.”

We don’t know which elements of the temple ceremony are ancient and which are purely Masonic inventions. But we do know that Joseph received knowledge of the temple ordinances well before he ever became a Mason. As Brian Hales explains, “Freemasonry in Nauvoo offers too little, too late to serve as the starting point and principal source of inspiration for the major doctrines and teachings relating to priesthood and temple ordinances. … Given Joseph Smith’s reluctance to share the details of the most sacred events and doctrines publicly, it is certainly possible he received specific knowledge about some temple matters even earlier than can be now documented. These matters include: 1) the narrative backbone, clothing, and covenants of the modern temple endowment, especially as described in the book of Moses (1830-1831); 2) the sequence of blessings of the oath and covenant of the priesthood described in D&C 84 (1832); and 3) priesthood keys and symbols expressed in keywords, names, signs, and tokens (from 1829).”

Matthew Brown elaborates on all of this in his book:

The theory that Joseph Smith took ritual elements from the Freemasons in order to create the LDS temple ceremony is principally founded upon the concept of time. Supporters of this theory argue that since the Prophet joined the Masonic fraternity shortly before he introduced the Nauvoo endowment among the Saints—and because there are similarities between the two sets of ceremonies—the leader of the Mormons must have been guilty of unacknowledged borrowing from the Masons….

In the years 1829 and 1830, Joseph Smith produced two scriptural texts containing numerous ritual elements that would become familiar to recipients of the Nauvoo endowment. Chapters 2–6 in the book of Mosiah, chapters 11–18 in the book of 3 Nephi, and chapters 2 and 3 in the book of Ether should all be compared with each other in order to see the relevant repeating pattern in the Book of Mormon. Then this same pattern should be sought for in chapter 1 of the book of Moses while chapters 2–6 of the same volume can be examined for other patterns that were employed in Nauvoo. In 1834 some portions of the book of Moses that were later incorporated into the Nauvoo-era temple liturgy were interwoven into Lecture on Faith #2 (cf. D&C 29:34–45)….

In mid March 1839, the Prophet wrote in a letter, “I never have had [the] opportunity to give [the Saints] the plan that God has revealed to me,” and later that year he taught one of the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles “many great and glorious principles concerning God and the heavenly order of eternity,” including the concepts of the “eternal union” of marriage and “eternal family organization.”

In September 1840, the First Presidency of the Church issued an epistle wherein they declared that the dispensation of the fullness of times would be an era when “all things” would be restored and the promises made to the fathers would be fulfilled. They said that they had been “given the pattern and design” for upbuilding God’s kingdom on the earth and announced that the time had arrived for “establishing the Priesthood in their fullness and glory.” They also indicated that it was time to build a temple in Nauvoo, and it would serve as a house of worship, prayer, and divinely established “ordinances.” At the October 1840 general conference of the Church, the Prophet discoursed on baptism for the dead one day and on the “plan of ordinances” that had been revealed to Adam or the “Ancient of Days” or “Michael” the next day. Some of the themes of this second sermon included premortal time, the creation, the Garden of Eden, and the Fall; the “keys” and “covenants” and power and glory with which God blessed Adam; the instructions, revelations, and commandments that the Lord gave to the first man; “the priesthood [being] restored with all its authority, power, and blessings” (i.e., in all its fullness) in the dispensation of the fullness of times, “every ordinance belonging to the priesthood” in “ancient days” being practiced within the Nauvoo Temple; priesthood “keys” that have been kept hidden; the mysteries of godliness; and certain kinds of sacrifice being made at an altar by latter-day sons of Levi (i.e., temple officiators) but after a pre-Mosaic or Melchizedekian type. All of this, said the Prophet, was “the order from the beginning” or the “order which [God] established … whereby He sent forth power, revelations, and glory.”

Jeffrey Bradshaw and K-Lynn Paul trace much of that early history prior to 1836 in this fantastic paper for the Interpreter Foundation. From their research, it’s pretty clear that Joseph had a wealth of knowledge about temple ordinances before the Kirtland Temple was finished, well before he became a Mason in Nauvoo in March of 1842.

Moreover, the temple covenants themselves have ancient origins that greatly predate the Masons, and so do many of the symbols and tokens we learn inside the temple. LDS Living also mentioned a few symbols that were described before Joseph became a Mason. Additionally, Greg Kearney gave a list of apparent similarities between Latter-day Saints and Masons, and explained why they aren’t as striking as they might seem.

So, in my mind, there’s not really much here backing up Thomas Faulk’s assertions.

He continues:

Unfortunately for the Church, Freemason historians cite its origins to the late 14th to early 15th century in Scotland as a trade guild, not 950 BC in Jerusalem.

That’s not “[unfortunate] for the Church.” The Church doesn’t base any of its history, doctrines, or temple ordinances off of the history of Freemasonry.

President Kimball and Elder Ballard appear to be mistaken about the origins of masonry and thus the Church’s historical connection for the endowment ceremony.

No. Heber C. Kimball was mistaken about the origins of masonry, that’s true. But he wasn’t wrong about the Church’s “historical connection for the Endowment ceremony.” Knowledge of the Endowment and of everlasting marriage were both known to Joseph, who was teaching the principles of at least some of those ordinances to the people well before 1842. We don’t know exactly when it was all unfolded to him, but he was learning portions of the doctrine at least as far back as 1829.

What it appears that Joseph did do, since we’re pretty far into this post and it hasn’t come up naturally yet, is adapt portions of a Masonic ritual he was familiar with into an aide for teaching the Endowment to the Saints.

Joseph was tasked by God to write the Endowment ceremony, apparently without much instruction on how to write it or teach the concepts and principles, and include the signs and tokens and symbols he needed to include. He seems to have used the ritual drama he saw in Masonic ceremonies as a jumping-off point to tell the narrative of eternal progression during the Endowment ceremony. They are not identical, and they are used in completely different ways to teach completely different things. That’s important to understand. But it does appear that he saw the ritual drama and believed he could alter and repurpose it to fit what he needed to achieve for the Endowment:

There are some short word phrases and actions used in the temple ceremony that are similar to word phrases and actions used in masonry, but the masonic word phrases and actions are not related to the themes, teachings, or covenants made in the temple. Even those places where actions are similar, they have completely different meanings. Joseph seems to have taken some of the actions and completely repurposed them. It is also interesting to note that the similar short phrases that are currently used are not critical phrases in the endowment ceremony. When the endowment ceremony was first performed in Nauvoo, it was much longer. As it has been shortened over the years, the Masonic-like phrases have been almost entirely removed.

At this point we have to stop and talk about the nature of revelation. Brigham Young said “When God speaks to the people, he does it in a manner to suit their circumstances and capacities. …Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to rewrite the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be rewritten, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation.”

Revelation comes from God, but comes through men. Too often we think that whatever comes out of the mouth of an apostle or prophet must be exactly what God said, word for word. But, if that were true, we wouldn’t have so many wonderful airplane analogies coming out in General Conference. Our language becomes filtered by our experience. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and many members of the Church in Nauvoo were familiar with the language of Masonry. So one would be very surprised if it didn’t crop up in their writings and teachings.

Those ritual aspects of the Endowment can and do change fairly often. There was a change earlier this year, even. That ritual is not the important, ancient part that’s been around since before the foundations of the world. The ritual is just the wrapping paper, and you can unwrap your gift and rewrap it in a variety of different wrappings without changing the gift, i.e., the ordinance/covenant/endowment of power.

So, to me, it doesn’t really matter what Joseph was inspired by when he was creating the ritual, because the ritual is just the teaching method. It’s just the packaging. It was his way of using a familiar vehicle that many of the Saints were accustomed to as a means for introducing the concepts found in the Endowment.

As Steven Harper explains:

So, here’s what it all really boils down to: yes, there are some elements of Masonic ceremony in the endowment. But those elements link back at least to early Christianity, and some are far older than that. Additionally, those elements are small things, like signs, tokens, symbols, minor phrasing, and the fact that there’s a ritual drama to teach us important lessons. They do not include the lessons themselves or the ordinances and covenants.

Joseph had been receiving revelations concerning the endowment since at least 1829 and parts of it were instituted in Kirtland, well before his arrival in Nauvoo. He said back in 1839 that he’d never had the chance to teach the Saints all that had been revealed to him. It seems to me as though the endowment had been revealed to him, but that the time was not ready to reveal it to the Saints at large until they were in Nauvoo. Once there, he didn’t know how to teach it to them until he attended some Mason meetings and realized what a valuable teaching method it could be. He adapted some elements and used others he recognized were of ancient origin, and an early form of our modern endowment was created.

God speaks to each of us in ways we’ll understand. Sometimes, that’s done through adapting things we’re already familiar with to teach us divine concepts. That’s precisely what He did with Joseph’s seer stones—He used something Joseph was familiar with to teach him how to receive revelation.

Is it really so surprising that Joseph would then adopt that same method to teach the eternal principles of the Endowment to the Saints by using Masonic elements they were already familiar with?

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 14: The Early Church – The Endowment [A] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This week, we’re continuing with the Word of Wisdom discussion. There were some important concepts introduced in last week’s post: the need for ongoing revelation, the Word of Wisdom as a mark to set us apart from the rest of the world, that there are differences between the revelation found in D&C 89 and the version we follow today, and that it was not meant just for physical health, but also for spiritual health. These are things to keep in mind this week, too.

The LFMW picks up:

Additionally, the Lord’s Law of Health seems to lack real health considerations.

This is a bit of an odd statement to me. The Word of Wisdom was not meant to be an all-encompassing list of everything that was healthy or unhealthy. It doesn’t cover every single individual circumstance. It makes very few definitive health statements, and mostly just says whether things are good or not good according to the Lord’s definition.

This is similar to the Creation account we find in Genesis 1, where God saw that His creations were good. We read in the Book of Abraham (chapters 4 and 5) that this meant that those things obeyed the council of the Gods. Meaning, they functioned as they were intended to.

This suggests to me—and this is entirely my opinion, so take it with a big ol’ grain of salt—that the things the Lord labels as “not good for man” and “not good for the body” are things that alter the body’s natural state.

Alcohol gets you drunk and can have serious effects on your liver and other organs over time. Coffee and tea contain caffeine, and while that is not against the Word of Wisdom in and of itself, it causes your blood pressure to rise and your heart to speed up. It can overstimulate your brain and cause withdrawal symptoms. Illegal drugs can have mind-altering effects as well as increase your heart rate to the point where it can sometimes be fatal. That’s in addition to being incredibly addictive. Smoking tobacco causes your lungs to fill with chemicals, which leads to heart and lung disease, diabetes, stroke, emphysema, COPD, and more. Chewing it causes those same chemicals to eat through your gums and destroy the enamel on your teeth. Both forms can lead to at least 14 different types of cancer: lung, mouth, throat, voice box, esophagus, stomach, kidney, pancreas, liver, bladder, cervix, colon, rectum, and a certain type of leukemia. Eating too much meat can lead to all kinds of health issues. Red meat, as many of us might know, is linked to numerous cancers. But processed meat of any kind, including poultry, can also lead to “ischaemic heart disease, pneumonia, diverticular disease, colon polyps and diabetes … gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis and duodenitis, … [and] gallbladder disease…” if you over-indulge. These all cause our bodies to function in ways that it wasn’t originally intended to.

Following the Word of Wisdom won’t keep your body completely free from any outside influences, as that is impossible to do. But it does cut down on some of the biggest things that can negatively alter the processes of your mind and body.

And guess what? At least one notable study conducted by UCLA over 25 years showed that following the counsel in the Word of Wisdom leads to longer life expectancies compared to people who don’t follow its counsel.

Currently, extremely obese members are given temple recommends, while active, healthy, and fit members who drink coffee and tea would not qualify.

I mentioned this last week, as it’s something I’ve seen come up occasionally on Reddit. While we’re charged with caring for our earthly bodies, there is no commandment against being obese. That’s because there are a lot of things that could cause someone to become overweight, and many of them have nothing to do with that person’s diet. Injury, illness, prescription medication, mental health issues, etc., can all lead to sometimes serious weight gain, as well as prevent that weight from coming back off. Individual circumstances vary too much for us to say that someone is sinning by being overweight.

That doesn’t give us free rein to abuse our bodies, but calling to spiritually punish someone for something that is not a commandment and that is so individualized is also not okay.

Overweight people are still given temple recommends because they’re not willfully violating a commandment. Just because Thomas Faulk thinks it should be a commandment does not mean that it isone.

Active, healthy, physically fit members who drink coffee and tea are breaking a commandment they covenanted with God to keep. So no, they do not qualify for a temple recommend.

It seems that if God really wanted to give the saints a code of health that would have prevented pioneer deaths due to a long list of illnesses including scarlet fever, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, influenza, pneumonia, cholera, malaria and small pox, he would have added things like the need for sanitizing water by boiling, increased personal hygiene and quarantining of sick persons.

Where does it say that the Word of Wisdom is meant to prevent pioneer deaths due to grave illnesses? It doesn’t even say it’ll ward against illnesses at all. It only says that: A) it was given to avoid the conspiracies of evil men (such as those in the cigarette industry who knew that their products caused cancer and hid the information while touting supposed health benefits in order to make money); B) that they would be generally healthy and strong, which does not mean they would never again get sick; C) that they would gain great knowledge; and D) that they would be marked as the covenant people of God so that the destroying angel would pass by them the way he did during the Passover.

This is just a silly straw man that has nothing to do with the text or intent of the Word of Wisdom.

In fact, the Church has long taught that coffee and tea were unhealthy; however, this reputation appears to be mistaken. Studies involving over 1.5 million participants who consumed 3-5 cups of coffee a day were at the lowest risk for cardiovascular diseases, stroke, prostate, breast and lung cancers, compared with those who drank none. Similar research show that polyphenol, a powerful antioxidant found in black, green and white teas, combat free-radicals that contribute to cancer, heart disease, kidney damage, diabetes, and helps lower cholesterol. (http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/tea-types-and-their-healthbenefits#1) and (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/upshot/more-consensus-on-coffees-benefits-than-you-might-think.html)

Yep, that’s because early studies did show that coffee and tea were unhealthy. Church leaders were repeating scientific consensus at the time. Scientific consensus changes as more information comes to light. That’s exactly what happened here, and it’s why Church leaders no longer make that claim.

However, just because black coffee and green tea have some health benefits, it doesn’t mean that drinking multiple cups daily loaded with sugar, milk, or creamer is good for you. We all know the negative effects of too much sugar, but milk and creamer both also have high levels of potassium. Combined with the potassium already in coffee, for example, 3-4 cups of that per day, every single day, can lead to too much potassium in your diet. Too much potassium leads to kidney disease.

Even things that are supposedly healthy come with caveats and restrictions. Black coffee is not the same as a mocha latte. All of the extra sugar and milk in it makes the mocha far less healthy than the black coffee.

Additionally, look at the wording of D&C 89:9:

9And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.

That’s literally all it says. It doesn’t say whether they’re good or bad for you, just that the Lord didn’t approve of them for drinking or using on injuries. But compare that to the admonition against tobacco in verse 8:

8 And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.

It specifically says that tobacco is not good for man to ingest or use, but is only to cure bruises or sick cattle. Clearly, sometimes the Word of Wisdom did say that things were bad for us. But it never actually says that coffee or tea or “hot drinks” are bad for us, just that we’re not supposed to drink them.

So, it doesn’t matter if they’re good for us or not, that’s not why we were prohibited from drinking them. The answer is essentially just, “Because God told us to.” That’s it, that’s the entire reason we avoid coffee and tea.

Possible Influences
Popular Misconceptions Regarding “Hot Drinks”

One common misconceptions in this era said that hot liquids were not good for the body.

A popular book titled, “Wholesome Advice against the Abuse of Hot Liquors,” particularly targeted tea, coffee and hot chocolate labeling them as unhealthy. This book argued that an excess consumption of hot drinks caused the blood and insides to heat up and that “Excess of heat is the most common cause of sickness and death.” Medical science at the time was so basic that the evidence presented in the book was based largely upon crude anatomical knowledge and references to classical Greek and Roman texts.

I didn’t read this entire book, personally. I kind of doubt Thomas Faulk did either, since the info he provided is mostly pulled from the full title. The quoted line is from page 91, about 1/3 of the way through. And frankly, the book is really boring.

Regardless of whether he read the entire thing or not, it was published in 1706, 127 years before the Word of Wisdom was introduced. Just to put that in perspective, that’s the same time difference between today and 1896, when Utah became a state. The world was very different in 1706 than it was in 1833, just like it was very different in 1896 than today. Science has grown by leaps and bounds since then.

Prior to the 19th Century, it was true that both excessively hot and cold drinks were thought to cause illness and even death. However, it was precisely because of the popularity of coffee, tea, and hot chocolate that those old ideas began to change. People were drinking a lot of each of them—remember, coffee in particular was pushed as a substitute for whiskey, because tea was seen as unpatriotic after the Boston Tea Party. It was over the course of the 19th Century that things began to change in earnest, as new medical discoveries were being made and deeper knowledge about the body became known. By the turn of the century, this idea of hot and cold liquids being bad for you was almost completely gone.

More curious is what’s not in the Word of Wisdom. Paul Hoskisson gave a presentation at the 2008 Sperry Symposium that discussed this very topic. While everything in the Word of Wisdom could be found in the thoughts of the day if you looked at the broader society, there were a lot of other things included in those thoughts than made it into the Word of Wisdom. For example, when Joseph and Hyrum both defined “hot drinks” as being “coffee and tea,” they didn’t mention cider, hot chocolate, herbal tea, or hot milk, which had to be drank after boiling it to rid of its impurities. There was also no mention of common medicinal cures like laudanum or calomel, which is especially surprising since an overdose of calomel is what killed Joseph’s brother Alvin. There was nothing about hygiene, and no admonition against eating vegetables with the skin on, which something you’d see during that time period. Even “too much thinking” was considered to be bad for your health. Etc. According to this Deseret News article by Michael De Groote:

While it is true that all of the items in the Word of Wisdom were at least mentioned in contemporary literature of Joseph Smith’s time, “clearly the Word of Wisdom contains none of the stupid and strange ideas that were rampant in the Prophet’s day,” Hoskisson said. “Neither does it include all the reliable and good stuff in his day.”

It’s something entirely different than that: a revelation from God, stating what was and was not acceptable according to Him.

A few decades later, John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, was arguing for complete abstinence from tea, on the grounds that it gave rise to “numberless disorders, particularly those of a nervous kind”. He placed emphasis on the religious importance of self-denial. (http://www.tea.co.uk/a-social-history#temperance)

Interestingly, Joseph Smith became very familiar with Methodist teachings when in June 1828 he became a member of minister Nathanial Lewis’ Harmony, Pennsylvania congregation. It is important to note that Joseph became a member after the First Vision where he was told that all religions were incorrect.

Nope, Joseph did not “become a member” of this congregation. Testimony of hostile witnesses (two of Emma’s cousins) states that at most, his name was on the roll for three days. To join the Methodists at that time, it was a six-month probationary period, which Joseph did not engage in. Their account is also not backed up by any other source at all. We only have the words of two men, coming decades later in 1879, who hated Joseph.

There are, however, multiple witnesses stating that he did not join any other church.

The Temperance Movement

Alcohol had been socially acceptable during the colonial era, but a social shift in the early 19th century initiated the belief that drinking was no longer acceptable.

It was more than “socially acceptable.” As we discussed last week, drinking hard liquor at every meal was a mainstay of most families in the Americas during the time period. Though that slowly started to change in the early 1800s, abstinence from alcohol is a belief that never fully took hold. Even during Prohibition, bootlegging was a common and profitable venture. If you wanted to drink alcohol during that time period (1920-1933), you could easily find a way.

Faulk words this in a way that insinuates that that drinking alcohol is not considered acceptable in the United States, but that is not accurate. Though there are a few dry counties in the South, this is not the norm for the vast majority of the country.

The temperance movement was an organized effort to encourage moderation in the consumption of alcohol or press for complete abstinence.

Marcus Morton founded the American Temperance Society in 1826 and it benefited from a renewed interest in religion and morality in America. The movement began to grow exponentially. Within 12 years it claimed more than 8,000 local groups and over 1.5 million members. By 1839, 18 temperance journals were being published. Some groups took positions on moral issues and advocated temperance with alcohol rather than abstinence. The movement split along two lines: moderates who allowed some drinking and relied on moral persuasion alone, and radicals who demanded prohibition laws to restrict or ban alcohol. Prohibitionists dominated many of the largest temperance organizations after the 1830’s, and temperance eventually became synonymous with prohibition.

“On October 6, 1830, the Kirtland Temperance Society was organized with two hundred thirty nine members…. This society at Kirtland was a most active one…. it revolutionized the social customs of the neighborhood. The Temperance Society succeeded in eliminating a distillery in Kirtland on February 1, 1833, just twenty seven days before the Latter-day Saint revelation counseling abstinence was announced, and that the distillery at Mentor, near Kirtland, was also closed at the same time.” (Brigham Young University Studies, Winter 1959, pp.39-40)

Yep, the temperance movement happened, and yes, the Kirtland Temperance Society was an active one. But just because temperance was an idea in place, doesn’t mean that that Joseph stole the idea from them. Like the Revelations in Context article points out, the Lord was preparing the people to receive the law.

And Faulk did not show any link between the Kirtland Temperance Society and the membership of the Church. How many of those 239 members were also Latter-day Saints? All of them? Any of them? I don’t know, and Faulk didn’t provide any evidence either way.

Many members of the Church during the Kirtland years were former Campbellites, and there were many more current Campbellites in the area during those same years. Alexander Campbell taught that alcohol should be avoided except during the Sacrament. Campbellites were clearly comfortable with the idea of prohibitions on alcohol, and a large number of people in the Kirtland Temperance Society surely had a Campbellite background.

Emma Smith

Joseph Smith started a training school called the School of the Prophets for the elders of the Church, which opened in Kirtland on the second floor of the Newel K. Whitney mercantile store in January 1833. Brigham Young stated that the Word of Wisdom was given in response to problems encountered while conducting those meetings:

“I think I am as well acquainted with the circumstances which led to the giving of the Word of Wisdom…When they assembled together in this room after breakfast, the first they did was to light their pipes, and, while smoking, talk about the great things of the kingdom, and spit all over the room, and as soon as the pipe was out of their mouths a large chew of tobacco would then be taken. Often when the Prophet [Joseph Smith] entered the room to give the school instructions he would find himself in a cloud of tobacco smoke. This, and the complaints of his wife at having to clean so filthy a floor, made the Prophet think upon the matter, and he inquired of the Lord relating to the conduct of the Elders in using tobacco, and the revelation known as the Word of Wisdom was the result of his inquiry.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.12, p.158)

Yep, I think most of us are familiar with this story. It sounded like a disgusting atmosphere, so I’m not surprised Emma complained about it. I would’ve complained, too.

As I said last week, revelation rarely happens in a vacuum. It usually comes in response to our sincere questions. If Emma’s distaste for the practices led to Joseph asking the Lord what He felt about those things, I have no problem with that. That’s exactly how most revelation comes about: something occurs to us, we ask, and the Lord reveals His will to us.

Timeline
- 1826 – American Temperance Society founded.
- 1828 – Joseph Smith becomes a member of the Methodist church that discouraged
- hot drinks.

Where is any evidence whatsoever that Joseph became a member of a Methodist church? Can Thomas Faulk provide the rolls for the church, showing Joseph on them for longer than the six months necessary to become a member? Or even a roll with his name on it at all? Because he certainly didn’t cite them for us.

- 1830 – Kirtland Temperance Society founded.
- 1833 – (Jan) Joseph Smith hears complaints from Emma about tobacco.
- 1833 – (Feb. 1) The Kirtland Temperance Society eliminates the distillery in Kirtland.
- 1833 – (Feb. 27) Joseph writes the Word of Wisdom limiting hot drinks, tobacco and strong drinks.

Again, Joseph did not “write” the Word of Wisdom. He received the revelation and dictated it to someone else, who wrote it down.

Even after all that, the History of the Church records that Joseph taught the Word of Wisdom but did not practice it. If the Lord really gave this revelation to Joseph, one would think he would at least follow it himself.

It wasn’t a commandment, it was a guide, and in Joseph’s day, wine and mild drinks were allowed under certain circumstances, particularly if the wine was of their own making. It was hard, distilled liquor that was forbidden.

And, as Paul H. Peterson says in his Master’s thesis, “An Historical Analysis of the Word of Wisdom”:

[I]t appears clear that Joseph Smith never interpreted the revelation as demanding total abstinence, but stressed moderation and self-control. His opposition to intemperance is evidenced by earlier statements which referred to intemperance as a “monster” and “the bane of humanity.” The Prophet almost never used tobacco, although it is recorded that once at Nauvoo he tried the faith of the Saints by smoking a cigar after having preached a discourse on the Word of Wisdom. He had no objections to using tobacco for medicinal purposes. With regard to wine and “strong drink” possibly the most accurate index to the Prophet’s position was expressed by Benjamin F. Johnson, who personally knew Joseph: “As a companion, socially, he was highly endowed; was kind, generous, mirth-loving, and at times even convivial. He was partial to a well-supplied table and he did not always refuse the win that maketh the heart glad….”

Moreover, there is some evidence that Joseph sought to avoid needless dissension among the Saints by urging moderation and charity. It would appear that some Mormons had been influenced by the fanaticism that characterized sermons of some of the radical temperance reformers, and tended to be intolerant of those with professed Word of Wisdom weaknesses. The Prophet, recognizing that the revelation must be seen in perspective with other matters and doctrines pertaining to the growth of the “Kingdom,” urged them to be slow to judge or condemn others.

So, if his aim was to teach charity and moderation while the Saints built up to living the law as a commandment, I don’t fault him for that.

We then partook of some refreshments, and our hearts were made glad with the fruit of the vine. This is according to the pattern set by our Savior Himself, and we feel disposed to patronize all the institutions of heaven.” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, January 14, 1836, vol.2, p.369)

Again, wine was not completely forbidden by the Word of Wisdom during Joseph’s day. And again, his goal—especially so soon after the revelation was given—was to urge moderation and a gradual building-up of obedience to the law.

Ordinance on the Personal Sale of Liquors – Section 1. Be it ordained by the City Council of Nauvoo, that the Mayor of the city be and is hereby authorized to see or give spirits of any quantity as he in his wisdom shall judge to be for the health and comfort, or convenience of such travelers or other persons as shall visit his house from time to time. Passed December 12, 1843. Joseph Smith, Mayor. Willard Richards, Recorder.” (History of the Church, December 12, 1843, vol.6, p.111)

Certain alcohols, such as brandy, were seen to have medicinal purposes, and to warm and heal people who were exposed to cold temperatures. This was an ordinance giving Joseph, as the Mayor of Nauvoo, the ability to care for travelers who arrived in poor shape.

“Before the jailor came in, his boy brought in some water, and said the guard wanted some wine. Joseph gave Dr. Richards two dollars to give the guard; but the guard said one was enough, and would take no more. The guard immediately sent for a bottle of wine, pipes, and two small papers of tobacco; and one of the guards brought them into the jail soon after the jailor went out. Dr. Richards uncorked the bottle, and presented a glass to Joseph, who tasted, as also Brother Taylor and the doctor, and the bottle was then given to the guard, who turned to go out.” (History of the Church, June 27, 1844, vol.6, p.616)

Again, wine was not completely forbidden. And honestly, if Joseph needed a drink while he was waiting for death in Carthage jail, I don’t personally have much problem with that.

I have never been taught in Church that abstinence from alcohol and other hot drinks were already popular concepts of time leading up to the revelation.

I am genuinely baffled by this comment. Church is for fellowshipping and learning how to draw closer to Christ. Why would anyone expect to be taught secular US history in Sunday School? We don’t even learn about the parts of US history that entwine with the Restoration, such as Manifest Destiny or the history of the First Amendment.

Why on earth would we use our limited time at Church to learn about the temperance movement in the United States? And why would any member expect that we would? That’s what high school is for.

It appears that the Word of Wisdom may not be unique instruction, but well within the context of 19th century assumptions.

My response to this comment is twofold.

First, I’m not aware of any source that claims that the counsel given in the Word of Wisdom was wholly unique and had never been suggested before. The intent wasn’t to declare counsel that nobody had ever heard before. It was to declare counsel that God recommended for physical and spiritual health, a starting point to ramp up to living the commandment.

Second, the Word of Wisdom was somewhat unique as written in D&C 89, as we discussed last week. The warnings against indulging in those substances were given in a completely different way than they were given in organizations like temperance societies. They would try to frighten people by claiming that alcohol use would lead to an entire host of diseases, among other things. The Word of Wisdom does not do that. It’s not comparable in tone or consequence to any kind of abstinence literature from that day and age.

Perhaps it was spurned by Emma’s complaints, added to by Methodist teachings and pressured by the local Kirtland Temperance Society.

If that was true, there would be evidence of it. Yet, Faulk hasn’t provided any. All he has provided are insinuations, accusations, and misrepresentations. If you’re going to accuse a prophet of being a liar and a fraud, you have to provide evidence of that if you expect me to believe you. Faulk hasn’t said anything here that’s alarming when you actually look at the evidence behind the accusations.

But, as always, the surest way to know whether or not the Word of Wisdom was revelation from the Lord is to get on your knees and ask. The Spirit will tell you, because the Spirit confirms the truth of all things. Despite what people like Thomas Faulk and Jeremy Runnells claim, that is a witness you can trust.

Remember, the Lord has graven us on the palms of His hands so that He would always remember us. In turn, we promise each week during the Sacrament to always remember Him. We are His, and He has ransomed us. As long as we remember that and follow His path, we will not be lost. His Spirit will not lie to us nor lead us astray.

The entire intent of these letters is to make you lose your trust in God. Do not let that happen. We are His children. He loves us and He wants us to learn to hear His voice and to recognize His hand in our lives. He’s there, waiting to give us shelter and guidance, but we have to ask for it. He won’t barge into our lives. We have to invite Him in. Please do. While you study these things, open the door and let Him in. Ask Him your questions, and let Him guide you to the answers. He will.

And as He does, we will “grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.”

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 13: The Early Church – The Word of Wisdom [B] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

One of the things about the online Latter-day Saint community that has always surprised me is just how often people try to argue the Word of Wisdom. As someone who was born in the covenant and raised mostly in Utah with a lot of friends who shared my beliefs, I’ve never felt the desire to drink alcohol, coffee, or tea, or to do drugs. I have my share fair of other temptations, but breaking the Word of Wisdom has never been one of them. Because of that, it’s hard for me to understand the very large focus on this topic that so many people have.

We don’t abstain from coffee, tea, or alcohol because those things are inherently sinful on their own. The Savior drank wine, after all. In fact, He was even accused of being a “winebibber,” or a drunkard. Obviously, this was an exaggerated accusation by people looking for ways to discredit His teachings, but He did still occasionally partake of wine.

That would suggest that drinking small amounts of alcohol on occasion is not necessarily a sin it and of itself. It’s not like premeditated murder, which is inherently immoral even if you don’t know there’s a commandment against it. If you don’t know that there’s a commandment against drinking alcohol and you haven’t made any covenants with God, you aren’t committing an immoral act by drinking it. However, it is a commandment to avoid it, and we promised in our baptismal covenants to obey the commandments. So, if we voluntarily break that covenant and commandment, at that point we are sinning. We’re breaking our promise to God.

That’s why it can be so hard for those who convert to the Church to obey the Word of Wisdom. Until they learned it was a commandment, they didn’t know there was anything wrong in drinking those things. That would not be an easy thing to get used to, and I certainly don’t blame anyone for struggling with it. Retraining your thought processes is a difficult thing.

So, I’m not trying to criticize those who do struggle with this topic. I’m just saying that I don’t personally struggle with it, and I’m not sure why it’s such a large focus in the online LDS community.

Over the years, I’ve seen people look for loopholes, argue that we aren’t following it as written, try to invent new and bigger restrictions, use it as a weapon against those they don’t believe are following it according to their own standards, try to argue the validity of its health benefits, try to undermine the commandment because of its history, etc. It comes up constantly on Reddit and other online forums.

If you’re busy looking for loopholes, trying to justify your use of substances you promised to forgo, that means that your heart’s not really in it. That’s something you need to work through with Heavenly Father, not by rationalizing your decisions with strangers on the internet.

We don’t follow the Word of Wisdom exactly as written in the Doctrine and Covenants because we aren’t living in 1833 anymore. We have modern revelation given to us by modern prophets who help us interpret the commandments for our day and age. What’s even the point of having modern prophets if we’re just going to shun their counsel?

The Word of Wisdom covers a lot of topics and already includes a fair number of dietary restrictions we’re commanded to live by. We don’t need to add additional restrictions to it that God hasn’t seen the need to add. If someone drinks energy drinks while working the graveyard shift at work, it’s not our job to police their behavior. Or, I’ve seen people suggest that anyone who is overweight shouldn’t be allowed into the temple. There are a lot of reasons someone might be overweight. Maybe they were in an accident and attempts to exercise leave them in excruciating pain. Or maybe they have depression that caused them to gain weight, and maybe their antidepressants are preventing them from losing the weight. Maybe it’s a side effect of their birth control or other medication. Maybe they recently gave birth. Certain autoimmune disorders and thyroid problems can also lead to weight gain. Do we really want to start spiritually punishing people because they’re following the counsel of their doctors? Or because they suffered an injury, health disorder, or a mental health crisis? Unless we’re their bishop or stake president, it’s not our job to judge someone else’s spiritual worthiness to enter the temple.

If your personal interpretation of the Word of Wisdom tells you that you need to cut sugar out of your diet, for example, that’s great. Do whatever the Holy Ghost tells you that you need to do. But you also can’t expect others to follow your interpretation. Unless you’re the prophet following the revelation of the Spirit, you don’t get to set the standards of worthiness for temple attendance. All you can do is live your life according to your own personal revelation. But that revelation is personal for a reason: it only applies to your person. The Lord will not justify us in berating someone else for not following an interpretation of the law He has not given to His prophets. They are His official mouthpieces. We are not.

A lot of people will argue the health benefits of a single glass of wine with dinner, or of drinking green tea or coffee. They suggest that drinking coffee is healthier than drinking caffeinated soda. While that may be true, health is not the only reason for obeying the Word of Wisdom. Yes, it’s a law of health. But as Elder Uchtdorf pointed out, those blessings aren’t always immediate, and they aren’t solely about physical health—they’re also about spiritual health:

I remember when I was preparing to be trained as a fighter pilot. We spent a great deal of our preliminary military training in physical exercise. I’m still not exactly sure why endless running was considered such an essential preparatory part of becoming a pilot. Nevertheless, we ran and we ran and we ran some more.

As I was running I began to notice something that, frankly, troubled me. Time and again I was being passed by men who smoked, drank, and did all manner of things that were contrary to the gospel and, in particular, to the Word of Wisdom.

I remember thinking, “Wait a minute! Aren’t I supposed to be able to run and not be weary?” But I wasweary, and I was overtaken by people who were definitely not following the Word of Wisdom. I confess, it troubled me at the time. I asked myself, was the promise true or was it not?

The answer didn’t come immediately. But eventually I learned that God’s promises are not always fulfilled as quickly as or in the way we might hope; they come according to His timing and in His ways. Years later I could see clear evidence of the temporal blessings that come to those who obey the Word of Wisdom—in addition to the spiritual blessings that come immediately from obedience to any of God’s laws. Looking back, I know for sure that the promises of the Lord, if perhaps not always swift, are always certain.

It’s also about obedience, and about standing apart from the rest of the world.

Remember, we’re constantly being taught to “be in the world, not of the world.” Abstaining from coffee and alcohol in particular set us apart from the rest of our society. There are entire cultures built around needing coffee before you can be considered awake and human in the morning, and in needing to have a few drinks in order to have fun at night or at social gatherings. That we don’t engage in those cultures marks us as being different. It sets us apart as being a peculiar people. This is a label that President Nelson has defined as being “a compliment of the highest order.”

The final verse of D&C 89 states that, “I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them.”

This is obviously an allusion to the Passover, when the destroying angel passed by those homes marked with lamb’s blood. It was a sign of their promise to obey Jehovah, designating the children of Israel as the covenant people of God. The Word of Wisdom is meant the same way, as a mark designating us as the covenant people of God today.

And, of course, the other large objection I regularly see has to do with the history of the Word of Wisdom. This looks like it’ll be Thomas Faulk’s main objection, as well.

In studying all aspects of early Church history, I often though about the Word of Wisdom and how much the revelation means in verifying Joseph Smith’s prophetic abilities.

Okay. I can’t say I’ve ever had that particular thought, because to me, verification of Joseph Smith’s prophetic abilities can only come from the Spirit. But to each his or her own, I guess. We each find different study topics interesting for our own reasons.

However, the more I researched the historical context of Word of Wisdom the more I learned that it was not unique in its instructions for health during that period. In fact, conventional ideas, movements, and additional influences likely shaped what we have come to know as “the Lord’s law of health.”

That’s not exactly true. There were certainly things like the temperance movement at play during the time period, but there were some big differences between the literature those organizations put out and the revelation that is today’s D&C 89.

When studying any of the revelations that come from the Doctrine and Covenants, it’s useful to go to the “Revelations in Context” portion of the Church’s website. In the article for D&C 89, Jed Woodworth explains:

Latter-day Saints who learn of the American health reform movements of the 1820s and 1830s may wonder how these movements relate to the Word of Wisdom. Did Joseph Smith simply draw upon ideas already existing in his environment and put them forward as revelation?

Such concerns are unwarranted. Remember that many early Latter-day Saints who took part in temperance societies viewed the Word of Wisdom as inspired counsel, “adapted to the Capacity of the weak & the weakest of Saints who are or can be called Saints.” Moreover, the revelation has no exact analog in the literature of its day. Temperance reformers often tried to frighten their hearers by linking alcohol consumption with a host of horrific diseases or social ills. The Word of Wisdom offered no such rationale. Strong drink, the revelation says simply, is “not good.” Similarly spare explanations are given for the injunctions against tobacco and hot drinks. The revelation can be understood more as an arbiter and less as a participant in the cultural debate.

Instead of arguing from a position of fear, the Word of Wisdom argues from a position of confidence and trust. The revelation invites hearers to trust in a God who has the power to deliver great rewards, spiritual and physical, in return for obedience to divine command. Those who adhere to the Word of Wisdom, the revelation says, shall “receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones & shall find wisdom & great treasures of wisdom & knowledge even hidden treasures.” These lines link body to spirit, elevating care for the body to the level of a religious principle.

In the end, some overlap between the Word of Wisdom and the health reform movement of the 19th century is to be expected. This was a time of “refreshing” (Acts 3:19), a moment in history where light and knowledge were pouring down from heaven. On the night Joseph Smith was visited by the angel Moroni for the first time, in the fall of 1823, the angel quoted a line from the book of Joel and said it was about to be fulfilled: “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh,” the passage read (Joel 2:28; emphasis added). Insofar as temperance reform made people less dependent on addictive substances, prompting humility and righteous action, the movement surely was inspired by God. “That which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually,” the Book of Mormon stated (Moroni 7:13). Rather than concerning themselves with cultural overlap, Latter-day Saints can joyously contemplate how God’s Spirit touched so many, so widely, and with such force.

I think that last point is an especially good one. We’ve talked before about how the Lord will often prepare the world for momentous Gospel moments, important historical events, and for important revelations from Heaven.

So, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that social and health reforms were happening at the same time this revelation came forth. I also don’t think it’s a coincidence that multiple countries abolished the slave trade around the same time, or that there were numerous revolutions against tyrannical governments within a few decades of the American Revolution. God was inspiring men and women to act for the betterment of society.

Revelation doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It often happens as an answer to a direction question asked of God. And why else would we ask a question unless something in our lives inspired us to ask it?

The Word of Wisdom

The Word of Wisdom was written by Joseph Smith in Kirtland, Ohio on February 27, 1833. It is currently published in section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

According to the Historical Introduction at the Joseph Smith Papers Project, Joseph dictated this revelation; he did not write it. That may seem a little pedantic on my part, but Faulk is clearly trying to insinuate that this was not a revelation, but a document produced solely by Joseph Smith. I do not consider that to be an accurate statement.

To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint.
That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.
Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving.
Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.
wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.

The portions he chose to repeat and the words he chose to emphasize here are the blueprint for the rest of this section. These are the topics he’s going to bring up in more detail as we go along.

There are several things mentioned in The Word of Wisdom that aren’t commonly observed in modern LDS culture.

Yep, because interpretation of revelation is the responsibility of the prophets and apostles. If all revelation was exactly the same for every people, culture, language, time period, location, and society across history, Adam is the only prophet we ever would have needed. The Savior’s earthly ministry wouldn’t have needed to fulfill the Law of Moses, because the Law wouldn’t have changed after His crucifixion and resurrection.

But that’s clearly not true. Revelation—and its application and adaption across cultures, continents, and centuries—changes over time. That’s one of the primary reasons we have modern-day prophets, to give us revelation relevant to our day and our society.

We are a church that allows for an open canon and modern-day revelation. We shouldn’t be doing everything exactly the same way they did them 200 or 2000 years ago. That’s not a flaw, it’s literally God’s plan for us. That’s what’s supposed to happen.

The “Word of Wisdom” label covers three distinct things today: the historical revelation, the modern day commandment portion that must be strictly followed for temple worthiness, and the modern day commandment portion that is left to individual interpretation and personal revelation. They may all fall under the same umbrella title, but they are not identical.

The revelation found in D&C 89 is similar to, but not the same as, the commandment we follow today. There are portions that do not apply to us today, such as the portion about eating fruits and vegetables in season. Modern technology means that fruits and vegetables can be grown and preserved all year long, rather than in specific seasons. There are also things included in our version today that are not found in the Doctrine and Covenants, such as illegal drugs, prescription medication, and e-cigarettes.

Our modern commandment is further split into two sections: the one detailing the things we absolutely must or must not do in order to remain temple-worthy, such as abstaining from alcohol, and the one giving guidance that is open to personal interpretation. This includes things such as how to define eating meat “sparingly,” or whether or not eating mostly whole grains is wise considering your celiac or Crohn’s diseases. Our individual circumstances in life vary, so we don’t all eat an identical diet or exercise the exact same amount in the exact same way as one another.

Are some people falling short of the ideal? Of course. We will all always fall short of the standards the Lord has set for us. That’s why we need a Savior and the Atonement in the first place. That’s also why the Savior is our Judge: He knows our hearts and our minds, and He knows our individual circumstances. He knows where we fail and where we succeed.

Verse 2 – Clearly states that the Word of Wisdom is not a commandment; yet modern members are asked if they follow it during temple interviews and will not be issued a temple recommend if the interviewer feels that they do not properly adhere.

That’s because it was formally adopted as a canonized commandment by a unanimous vote during General Conference on September 9, 1851.

Initially, it was given as a way to build up to living the law. In 1830, American consumption of distilled alcohol was at the highest point in our nation’s history. Men, women, and children were drinking whiskey at every meal every single day because unpurified water was so dangerous to drink. The per capita rate of alcohol consumption is three times that of today’s rate, and that isn’t even counting things like beer or wine, just distilled spirits. That’s the entire reason why the temperance movement sprang up in the first place. People were being raised from childhood on hard liquor instead of water.

You don’t go from an entire country drinking whiskey at every meal to complete abstinence overnight. It’s something you have to work up to. Coffee was then pushed as the substitute to whiskey, and we haven’t even mentioned tobacco use yet. Each of those things were ingrained in American society in 1833.

As President Joseph F. Smith taught in 1913:

The reason undoubtedly why the Word of Wisdom was given—as not by “commandment or restraint” was that at that time, at least, if it had been given as a commandment it would have brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation; so the Lord was merciful and gave them a chance to overcome, before He brought them under the law.

There’s also some dispute over whether or not those first three verses of D&C 89 should even be part of the revelation or not. When the revelation was first written down, those verses were included as part of the revelation. But in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, they were given as the introduction to the revelation. It wasn’t changed until the 1876 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, under Brigham Young. Joseph Smith clearly did not feel the need to include those verses as part of the revelation itself.

All of those things means that this is a shaky point to hang your objection on.

Verse 6,7,9,17 – Makes the distinction between 4 different types of drinks: wine, strong, hot and mild. Wine = ok for the sacrament if you make it yourself. Strong drinks = not ok. Hot drinks = not ok. Mild drinks = ok.

Not exactly. “Pure wine” was unfermented grape juice:

The “pure wine” in Doctrine and Covenants 89:6 “is understood to mean new or unfermented grape juice, since the Word of Wisdom declares unequivocally against the internal use of alcohol in any form.

“This interpretation is reinforced by the fact that … water was early in the history of the Church substituted for wine, for sacramental purposes. The revelation reads:

“‘For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins.’ [D&C 27:2].” (Widtsoe, Word of Wisdom, pp. 60–61.)

So, clearly, some of those verses didn’t mean what Faulk seems to think they meant.

And, again, the only interpretation of the Word of Wisdom that matters in our lives today is the one given by modern-day prophets and apostles.

Verse 9 – Mentions “hot drinks.” What exactly does “hot drinks” refer to? Apostle George Q. Cannon stated, “We are told, and very plainly too, that hot drinks – tea, coffee, chocolate, cocoa and all drinks of this kind are not good for man.… We must not permit them to drink liquor or hot drinks, or hot soups or to use tobacco or other articles that are injurious.” (George Q. Cannon, General Conference, April 7, 1868, Journal of Discourses, vol.12)

That was one man’s opinion, and not the opinion given by nearly every single other prophet and apostle over the years. Joseph and Hyrum Smith both defined “hot drinks” as coffee and tea, not cocoa, hot chocolate, or soup. That is the same definition repeated by multiple prophets and apostles ever since.

We have been taught repeatedly that doctrine is only considered binding when it is taught by multiple apostles and prophets across several years, not one opinion given one time by one person.

Verse 11 – Only eat produce in their proper season.

We addressed this already—it doesn’t make any sense in our day and age with modern refrigeration technology and agricultural developments.

Verse 12,13 – Meat should only be eaten in the winter or during a famine.

The Doctrine and Covenants student manual disagrees with this interpretation in today’s day and age:

This verse has caused some to ask if meat should be eaten in the summer. Meat has more calories than fruits and vegetables, which some individuals may need fewer of in summer than winter. Also, before fruits and vegetables could be preserved, people often did not have enough other food to eat in winter. Spoiled meat can be fatal if eaten, and in former times meat spoiled more readily in summer than winter. Modern methods of refrigeration now make it possible to preserve meat in any season. The key word with respect to the use of meat is sparingly.

Again, modern refrigeration technology means this section is obsolete, because we can safely keep meat fresh during the hot summer months.

Verse 17 – Mild drinks made from barley area ok. What drinks are made from barley? Beer.

Beer is not the only drink made from barley. Additionally, a popular drink in 18th and 19th Century America was something called “small beer,” which is beer with a very low alcohol content around 1-2%. That means it has about as much alcohol in it as kombucha does. This may be what was meant more than standard beer, but beer and wine also both have lower alcohol content than hard liquor does.

Either way, all alcohol is against the current Word of Wisdom.

It seems that the modern Church has settled on coffee, tea, alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs as the new interpretation.

This is not “the new interpretation.” This has been the interpretation of the Word of Wisdom since Heber J. Grant spoke about it in 1922. That was over a century ago.

But according to the text of the Word of Wisdom, members should refrain from hot drinks of all kinds, chocolate and soups included.

That’s not what the text says at all. Can anyone find hot chocolate or soup mentioned anywhere in D&C 89?

Didn’t think so.

That was one man’s definition, and while you could probably find other leaders who agreed with him, this is not and never has been the standard definition of “hot drinks.” It has always been defined as “coffee and tea,” right from the beginning. Within just a few years of the revelation being given, both Joseph and Hyrum Smith defined the term as referring specifically to coffee and tea.

Alcohol is not outright banned, but only strong drinks (hard liquor).

In the original revelation, yes. But again, it was given in its original form as a way to ramp up to the modern form. The people had to be eased into it because otherwise, many early Saints would have been condemned. It takes time to change a society’s behavior.

In addition, according to the Word of Wisdom, all members should be vegetarian most of the year.

Nope. “Sparingly” does not mean “none at all.”

John A. Widtsoe specifically refutes this idea:

“The Word of Wisdom is not a system of vegetarianism. Clearly, meat is permitted. Naturally, that includes animal products, less subject than meat to putrefactive and other disturbances, such as eggs, milk, and cheese. These products cannot be excluded simply because they are not mentioned specifically. By that token most of our foodstuffs could not be eaten.”

And D&C 49:18-19 states plainly:

And whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God;

For, behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance.

According to the Lord Himself, a leader who tells people that they should be vegetarian is a sign that that person is not ordained of God. Animals were put on this earth for our use.

Does this mean you should go the opposite route and eat tons of meat? Also no. Unless your doctor puts you on a high-protein diet to lose weight, you should prayerfully consider what eating meat “sparingly” means in today’s society, and adjust your diet accordingly.

We still need to be good stewards of the animals under our care. Despite what the internet constantly tells us, we don’t actually need to add bacon to everything.

These parts have been reinterpreted to change the original intent.

Again, this is what is supposed to happen in a church with ongoing revelation and an open canon. This is a feature of the Church, not a bug. Why would you want to belong to a church where the leaders don’t receive revelation from God?

Now that we’re able to fully live the Word of Wisdom without condemning the bulk of the membership, that’s what we’re expected to do. It’s the difference between living the lower law and the higher law.

Remember, by obeying the Word of Wisdom as outlined by our current leaders, we’re marked as the covenant children of God. We’re set apart from the world. What the world looked in like 1833 and what it looks like today are very different. We need to adjust accordingly, and our prophets have shown us the way to do that.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 12: The Early Church – The Word of Wisdom [A] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This past weekend, we were blessed to hear from the prophets and some of our other church leaders during General Conference, and Sunday is Easter. The messages to focus on our Savior, avoid contention, and increase our ability to receive personal revelation, including from our patriarchal blessings, hit me especially hard this year. The very nature of this series, and of the previous one I did, means that I am wallowing in contention and things that cause the Spirit to flee. Though the tone of this letter is less overtly hostile than that of the CES Letter, the intent and the manipulations behind the words are identical. Because I’m surrounding myself with this kind of thing, sometimes it does diminish my capacity for personal revelation. It also means that sometimes, I don’t react with as much compassion and empathy as I’d like to.

This kind of material stirs up ill feelings in me toward the authors and that has a tendency to spread to other situations. There was a notable example just this past week. I went through a difficult experience that left me very upset and stressed out. With my emotions heightened, I didn’t react with as much understanding and grace as I probably should have. Because I learned of it shortly after working on last week’s post, that fed into how I was feeling and made it worse than it otherwise would have been. Conference was the balm of Gilead that I needed.

More than that, I was reminded again just how important it is to have the Spirit with us, guiding us and testifying of the truth, during these difficult times. It’s even more vital to have His influence with you when you’re reading and studying this kind of material.

Today’s topic is a big, full-color illustration of this principle. There’s a perfectly rational explanation for everything we’re about to discuss, but the ability to hear the Spirit and discern fact from fiction is key.

I am, of course, talking about the Kinderhook Plates.

To give a brief overview, a group of men in Kinderhook, Illinois—a small town located about 70 miles south of Nauvoo—forged a set of six small, metal, bell-shaped plates and scratched images on them. They then buried them in the ground and staged a dig where they “found” them. The plates made the papers and generated a fair bit of interest. In the audience that day happened to be a few members of the Church who eventually took the plates up to Joseph to see if he could translate them.

Joseph examined them in the presence of several other people, consulted a few resources, and gave a few remarks about them and their possible meaning. There is no further mention of them in Latter-day Saint history for decades, until a short mention of them ended up in what eventually became B.H. Roberts’s History of the Church compilation.

A few of those involved admitted to it being a hoax, but this wasn’t definitively proven until 1980. Until that time, the plates were not well-known, though several critics did point to them and some past Church leaders and historians did defend them as being real. Since 1980, they’ve been a much more common source of attack against the Church. We’ll discuss everything in more detail as we go along, but that’s the gist of it.

The Kinderhook Plates are six brass plates engraved by men from Illinois for the purpose of exposing Joseph Smith as someone who could not divinely translate ancient writings. This chapter covers the background, Joseph’s translation, the forgery claim, the 1953 test results, and the 1980 test results.

Not exactly. That was the common thought for a long time, and in fact, I said something similar when I responded to the CES Letter on this topic. But Mark Ashurst-McGee reached out to share some additional research he’d done with Don Bradley for a book titled Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith’s Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity. Their chapter is titled “’President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Joseph Smith and the Mistranslation of the Kinderhook Plates,” and is probably the best source of information about this subject to date.

As they explain:

…[W]hile Fugate proudly admitted to being involved in the forging and planting of the plates, he did not boast of any ruse to get to the plates delivered to Smith. Instead he recounted that “the Mormons wanted to take the plates to Joe Smith, but we refused to let them go.” …One of Fugate’s sons, who related that the joke was well-known within his family, described the Kinderhook hoax not as an elaborate trap meant to ensnare the Mormon prophet upriver in Nauvoo, but rather “a little plan by which to startle the natives.” … The hoax was apparently only a community affair, not the well-laid trap for Joseph Smith that almost all historians, producers of anti-Mormon literature, Mormon apologists, and other writers have assumed. As Fugate explained, “the plates were made simply for a joke”—a little prank on the neighbors.

So, it was meant to be a prank, but not one made on Joseph. It had nothing to do with “exposing Joseph Smith as someone who could not divinely translate ancient writings.” They were just trying to play a joke on their community, and then it spiraled out to be a bigger issue than they’d anticipated.

Background

“On April 23, 1843, a group of men excavated an old earth mound just outside the town of Kinderhook, Illinois, and came up with a most interesting find. The excavation was headed by Robert Wiley, a local merchant. After digging down about twelve feet, they came upon “fire burned rock, charcoal, ashes, and badly decomposed human bones. Near the [corner] a bundle was found that consisted of six plates of brass of a bell shape, each having a hole near the small end, a ring through them all and clasped with two clasps. The plates appeared to have some kind of writing on them but were so badly oxidized they could not be clearly distinguished until Dr. W. P. Harris, MD, treated them with a dilute solution of sulphuric acid which made them perfectly clear. They were completely covered with “hieroglyphics” on both sides. A certificate stating the facts of the find was drawn up and signed by nine of the men present and sent to nearby newspapers.” (Welby W. Ricks, The Kinderhook Plates, The Improvement Era, September 19, 1962)

This information is taken from an article from the old Improvement Era magazine, found on pages 636-637 and then continued on pages 656-660. Between B.H. Roberts defending the plates in the History of the Church and elsewhere, and when they were confirmed a hoax in 1980, this Improvement Era article from 1962 is the only defense of the plates in any official Church publication that I am aware of.

There were a few other mentions here and there. For example, Mark E. Peterson mentioned them briefly in a book in 1979, before they were confirmed a hoax, and just said that they were generally considered to be genuine due to the information contained in this Improvement Era article. However, none of these mentions were in official Church publications.

The article was written because two professional engravers examined the sole remaining plate and declared that the symbols were engraved, not etched with acid. Etching would prove them false, as that method was relatively new in 1843. Because they were confirmed engraved at that time, it was a sign that they were genuine, and the author clearly believed that they were.

Translation

This passage details Joseph’s experience with the plates.

“I insert facsimiles of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, May 1, 1843, vol.5 p.372)

Joseph claimed to translate the characters on the plates. He stated that the body they were found with was descended from Ham.

Nope. As I’ve mentioned before, the History of the Church was written to sound as though Joseph was speaking, when in reality, the comments were taken from multiple different sources and authors.

This bit was actually modified from William Clayton’s personal diary entry from May 1, 1843. Rather than saying “I have translated a portion,” it actually said, “President Joseph has translated a portion.”

Brigham Young was also with Joseph at the time he was studying the plates and recorded in his own journal:

“May 3rd 1843 I took this [sketch at right] at Joseph Smiths house found near Quincy.”

Yes, this one’s correct, aside from some typos. In addition to Brigham Young and William Clayton, we have several other contemporary mentions of the Kinderhook Plates. Notably, Willard Richards discussed it in Joseph’s own journal, though it only said that he sent for his Hebrew Bible and lexicon for research. The journal entry didn’t discuss any translation attempts.

Other contemporary mentions include: one from Nauvoo resident Charlotte Haven, who said that she heard from an anonymous friend that Joseph said the characters looked similar to those on the Book of Mormon, and that with God’s help he might be able to translate them; a letter from Parley P. Pratt to his cousin John Van Cott, in which he said that the writing was Egyptian and that Joseph had compared them to the papyrus rolls; a letter from the editor of the Times and Seasons (at that time, John Taylor) in which it was said that Joseph saw the plates and “what his opinion concerning them is, we have not yet ascertained”; and an anonymous letter to the New York Herald thought to be from Sylvester Emmons in which it says that Joseph compared the symbols to his Egyptian Alphabet papers. Other accounts can be found at FAIR.

There is no record of Joseph ever having personally said that the Kinderhook Plates were genuine or that he was able to translate them.

But what we do have is much more interesting: multiple sources saying that Joseph consulted various resources such as his Egyptian Alphabet papers, the papyrus rolls, and his Hebrew Bible and lexicon while he examined the plates.

You see, what it actually appears Joseph did was not to translate the plates by the gift and power of God, the way he did with the golden plates or the Egyptian papyri. Joseph, an avid but not fluent student of ancient languages, pulled out some of his books and papers and compared the symbols on the Kinderhook Plates to them.

He found one image on one plate that looked a bit like a deconstructed image in the GAEL (the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language book found among the Kirtland Egyptian Papers), and described what it would mean if the definition was accurate. Mormonr has a handy image showing this, which you can see here.

The definition given beside the dish symbol in the GAEL says it means “honor by birth, kingly power by the line of Pharaoh, possession by birth, one who reigns upon his throne universally — possessor of heaven and earth and of the blessings of the earth.”

This fits in with Abraham 1:21, which says:

Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

What did the definition supposedly given by Joseph say? That the owner of the plates seemed to be:

“a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and that he received his Kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.”

That is word-for-word what you get when you combine the GAEL definition with Abraham 1:21. That was Joseph’s great translation effort. He compared the symbols to the ones he’d already copied down, found one that looked kind of similar, and simply read off the definition he’d come up with from the GAEL. He never claimed divine revelation for the translation, he never said it came by the power of God, he simply compared the symbols to ones he already had on hand.

The Forgery Claim

In a letter, Wilbur Fugate, one of the men present during the excavation, claimed to have helped craft the plates.

“I received your letter in regard to those plates, and will say in answer that they are a humbug, gotten up by Robert Wiley, Bridge Whitton and myself…None of the nine persons who signed the certificate knew the secret, except, Wiley and I. We read in Pratt’s prophecy that “Truth is yet to spring up out of the earth.” We concluded to prove the prophecy by way of a joke. We soon made our plans and executed them, Bridge Whitton cut them out of some pieces of copper; Wiley and I made the hieroglyphics by making impressions on beeswax and filling them with acid and putting it on the plates. When they were finished we put them together with rust made of nitric acid, old iron and lead, and bound them with a piece of hoop iron, covering them completely with the rust.

Our plans worked admirably. A certain Sunday was appointed for digging. The night before, Wiley went to the Mound where he had previously dug to the depth of about eight feet, there being a flat rock that sounded hollow beneath, and put them under it. On the following morning quite a number of citizens were there to assist in the search, there being two Mormon elders present (Marsh and Sharp). The rock was soon removed, but some time elapsed before the plates were discovered. I finally picked them up and exclaimed, “A piece of pot metal!” Fayette Grubb snatched them from me and struck them against the rock and they fell to pieces. Dr. Harris examined them and said they had hieroglyphics on them. He took acid and removed the rust and they were soon out on exhibition.” (Letter of Wilbur Fugate to James T. Cobb, 8 April 1878, Wisconsin Historical Society, Madison, WI)

While this does appear to be the official date of the letter, it’s commonly attributed to June 30, 1879, when Fugate was deposed. If you see the two different dates and get confused, that’s why. The date is the least interesting thing about it, though. It goes through all of the details of how the hoax was perpetrated and is a short but fascinating read.

After the publication of this letter in W.W. Wyl’s anti-LDs Mormon Portraits, the Kinderhook Plates and Joseph’s examination of them became a subject of controversy. It wasn’t a common avenue of attack, but it was a persistent one until 1980. That’s when the criticisms really began to take off.

Faithful LDS members disregarded Fulgate’s story and held to Joseph’s translation of the plates and maintained that the plates were in fact ancient artifacts.

Yeah, some definitely did, especially after the engravers mistakenly confirmed that they were genuine. But even among Latter-day Saints, they weren’t really a topic of much knowledge or interest during the 20th Century.

1953 Test Results

Addressing the forgery claim of Wilbur Fugate, the Church used two professional engravers to examine the Kinderhook plates. The Improvement Era article goes on to state:

“Mr. Fugate said Wiley and he had etched the plates. Yet two professional engraves were invited to view the plates in 1953 and give their unbiased opinion about them – which they did freely and without charge. They stated clearly that the plate was engraved with a pointed instrument.”

“The plates are now back in their original category of genuine. What scholars may learn from this ancient record in future years or what may be translated by divine power is an exciting thought to contemplate. This much remains. Joseph Smith, Jun., stands as a true prophet and translator of ancient records by divine means and all the world is invited to investigate the truth which has sprung out of the earth not only of the Kinderhook plates, but of the Book of Mormon as well.” (Welby W. Ricks, The Kinderhook Plates, The Improvement Era. September 19, 1962)

The assessment was that the plates were authentic and Joseph was a true prophet. As late as the printing of this 1962 article, every prophet from Joseph Smith to David O. McKay believed the plates to be authentic.

I think it’s a stretch to say that “every prophet from Joseph Smith to David O. McKay believed the plates to be authentic.” We can’t confirm that at all. Most of the prophets never mentioned them. Only about 3-4 of them ever did. Even Joseph himself apparently asked that the plates be authenticated before he continued to try to translate them.

But even if they all did, it doesn’t matter much to me. I don’t expect my leaders to be perfect. They’re human beings, not divine ones, and as such, they make mistakes just like I do. Sometimes, they’re wrong. That doesn’t change their calling from God. It just means that I need to cut them some slack occasionally and, like it says in the Doctrine and Covenants, receive their words in all patience and faith.

1980 Test Results

It wasn’t until 1980, that LDS professor Stanley P. Kimball was able to secure permission to perform more scientific testing on the plates. In the August 1981 Ensign, the Church published an article detailing the processes, results and conclusion.

Yes. It’s an interesting article, though more research has since been done and some parts of it are badly out of date.

“These tests, involving some very sophisticated analytical techniques, were performed by Professor D. Lynn Johnson of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Northwestern University.

Dr. Johnson used a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to examine the grooves that form the characters on the plate to determine whether they were cut or scratched with a tool or whether they were etched with acid. A scanning Auger microprobe (SAM) was used to detect any nitrogen residues that might have been left in the grooves as a result of etching with nitric acid.

The irregular, grainy texture characteristic of acid etching is evident, not a striated surface that would have been produced by an engraving tool. A thorough SEM examination of the characters on the plate brought Dr. Johnson to the conclusion that the characters on the plate were indeed prepared by acid etching, not by any form of tooling, scratching, or cutting.

It became apparent during the SEM study that a residue of some kind was present in some of the grooves. The scanning Auger microprobe (SAM) was used to analyze these residues. A clear indication of nitrogen was detected, which would be consistent with a copper nitrate residue and could indicate that nitric acid was used in the etching, as those who reportedly originated the deception had claimed.”

“A recent electronic and chemical analysis of a metal plate (one of six original plates) brought in 1843 to the Prophet Joseph Smith in Nauvoo, Illinois, appears to solve a previously unanswered question in Church history, helping to further evidence that the plate is what its producers later said it was—a nineteenth-century attempt to lure Joseph Smith into making a translation of ancient-looking characters that had been etched into the plates. (Stanley P. Kimball, Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax, Ensign, 1981)

Like I said, interesting stuff! Science is cool, you guys. Though, again, that line about it being a hoax directed squarely at Joseph instead of at the community or members of the Church at large has since been shown to likely be incorrect.

Context
Wilbur Fugate, Robert Wiley, and Bridge Whitton fashioned fake ancient plates out of copper and iron. Using acid, they etched counterfeit hieroglyphics.

Yep. This is true.

The plates were taken to Joseph Smith where he pronounced them genuine and translated the “ancient characters.”

Not exactly. There’s no actual evidence he “pronounced them genuine” or that he ever personally described what he did as “translating.” It’s also clear that it was an attempted translation of only one “ancient character.”

The entire body of the Church believed in the authenticity of the plates.

Eh, again, I think that’s a stretch. Some certainly did, including some noted historical members and leaders. But I’m pretty sure that most of that “entire body of the Church” had never heard of them and didn’t have any idea whether they were authentic or not. Even today, there are many members who have never heard of them, particularly those outside of the United States.

And, frankly, I don’t know that the “entire body of the Church” has ever unanimously agreed on anything.

Wilbur Fugate claimed he, Wiley and Whitton made the plates as a joke.

Yep. He wasn’t the only one. Fugate’s son also spoke out at one point, and allegedly so did Bridge Whitten, one of the conspirators. That one can’t be confirmed because it was found in a letter by one of the witnesses at the dig, a W.P. Harris. Harris claimed in an 1855 letter that Whitten had confessed to him that it was a hoax, but that letter wasn’t found until 1912.

A 1953 observation claims the plates are genuine; reinforcing the Church’s position.

True—and the two engravers who made that observation were not LDS and had nothing to gain by lying about the matter.

After further scientific testing, it was concluded that the Kinderhook Plates were absolutely not genuine.

Also true, as we went over.

The fraudulent Kinderhook plates raise several troubling concerns. How could the prophet Joseph Smith believe they were authentic and claim to have translated the symbols as an account of a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt?

There is no evidence that Joseph ever claimed they were genuine, and in fact, according to Fugate’s own letter, there is evidence to suggest that he wanted them authenticated:

“We understood Jo Smith said [the plates] would make a book of 1200 pages but he would not agree to translate them until they were sent to the Antiquarian society at Philadelphia, France, and England.”

I’m not sure how those six tiny plates were supposed to create a book of 1200 pages, but that was probably local rumor and not anything official. So, again, we can’t corroborate this, but it is a secondhand account of Joseph’s intentions by one of the guys who fabricated the plates.

This also puts into question Joseph’s translations of the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham characters.

No, it doesn’t. Joseph never claimed to translate the Kinderhook Plates by any revelatory means. We don’t even have record of him claiming to have translated them at all. All evidence shows that Joseph spent a week or two looking over them curiously, and then never mentioned them again. He never gave an explanation for that, so it’s unclear why he dropped them. According to the Church History Topic page on this topic:

Whether Joseph suspected the forgery, thought of attempting a revelatory translation but experienced a “stupor of thought,” or merely took a scholarly interest in the purported ancient writings (like other amateur linguists of the time) remains unconfirmed by historical accounts. Whatever he thought of the plates, he quickly lost interest in them.

We don’t know why he lost interest in them. But we do know that there is no account at all of Joseph ever trying to translate the Kinderhook Plates by the gift and power of God. No firsthand accounts, and no second- or thirdhand accounts, either. All of the accounts only say that he consulted other resources while examining the plates. There is no doubt he was interested in them, and there’s no doubt he made a preliminary examination of them. There is no doubt that he found a symbol that looked similar and said “Hey, this might be what this means.” But we don’t have his exact words on that occasion, and he never took it any farther than that.

Joseph, though trying to learn ancient languages, could not translate by ordinary means. He did not have that ability. He didn’t speak the languages he was translating from. He had to translate through the Spirit and through the power of God, because he did not have that ability on his own.

But when he looked at the Kinderhook Plates, he didn’t attempt a revelatory translation. He attempted a secular one, and then quickly abandoned it. As it says at Book of Mormon Central:

Joseph took preliminary steps toward an ordinary **translation by comparing the squiggles on these plates to other ancient writings he was familiar with. This apparently produced no findings of any significance. If he ever sought out a revelatory translation, he evidently never received or claimed to have received one.

The evidence from Joseph Smith’s journal for early May 1843 indicates that, “whatever JS initially thought about the plates, he soon lost interest in them.” The numerous entries in Joseph’s journal indicate that Joseph was busy entertaining several guests, holding court, attending business and religious meetings, overseeing economic transactions, and much more—but only one brief mention of the Kinderhook Plates is made. Some evidence even suggests Joseph wanted them examined by the Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, so perhaps Joseph even suspected their fraudulence or had concluded that they were not religiously significant….

While some critics try to use this story as evidence that everything about Joseph Smith was a fraud, the historical evidence suggests that Joseph ultimately did not fall for the hoax—he never tried to purchase the plates, hire scribes, and go into translation mode, like he did with the ancient Egyptian papyri he had purchased in Ohio. He never produced a “Book of Kinderhook.” Whatever Joseph Smith may have thought of the Kinderhook plates, the Lord could not be fooled. God would not and did not reveal a translation of these bogus artifacts.

The more universal message from the Kinderhook incident is that Joseph’s ability to translate … was a gift from God, and only worked when God enabled him to do His will.

I also think this episode speaks volumes in another way: as an evidence of the Book of Mormon.

If Joseph was faking it all along, why didn’t he come up with a fake translation? They were tiny plates and there were only a handful of them. All he needed to do was invent a simple two-page letter or history supposedly from the author. It would’ve been easy if he’d also faked the entire Book of Abraham, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price. But he didn’t. Why not?

And, more importantly, if Joseph perpetrated his own hoax with the Book of Mormon, why did he initially believe he could attempt a translation of the Kinderhook Plates? To me, that actually says that he didn’t fake the gold plates. He genuinely believed that it was possible that metal plates found buried in the ground in a strange language could be translated into scripture because it had happened to him before.

This incident is not the smoking gun critics seem to think it is. In fact, to me, it’s a strong testament of the truthfulness and historicity of the Book of Mormon and of Joseph’s divine call as the prophet of the Restoration. Those are things that the Holy Ghost continually reaffirms to me. And when I study and ponder this incident, the Spirit whispers to me that this is not evidence of Joseph being a fraud. It’s evidence that he’s not one.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 11: The Early Church – The Kinderhook Plates appeared first on FAIR.

Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith's Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity

View Details

General Conference is now just 2 days away! It will be held April 1-2, and will have morning and afternoon sessions on Saturday and Sunday, along with an evening session for everyone on Saturday. More information is available here.

In preparation, we are doing a daily countdown with posts from different people explaining how they feel about General Conference, how they prepare, tips for getting the most out of it, how to deal with associated social media posts, etc.

Musings on General Conferenceby Trevor Holyoak

My earliest memories of General Conference are of me and my siblings playing with Legos while our parents tried to watch (and listen) in the same room. I knew it was our church leaders and prophet speaking, but to me it was just an opportunity to not have to go to church in person. As I got older, I paid a little more attention – particularly when my dad would take me to the stake center to watch the Priesthood session, and the times I took a date to Temple Square to watch it – but I didn’t start fully appreciating it until my mission. As a missionary, I fell in love with General Conference. I watched all the sessions all the way through for the first time in my life. Part of it may be that I realized how special this was for the members I watched it with – they spent the entire day at the church, and had a picnic together between sessions – but I think it was the first time I realized just what it was that I was watching: that these leaders were called of God to lead His church, and they were telling us what we needed to hear at that moment.

Since then, I have tried to watch as much of General Conference live as I can. And I have tried to set an example for our children, who have impressed me with being much more interested than I was at their age. I remember one of my daughters, when she was maybe 5 years old, watching Pres. Hinckley talk and asking if he could see us through the TV. When they became old enough to go to Seminary, they began keeping notes. It was probably by assignment, which made me really appreciate their Seminary teachers, but it became a habit that they still do. And I was extremely impressed the time my teenage son invited his friends over to watch a Saturday afternoon session, and they actually sat quietly – somewhat reverently even – and watched together.

I personally have never kept actual notes the way my children do, but I have gotten in the habit of going on Twitter and sending out quotes and impressions throughout a session or two. And I have found myself referring back to them later. As a family we also try to watch one General Conference talk a week during the 6 months between them. It’s funny how I couldn’t necessarily tell you offhand what a particular leader said, but once their talk starts playing, it tends to come flooding back.

I asked my wife if she wanted to say anything for this, and she said all she needs is cinnamon rolls and pajamas. She really enjoys the family time at home as we watch our leaders speak. It is also her that keeps us going on watching talks between Conferences.

One of the talks that I remember most was by Pres. Oaks on “Healing the Sick” in April 2010. Last year I enjoyed reading a biography of him that had just come out, and learned some background related to that talk. He seems to have gained faith in the power of the priesthood early in his life. His father was a doctor and someone once “asked him if he was going to grow up to be a doctor like his father and heal people. ‘No,’ he answered. He was going to be a ‘high priest like my father and bless babies.’” Later, when he was ten years old, he had an experience that “has been a significant influence on my faith in the power of the priesthood.” When he was staying with his grandfather, his younger cousin fell unnoticed into an irrigation ditch and wasn’t found for 20 or 30 minutes. He had been floating facedown and was dead. His grandfather gave him a blessing and he was revived. “‘He suffered no after-effects, filling a mission to Australia, marrying a lovely girl, and living an exemplary life as a Latter-day Saint husband and father. I am witness,’ Dallin concluded, ‘to the miracle of his childhood death and restoration.’” [1]

I appreciate how Pres. Oaks always states things very clearly. Unfortunately, some people don’t seem to appreciate that as much. It should be known that, according to the biography previously mentioned, “Just as he had before his call to the apostleship, he relied heavily on revelation to guide him in what he said to audiences after he became a member of the Twelve. He felt the heavy responsibility of spiritually feeding those who came–or tuned in–to hear him, and he wanted to align his will with God’s in selecting, developing, and addressing topics of importance in advancing the Lord’s purposes.” [2]

It seems to have become common recently for people to expect changes to be announced more frequently in General Conference under Pres. Nelson than in the past. Regarding this, Pres. Oaks said, “Change is almost always exciting… But as I have thought about the many recent changes in the Church, I have felt some caution. The changes we have experienced in our Church meetings and policies should help us, but by themselves they won’t get our members to where our Heavenly Father wants us to be. The changes that make a difference to our position on the covenant path are not changes in Church policies or practices, but the changes we make in our own desires and actions.” [3]

I look forward to watching General Conference this weekend. It always goes by way too quickly, and leaves me wanting more of the guidance and the Spirit that I feel. We are truly blessed to be living in a time when such guidance from church leaders is so accessible. I pray that I can receive what is said in the spirit it was intended, and make those changes in my life that will bring me closer to my Heavenly Father as I am inspired to do so.

_______________________________________________

Here are some comments from a few other FAIR volunteers:

In one sense, I am afraid I don’t to a lot in terms of formal preparation.

I make sure I have set aside uninterrupted time to watch it.

while I try to frequently attune to the Lord in my daily doings, I make a particular effort to try to be receptive during the presentations.
3.I keep in mind that many of the presenters have been praying and trying to be in tune during their preparation and I try to pick-up on that aspect as they are speaking.

I am very aware of the spiritual entrapments of our daily world and am particularly interested in the particular take the General Authorities emphasize at that moment.

Over the years, I have found I more and more keep thinking, “This conference is even better than the last, and the last was great”. Wondering, are they getting better or am I changing?

Stephen Johnsen

I ponder on the things from the last conference, if there are any changes we have managed to make.

I ponder “where we are now,”, what can I expect to hear and find out that my thoughts were wrong or right.

I study the scriptures and pray that I can understand what is being said.

Today I listen to the conference in my room with earphones with the language I wish and my husband listens in his room with his earphones in Norwegian. I need a pen and paper to write down the important or good messages I find in the speeches.

I may think a speech is not “good”… but I think maybe it was good for someone else, I am not the only listener. I am aware that some things may perch my heart, but that is not the fault of the conference or the speaker, but mine and maybe it is right there that I should try to do something. I think we should try to help the person [with negative thoughts] to understand or at least to bear the conflict they have got. There is a difference between misunderstanding something or not having enough knowledge to know your thoughts are wrong against swallowing willfully anti stuff. And even in the last one we can do miracles by changing the surroundings. Like in Montessori pedagogy the environment is highly important and by changing the environment you can change the behaviour of a child.

Maija-Liisa Årsnes, Norway

I have taken to heart something an elders quorum president told me, which is determine an area of my life where I need improvement and prayerfully ask a question related to that with the expectation it will be answered during General Conference. It gets me praying and being mindful of General Conference as well as areas where I can improve.

When it comes to negative peer interactions. I simply reiterate the truths I know. Nothing else I feel I can do.

K. Tommie Martin

[1] Turley, R. E., Jr. (2021, March 1). In the Hands of the Lord: The Life of Dallin H. Oaks. Deseret Book Co., 7, 15, and 17. My full review is here.

[2] Ibid., 322.

[3] Ibid., 361.

Trevor Holyoak is the Vice President of FAIR. He has been actively involved with FAIR for many years and received the John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award in 2014. He graduated magna cum laude from Weber State University with a BS in computer science and now works as a programmer and systems administrator. He is currently serving as a stake emergency preparedness director and in the leadership of the Utah Valley Amateur Radio Club. He and his wife have five children and live in Cedar Hills, Utah.

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 2 Days! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Before we get started, I need to make a quick correction on last week’s post. I misread something and gave you guys some inaccurate information. Regarding a John Whitmer interview that was published after his death, I said that his brother David disputed the interview. David Whitmer actually disputed the contents of his own interview given that same year to the same person. Sorry for the mix-up!

However, John’s interview does still conflict with every other account given on how the Eight Witnesses saw the plates. Therefore, it should still be taken with a grain of salt—particularly since David claimed his interviewer reported things he never actually said. We’ll be discussing this disputed interview shortly.

The two topics at the end of this Witnesses section have nothing at all to do with one another. To be honest, I don’t even know why Faulk placed either of them under the “Witnesses” subtopic. So, my apologies if this post comes across as disjointed. I’m not sure yet how to transition from one topic to the next, so we’ll just run with it and see what happens.

The first topic on the agenda today is what happened to the plates after the translation was complete:

Where Are The Plates Now?

After completing the Book of Mormon Joseph had no more use of the plates and he gave up possession of them.

It’s a small thing to nitpick, but I don’t know that I’d have personally phrased in it quite that way. I’m sure Joseph still had plenty of use for them, and they would’ve been a handy evidence of what he was saying. But the plates did bring him great hardship, so I can also see why he may have been relieved to hand them back over once and for all.

Wilford Woodruff records,

“President Young said in relation to Joseph Smith returning the plates of the Book of Mormon, that he did not return them to the box from where he had received them. But he went into a cave in the Hill Cumorah with Oliver Cowdery and deposited those plates upon a table.” (Wilford Woodruff, Leaves From My Journal, December 11, 1869)

Before discussing this journal entry, there are some sourcing issues here. Leaves From My Journal is not organized by date, but by topic. A search of the full text from Project Gutenberg shows that the words “Hill Cumorah” do not appear anywhere in this book, so this is not the source where this quote was taken from. It does come from Wilford Woodruff’s journal from December of 1869, but it’s unclear where Faulk lifted this quote from.

The full quote actually reads as follows:

President Young said in relation to Joseph Smith returning the Plates of the Book of Mormon that He did not returne them to the Box from where He had Received But He went im a cave in the Hill Comoro with Oliver Cowdry & deposited those plates upon a table or shelf & in that room were deposited a large amount of gold plates containing sacred records & when they first visited that Room the sword of Laban was Hanging upon the wall & when they last visited it, the sword was drawn from the scabbard & lew upon da table & a Messenger who was the keeper of the room informed them that that sword would never be returned to its scabbard untill the Kingdom of God was Esstablished upon the Earth & untill it reigned triumphant over Evry Enemy Joseph Smith said that Cave contained tons of choice Treaas~~s~~ures & records [sic]

There are numerous such accounts from early Saints, and Faulk follows this excerpt with one from that disputed David Whitmer interview given in 1878:

In an interview, David Whitmer recalls:

“Interviewer – Where are the plates now?

Whitmer – In a cave, where the angel has hidden them up till the time arrives when the plates, which are sealed, shall be translated. God will yet raise up a mighty one, who shall do his work till it is finished and Jesus comes again.

Interviewer – Where is that cave?

Whitmer – In the State of New York.” (David Whitmer, Deseret Evening News, August 16, 1878)

The original letter asking David questions about this interview has been lost to time. All we have is his response, so it’s not clear which facts are in dispute:

“As to what you Say about the correspondence published by P Wilhelm Poulson M.D. August 20th, 1878. I surely did not make the Statement which you Say he reports me to have made, for it is not according to the facts. And I have always in the fear of God, tried to give a true statement to the best of my recollection in regard to all matters which I have attempted to Explain. And I do not now remember of talking to Mr Poulson on the subject referred to.”

What that subject is, we don’t know. There’s a bit in the interview about Martin Harris that conflicts with every other account of the Three Witnesses, so I assume it’s probably that portion, but Whitmer never said so directly. It’s just a guess.

Because we don’t know what he disputed, we need to treat this entire interview with caution. And since Poulson’s interview with David’s brother John also has discrepancies with every other known account, it’s probably safe to say that Poulson is not a reliable source.

According to Wilford Woodruff and David Whitmer, it seems as though they are still here on the Earth in a cave in the Hill Cumorah.

Clearly, Faulk did not actually read this account, because—assuming the account is accurate the way Faulk does—David Whitmer directly contradicts this statement immediately following the quoted portion of the interview:

I—Where is that cave?

He—In the State of New York.

I—In the Hill of Cumorah?

He—No, but not far from that place….

David very clearly says that the plates are not in the Hill Cumorah.

However, again, this account has been disputed, and there are multiple other accounts declaring the same thing—that the Hill Cumorah opened up, and Joseph and Oliver walked in and deposited the plates inside a room filled with a ton of other records, as well as the sword of Laban.

Brigham Young stated it in the Journal of Discourses, for example:

…This is an incident in the life of Oliver Cowdery, but he did not take the liberty of telling such things in meeting as I take. I tell these things to you, and I have a motive for doing so. I want to carry them to the ears of my brethren and sisters, and to the children also, that they may grow to an understanding of some things that seem to be entirely hidden from the human family. Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the hill Cumorah, which he did. Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room. He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light; but that it was just as light as day. They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in the corners and along the walls. The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: “This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ.” I tell you this as coming not only from Oliver Cowdery, but others who were familiar with it, and who understood it just as well as we understand coming to this meeting, enjoying the day, and by and by we separate and go away, forgetting most of what is said, but remembering some things. So is it with other circumstances in life. I relate this to you, and I want you to understand it. I take this liberty of referring to those things so that they will not be forgotten and lost….

And again, remember that we need to take the JoD with a grain of salt, because much of it was altered from the speakers’ original words by the reporters.

But this story was repeated by W.W. Phelps, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Pratt, and others in addition to David Whitmer, Wilford Woodruff, and Brigham Young. Some said they heard it directly from Oliver Cowdery, one from Hyrum Smith, one from Don Carlos Smith, etc. Because there are so many accounts from so many reputable sources, we do have to consider this story as possible.

Joseph himself merely had this to say in the Joseph Smith—History:

…But by the wisdom of God, [the plates] remained safe in my hands, until I had accomplished by them what was required at my hand. When, according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge until this day, being the second day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight.

The Manuscript History of the Church skips straight from the translation “drawing to a close” in June of 1829 to a revelation from March of 1830, ignoring the return of the plates altogether.

And, according to Lucy Mack Smith:

After these [Eight] witnesses returned to the house, the angel again made his appearance to Joseph, at which time Joseph delivered up the plates into the angel’s hands.

So, from Joseph’s own words, all he says is that he returned the plates to Moroni. But from multiple second- and thirdhand sources, the story emerges of Joseph and Oliver returning the plates to the cave in the Hill Cumorah, sometimes with Hyrum and others joining them, and sometimes alone.

Surely the Church must be in possession of the plates as there is a visitor’s center at the Hill Cumorah.

Well, no. The Hill Cumorah in New York is almost certainly not the Hill Cumorah/Ramah from the Book of Mormon. Because the hill in New York is a drumlin made of gravel and dirt, it’s geologically impossible for it to hold a cave of the size needed to hold all of the Nephite records. Any cave of that size would collapse in on itself.

Mormon makes it clear that he buried all of the other Nephite records at Cumorah, not the golden plates. Moroni wandered for more than 30 years after losing the battle at Cumorah. Why would he go back just to bury the plates, when he could have buried them anywhere? It makes far more sense than he eventually made his way to New York by the direction of the Spirit and buried them in the hill in New York, where they waited for Joseph to be led to them.

And just because the Church has a visitor’s center at the hill we call Cumorah doesn’t mean they’ve done full excavations of the hill and have everything from inside it in their possession. What a silly argument. Besides, the Book of Mormon prophesies that the plates will be returned after they’re translated, and after the witnesses come forth to testify of its truthfulness:

Wherefore, when thou hast read the words which I have commanded thee, and obtained the witnesseswhich I have promised unto thee, then shalt thou seal up the book again, and hide it up unto me, that I may preserve the words which thou hast not read, until I shall see fit in mine own wisdom to reveal all things unto the children of men.

As far as the cave itself goes, it’s an interesting set of questions. Did that event happen the way the second- and thirdhand sources claim, or was it simply a hand-off to Moroni? If it did happen, where is the cave? What else is in there? And most importantly, when will we have access to the records and other artifacts inside?

Personally, I believe that the cave does exist and that Joseph and Oliver did place the plates inside when they returned them to Moroni. I believe, due to the composition of the hill in New York, that this event was one of two things: either a purely visionary, symbolic experience, or, much more interestingly, a literal, physical transportation to the original Cumorah.

1 Nephi 11:1 says:

For it came to pass after I had desired to know the things that my father had seen, and believing that the Lord was able to make them known unto me, as I sat ponderingin mine heart I was caught away*in the Spirit of the Lord, yea, into an exceedingly high mountain*, which I never had before seen, and upon which I never had before set my foot.

Maybe Joseph and Oliver were also “caught away in the Spirit of the Lord” and went somewhere they never had before seen, and upon which they never had before set their feet. The cave repository they stepped into seems to be the original Cumorah, and it seems to still be intact. We don’t know where that hill is, and that is probably with very good reason. The Lord is keeping it hidden from the knowledge of man until the time is right to bring the contents forth, as He promised He would.

And to me, that is just such a cool idea. That’s probably why I lean toward it, if I’m being honest, but it is what I believe likely happened. To me, it accounts for all of the evidence.

Switching topics now, we’re going to move on to the succession crisis after Joseph’s death. I told you there was no easy way to segue between the two!

Here’s what Faulk had to say about this topic:

The Succession Crisis

For roughly six months after Joseph and Hyrum Smith’s deaths, several people competed to assume the role as prophet and leader of the Church. Claiming to be the new rightful successor were: Sidney Rigdon, Brigham Young, James Strang, Samuel Smith, William Smith, Joseph Smith III and others.

Just to clarify, Joseph Smith III was a child and did not make this claim in the months after Joseph Jr.’s death. Some of his family members felt the position should be reserved for him until he was old enough, however. And he did obviously believe that the position had been given to him when he was an adult, but he did not publicly vie for the position as an 11-year-old boy.

After several hours of searching, I also can’t locate any instance where Samuel Smith put himself forward as the successor to Joseph or Hyrum. He was the one who retrieved their bodies from Carthage, and he had to evade a violent mob in order to arrive there. He wounded his side during the melee, and upon his return to Nauvoo, became very ill. He died about three weeks after Joseph and Hyrum did. The closest I can come to corroborating him as a potential successor is a note copied from William Clayton’s Nauvoo diaries and eventually published by who was then a BYU grad student named Andrew Ehat. According to Ehat’s Master’s thesis, when discussing who might take over as leader of the Church:

That [Newell K.] Whitney did not have in mind either of the two surviving members of the First Presidency, he made perfectly clear to Clayton, for he concluded his interview by saying that “Joseph…said that if he and Hyrum were taken away, Samuel H. Smith [the Prophet’s brother] would be his successor.” The week before, however, Lucy Mack Smith wanted Samuel to be the Patriarch.

I can’t corroborate this further with Clayton’s Nauvoo diaries, because while the Church Historian’s Press has announced that they will be published and transcribed, this has not yet happened.

And, just so we’re all clear how murky this information is, Newell K. Whitney reported it to Clayton, who recorded it in his journal. From the notes and comments about the Clayton diaries on the By Common Consent blog, it appears that historians James B. Allen and Dean Jessee transcribed the diaries either independently at the same time, or while working together on the project. Ehat apparently took his notes from the Allen/Jessee transcripts, not from the diaries themselves.

So, this one little nugget of information is coming to us at least fourth-hand, possibly fifth-hand if Ehat went through both Allen and Jessee to get the information. At this point, be cautious in taking that declaration of Joseph’s to be anything more than just a rumor. But even if he did say it, Joseph named several people as his successor at different times, and it was not his decision to make. It was the Lord’s.

Brigham Young also didn’t present himself as the next leader of the Church. Instead, he put forward the combined efforts of the Quorum of the Twelve, because together, they held all of the Priesthood keys necessary to lead the Church. In his journal, he wrote:

The first thing which I thought of was, whether Joseph had taken the keys of the kingdom with him from the earth; brother Orson Pratt sat on my left; we were both leaning back on our chairs. Bringing my hand down on my knee, I said the keys of the kingdom are right here with the Church.

The others on Faulk’s list, however, did indeed make a claim to Joseph’s now-vacated role.

Sidney Rigdon, first counselor in the First Presidency to Joseph Smith, argued that by virtue of revelation from the Prophet himself, he should be rightful heir to Joseph’s position.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:6:

And again, verily I say unto thy brethren, Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams, their sins are forgiven them also, and they are accounted as equal with thee in holding the keys of this last kingdom.

Um. Not exactly. D&C 20:6 actually says:

But after repenting, and humbling himself sincerely, through faith, God ministered unto him by an holy angel, whose countenancewas as lightning, and whose garments were pure and white above all other whiteness;

It’s about Joseph Smith and Moroni, not Sidney Rigdon. Faulk apparently meant to cite D&C 90:6 instead.

This revelation was given in March of 1833, 11 years before Joseph’s death. While Sidney was a member of the First Presidency all that time, Joseph did try to remove him but was outvoted. The historical record of Joseph’s reaction to this outcome is in dispute. The Times and Seasons reported that Joseph was glad of the outcome and hopeful that Sidney would rise up again to his calling. The History of the Church, however, says that Joseph washed his hands of the situation and of Sidney. It’s unclear which is the most accurate description or why the record was changed.

The other details, though, are correct. Sidney did use that revelation, as well as several others, in his attempts to wrest control of the Church away from the Twelve. He was obviously unsuccessful in this attempt.

James Strang asserted that, unlike the others, he had physical proof of his prophetic calling. He produced a 3-page letter, supposedly written by Joseph Smith, naming Strang as successor. While the wording of the letter is somewhat ambiguous and the handwriting does not match Joseph’s, it still convinced many members of the Church to follow Strang. Included were all the members of the 3 and 8 witnesses, and all members of the Smith family including Emma, except Samuel, and Joseph Sr.

Again, this is not very accurate. Yes, James Strang did indeed produce this letter and make those claims. However, there were also two exposés written by people who claimed to help him perpetrate his hoaxes.

It would have been pretty difficult for Samuel or Joseph Sr. to join Strang’s church, since both of them were dead by that point. And Oliver Cowdery never joined Strang’s church, either. There is only actual evidence of three of the Witnesses or Smith family members believing any of his claims: Martin Harris, John Whitmer, and William Smith—and all of them were short-lived. David Whitmer was listed as an antagonist by Strang himself. Katharine Smith Salisbury later disputed that any of the female members of her family ever followed Strang either, and any evidence to the contrary was manufactured during a time when they were consumed by grief. Emma also rejected Strang’s claims, as she initially favored Sidney taking over until her son was old enough to do it himself. After Sidney backed out of the fight, she remained religiously unaffiliated until her son joined the Reorganized Church of Latter-day Saints.

Fighting between individual competitors lasted 3 years until the most senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Brigham Young, was voted “President of the whole Church of Latter Day Saints” by the remaining members of the Twelve.

Three years? Not exactly, no. That vote took place on April 7th, 1845, 10 months after Joseph’s death. And on February 4th of that same year, they’d already voted Brigham “president of the Kingdom of God” and “legal successor of president Joseph as our head.” It wasn’t publicly known yet, but that’s when it happened.

While Joseph Smith and five others were imprisoned at Liberty Jail in Missouri, his young son, Joseph III, was brought to visit on several occasions. Imprisoned with Joseph was apostle Lyman Wight. Lyman did not agree with Brigham’s new position as leader of the Church because he witnessed Joseph Smith ordain his oldest son, Joseph III, to be his successor.

“Joseph called on me shortly after we came out of [Liberty] jail to lay hands with him on the head of a youth and heard him cry aloud, ‘You are my successor when I depart,’ and heard the blessings poured on his head. (Lyman Wight, Saints Advocate, Vol.7, September 1884) Who was the youth Lyman referred to? “The fifties assembled should have called on all the authorities of the church down to the lay members from all the face of the earth, and then have called on young Joseph, and held him up before the congregation of Israel to take his father’s place in the flesh!” (Lyman Wight, Gospel Herald, Voree, WI, August 31, 1848)

Yes, Lyman Wight did claim that he’d witnessed this blessing take place. Joseph III did also remember receiving a blessing when he visited his father in Liberty Jail, but was too young to remember its contents. The issue is, however, that Lyman Wight had a habit of reading his own wishes into revelations, according to Wilford Woodruff. He ignored conditional blessings and misremembered the wording of other blessings. That makes it impossible to know whether he was interpreting the blessing correctly or not. It may have been something of a patriarchal blessing or a father’s blessing, and not the Priesthood ordination Wight claimed it was. Because we don’t know what was said, and because Heavenly Father made His wishes known as to the identity of Joseph’s successor, we know we can’t accept the naming of Joseph III as Joseph’s successor as being valid.

None of the 3 scribes of the Book of Mormon, Emma Smith, Sidney Rigdon and Oliver Cowdery, wanted to be affiliated with the new Brigham Young-led Church. None of the 3 Witnesses wanted to be part of Brigham’s Church and none of the 8 Witnesses did either. While Samuel Smith and Joseph Sr. did not end up leaving the Church like the rest, it is important to note that the Church was financially supported them at the time. While Samuel Smith and Joseph Sr. did not end up leaving the Church like the rest, it is important to note that the Church was financially supported them at the time.

There were at least seven scribes for the Book of Mormon, as we covered a few weeks ago, and Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, both scribes, were also both rebaptized into the Brigham-led Church. Of the Eight Witnesses, all three Smith family Witnesses were dead by the time Brigham and the Twelve took over after Joseph’s death. So were Christian Whitmer and Peter Whitmer, Jr. That leaves a grand total of four Witnesses who were alive at the time of Joseph’s death and who never returned to the Church.

As for the claim that the Smith family members were being financially supported by the Church, I searched for an hour and didn’t find anything to support that claim. Thomas Faulk certainly didn’t present any evidence to back up his words.

Samuel Smith was an industrious farmer and a Nauvoo city alderman, among other things. Joseph Smith, Sr., was both financially devasted by the fall of the Kirtland Safety Society and in declining health for several years before he passed, so it’s entirely possible that the Church did support him financially for a time. But, whether true or not, I personally suspect that Joseph being their family member had a lot more to do with them supporting his calling as a prophet than anything else did.

Context
No scribe was allowed to see the plates.

Sure, unless you count Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, Christian Whitmer, John Whitmer, and Samuel Smith, all of whom were Book of Mormon Witnesses as well as scribes during the translation.

All of the witnesses saw the plates spiritually, not physically.

Sure, if you discount every firsthand account any of them ever made.

Signatures of the witnesses are the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery.

Sure, because the only full manuscript that still exists today is the printer’s manuscript, which was a copy made by Oliver and delivered to the printer in order to keep the original manuscript safe.

All witnesses of the plates left the Church; save 2 members of the Smith family.

Sure, unless you also count Hyrum Smith, who was a Witness and who didn’t leave the Church. Peter Whitmer, Jr. and his brother Christian both died as faithful members before the rest of their family left the Church, too. And let’s not forget that Oliver and Martin both later returned to the Church despite leaving for a time. Only four of the eleven Witnesses left and never returned in this lifetime, and none of them ever recanted their testimonies despite their differences with Joseph. They each continued to testify of the truthfulness of the statements they signed until the day they died.

How much credibility can we give the testimonies of those that have claimed to see the plates when the records show that it was seen in visions, not physically as the Church teaches? How much trust can we put in the statements of these witnesses when all of them that weren’t being financially supported by the Church ended up leaving?

Well, since none of those objections are true, I personally happen to think they have a lot of credibility. When I think about all that those men endured—the beatings, the near-death experiences, personal and professional blows, the loss of their reputations, in some cases the loss of their families and even their lives—the fact that they stood by their testimonies through everything tells me that they are men of integrity who were telling the truth about the things they saw and experienced. I find them to be entirely credible.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 10: The Early Church – The Witnesses [C] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

General Conference is coming up in 5 days! It will be held April 1-2, and will have morning and afternoon sessions on Saturday and Sunday, along with an evening session for everyone on Saturday. More information is available here.

“Was that a revelation?” General Conference and Agents of the Divineby Steve Densley

Over time, I have come to look forward to General Conference more and more. It seems that now, more than ever, we need the wisdom and guidance that comes from those who have been set apart by God to instruct us.

Of course, I do not always hear what I want to hear. I am often challenged by the words of our leaders and can feel that I will need to stretch, sometimes with some pain, to accomplish what is expected. So I understand when I hear people wonder aloud, “Was that a revelation?” as if to say, “Do I really need to do that?” Or, “Is that really true?”

It would certainly clear things up to know that whenever one of God’s representatives speaks, the words are the very ones that God Himself would use if He were standing at the pulpit. Of course, if a church leader says something we don’t like, it would come as a relief to think that we can ignore it since it was just a mistake.

However, at times when we are troubled by the words of our leaders, we must take account of such scriptures that read: “Why is it that ye receive not the preaching of him whom God hath sent? If ye receive not this in your hearts, ye receive not [His servants]; and if ye receive not [His servants], ye receive not [Christ]” (JST, Matthew 3:34), and: “whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same” (D&C 1:38).

This latter verse has led many of us to expect that whenever a church leader speaks, it is as though God Himself is speaking. And yet, we have also been told that church leaders can make mistakes. The title page of the Book of Mormon itself warns us that “if there are faults they are the mistakes of men.” So how it is possible that a church leader can speak for God and yet be mistaken?

The answer to this problem may lie in what is known in the law as “agency theory.” This branch of the law relates to the extent to which we can expect a representative, called an “agent,” to speak on behalf of or bind the person who is being represented, called the “principal.” For example, if Elon Musk authorizes someone to act as his agent in selling a Tesla to me, if that agent and I agree to the terms of a sale, then Elon Musk will be bound by those terms. In that case, whether by Elon Musk’s voice or the voice of his agent, it is the same.

That does not mean that the agent will always say exactly what Elon Musk would say. In fact, the agent may actually make a mistake and say something wrong or sell the car at a lower price than Mr. Musk himself would have. But generally speaking, Elon Musk will be bound by the acts and words of his agent.

There are exceptions to this, of course. For example, if the agent were to purportedly sell me Elon Musk’s house when we both knew the agent only had authority to sell a Tesla vehicle, Elon Musk would not be bound to turn over the title to his home.

Similarly, we understand that if church leaders were to take action beyond their stewardship that action would not be binding on us. For example, if a counselor in the Sunday School Presidency were to announce a policy change for the Relief Society, he would be acting outside the scope of his stewardship and “agency.”

Putting the exceptions aside, we can take the actions of the leaders of the Church as binding upon the Church members and, while perhaps not exactly what God would do in their place, at least authorized by God through His delegated authority. On this point, Terryl and Fiona Givens related:

The story is told of a Church official who returned from installing a new stake presidency. “Dad, do you Brethren feel confident when you call a man as the stake president that he is the Lord’s man?” the official’s son asked upon his father’s return home. “No, not always,” he replied. “But once we call him, he becomes the Lord’s man.” The answer disconcerts initially. Is this not hubris, to expect God’s sanction for a decision made in error? Perhaps. It is also possible that the reply reveals the only understanding of delegation that is viable. (Terryl Givens & Fiona Givens, The Crucible of Doubt (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2014), 75-76, citing a personal conversation reported to authors by Robert L. Millet.)

Terryl and Fiona Givens further quote the Anglican churchman, Austin Farrer: “If Peter and his colleagues make law in applying the Lord’s precepts, . . . their law is the law of Christ’s Church, the best (if you will) that God’s Spirit can make with human instruments there and then, and, as such, to be obeyed as the will of God Himself. But to call Peter infallible in this connection is to misplace an epithet.” Ibid., 74-75, quoting Austin Farrer, “Infallibility and Historical Tradition,” in The Truth-Seeking Heart, ed. Ann Loades and Robert MacSwain (Norwich: Canterbury Press, 2006), 83-83.

Of course it is also true that when a church leader speaks by the inspiration of the Spirit, the words are scriptures unto us, of a certain variety. Joseph Fielding Smith taught that “a revelation that is to be given as these revelations are given in [the standard works], to the Church, will come through the presiding officer of the Church; yet, the word of the Lord, as spoken by other servants at the general conferences and stake conferences, or wherever they may be when they speak that which the Lord has put into their mouths, is just as much the word of the Lord as the writings and the words of other prophets in other dispensations” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 1:186. See also, D&C 68:4.)

It is important in this regard to recognize that while revelation can come through the visitation of an angel or by Christ Himself, God can also speak to Church leaders as He usually does to the rest of us, through the still small voice, and it is just as authoritative. In describing the way the leaders of the Church receive revelation, President Gordon B. Hinckley said that it is “[u]sually no voice of any kind, but just a perception in the mind. I liken it to Elijah’s experience. When he sought the Lord, there was a great wind, and the Lord was not in the wind. And there was an earthquake, and the Lord was not in the earthquake. And a fire, and the Lord was not in the fire. But in a still, small voice. Now that’s the way it works.” (Lattin, Don, “Sunday Interview — Musings of the Main Mormon.” San Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1997, by Don Lattin.) We have further been told that “We can tell when the speakers are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’ only when we, ourselves, are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost.’” (J. Reuben Clark Jr., “When Are Church Leaders’ Words Entitled to Claim of Scripture?” Church News, July 31, 1954, 9.)

However, even if a church leader is not speaking by inspiration of the Spirit, it is important to determine whether they are speaking within the scope of their calling. If so, a certain authority attaches to their words and actions even if they are not all inspired by God.

So it is exciting to me to hear the leaders of our Church speak in their official capacity at General Conference. While I am often moved spiritually by the words I hear, I am also simply grateful for the direction, guidance, and wisdom we can receive from those who have received the authority to lead God’s Church and to speak on His behalf.

Steve Densley, Jr. is the Executive Vice President of The Interpreter Foundation. He is a Utah attorney (J.D., Brigham Young University). He graduated with University Honors from BYU with a combined B.A./M.A. in public policy and political science. As an undergraduate, he was an assistant editor on the Pi Sigma Alpha Review. In law school, he was a member of the Law Review and the National Moot Court team. He has published articles in the Utah Bar Journal, the Journal of Law and Family Studies, Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, and Meridian Magazine. He has been recognized in SuperLawyers Magazine as one of the Mountain States Rising Stars and has been listed numerous times in Utah Business Magazine as among the Utah Legal Elite. He was the Executive Vice President of FAIR from 2013-15, recipient of the John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award, and was a producer of FAIR’s podcast when it twice won the People’s Choice Award for Best Podcast in the Religion & Spirituality category. He is also an award-winning photographer and a certified travel agent. He served a Hmong-speaking mission in the California Sacramento Mission. He and his wife Heather are the parents of four children and have one granddaughter.

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 5 Days! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Most of us are familiar with Joseph Smith’s well-documented stay in Liberty Jail, and the later criminal charges at Carthage that led to his murder. Many of us also know about the different lawsuits for debt collection, particularly concerning the Kirtland Safety Society. Church history geeks will be familiar with two back-to-back sham trials in 1830 while Joseph was still in New York, in which his enemies scoured the countryside for anyone willing to testify against him with any ridiculous story they could invent. After he was acquitted at the first trial, he was immediately handcuffed and re-arrested for the second trial. It lasted well into the early hours of the morning before he was acquitted a second time.

However, those weren’t the only legal trials in Joseph’s life. In fact, Joseph was involved in over 200 court cases, whether as a defendant, plaintiff, witness, or judge. Brigham Young once estimated that Joseph had been the defendant in about 48 of those cases. According to Joseph Bentley at the previous link, that estimate appears to be pretty accurate. He was found liable for some incurred debts over the years. In none of those criminal cases, however, was he ever confirmed to have been found guilty.

The case being discussed today is Joseph’s 1826 trial for “glass-looking,” another term for using a seer stone. Not much is known of this trial, and several of the records conflict in different ways. The basic gist, though, is that Joseph went to work for Josiah Stowell in November of 1825, trying to locate buried treasure. After about a month, he convinced Stowell to give up the venture, but stayed on with him as a farmhand for several months. In March of 1826, one of Stowell’s relatives brought charges against Joseph, claiming he was scamming Stowell. The outcome of this trial is one of those details that conflict across the different records.

So, what does the LFMW have to say about this trial?

Trouble With the Law

Between 21-25 years old, Joseph Smith was arrested 4 separate times for fraud.

Sort of. He was arrested four times, but he wasn’t charged with fraud four times. There were the two 1830 cases mentioned above in which he was charged with being “a disorderly person,” which was the corresponding charge in New York for using a seer stone. There was this 1826 case in which he was charged with “glass-looking” as well as being “a disorderly person.” And the fourth case came in 1829, in which Lucy Harris, the wife of Martin, claimed Joseph defrauded her husband. So, he was only charged with fraud once.

The two 1830 cases were dismissed for lack of valid evidence against him, as was the 1829 case. In fact, Lucy Mack Smith recounts that in the 1829 fraud case, the testimony against Joseph was so absurd the judge “told them that they need not call any more of their witnesses but to bring that which had been recorded of the testimony that had been given. This he tore in pieces before their eyes and told them to go home about their business and trouble him no more with such ridiculous folly.”

There’s a reason critics don’t usually mention these three cases. When your evidence is so bad that even the judge calls your claims ridiculous, you don’t really have a leg to stand on.

The outcome of the 1826 case is more murky, though, as we’ll come to see.

Josephsmithpapers.org displays a trial bill for Justice Albert Neely where Josiah Stowell brought charges against Joseph for glass looking and was convicted of misdemeanor.

This sentence is incorrect. The Joseph Smith Papers Project does indeed have the bill for the justice’s trial fees. We also have a bill for the constable. However, that’s the only factual information in that sentence.

Josiah Stowell did not bring those charges against Joseph, and it is unknown whether he was convicted of the misdemeanor. It also doesn’t actually appear to be a trial, but a pre-trial hearing to determine whether or not to bring a trial.

Though one account by William Purple states that Josiah’s sons brought the charges against Joseph, most accounts list Peter G. Bridgman as the accuser. Bridgman was Stowell’s nephew. Stowell actually testified on Joseph’s behalf. So did several of his family members. Stowell later joined the Church and remained a faithful member for the rest of his life. That’s not the behavior of someone who distrusted Joseph and tried to charge him with fraud.

As far as the judgment itself goes, the reports range from Charles Marshall’s purported transcript saying he was found guilty to Abram Benton and Joel King Noble both claiming he was convicted but allowed to escape and/or “took leg bail” to William Purple claiming he was discharged without penalty to Oliver Cowdery saying he was “honorably acquitted” in a letter to W.W. Phelps. You can see why there’s confusion over the outcome.

These are the accounts we have: the William Purple statement, three Pearsall statements, the two court bills, and Oliver Cowdery’s brief comments on the matter.

William Purple claimed to be a friend and associate of Albert Neely, the justice in this case. He says that he was asked to take notes during the hearing. This statement was produced from his note and his memory, though it’s important to note that it was published decades later and Purple had recounted his story many times. This means that inaccuracies were bound to have crept in over the years.

The Pearsall accounts are three purported transcripts of the docket entry of the case, originally provided by Emily Pearsall. However they all differ in places, the original source is missing, and it’s unclear whether the original transcript was altered. According to the Joseph Smith Papers Project:

Although Neely’s docket book is not extant, three documents purporting to be based on the docket entry for State of New York v. JS–A later appeared in print. The published docket entry includes the case name, the date of the proceedings, the name of the complainant—Peter G. Bridgman, Stowell’s nephew—and the charge that JS was a “disorderly person and an Imposter.” It also includes detailed summaries of testimonies by JS and five witnesses recounting JS’s use of a seer stone while in Stowell’s employment. The docket entry concludes with Neely’s purported verdict, “and therefore the court finds the defendant guilty,” as well as the justice’s itemized fee bill totaling $2.68. Several of these details are consistent with Neely’s and De Zeng’s 1826 bills, strongly suggesting that the published transcript was based on an authentic source.

Because of uncertain provenance, however, questions remain regarding the reliability of the printed document, and it is included here as an appendix item. According to later accounts, following Neely’s death the original docket book was inherited by his niece, Emily Pearsall, who served as a Methodist missionary in Utah in the early 1870s. At some point, Pearsall reportedly “tore the leaves” pertaining to the case “out of the record.” In 1872, British journalist Charles Marshall visited Utah, where Pearsall permitted him to copy the “original papers” of Neely’s “judicial proceedings,” which he published in Fraser’s Magazine in England. After Pearsall’s death in 1872, the excised pages passed to Episcopal bishop Daniel S. Tuttle, with whom she had lived in Utah. Unaware of Marshall’s earlier publication, in 1883 Tuttle published a transcript of the document in Philip Schaff’s Religious Encyclopaedia. Finally, in 1886 the anti-Mormon Utah Christian Advocate published a transcript of “the Manuscript” they had obtained from Tuttle. Although “the Manuscript” likely referred to the “original papers” torn from Neely’s docket, it is also possible that the term refers to a copy made by Tuttle. Each printing was apparently made independent of the others, as each contains unique omissions and errors. Without the original source, it remains unknown how accurately any of the published versions represents Neely’s original docket entry.

So, as you can see, it’s convoluted. That makes it difficult to ascertain the facts. I’m sure you’re asking the same question I did: what actually happened?

Well, according to Gordon A. Madsen, the leading expert in this case, 19th century New York courts presided over by a single justice like this in this instance were “on the bottom rung of the legal ladder.” They were called courts of special sessions. These justices weren’t trained lawyers or judges, but affluent men in the community who were tasked with presiding over matters that didn’t amount to serious crimes, but that upset the locals. For criminal cases, they had a few options. They could sentence someone to be held in the house of correction until the next general session of the court for an actual trial, up to a maximum of six months. They could also sentence someone to 60 days of hard labor at the house of corrections instead of a trial. The general session court could fine up to $25 and an additional six months of hard labor for a misdemeanor.

Joseph was not sentenced to any of those things. He was also not brought before a general session court. The bills were sent to the county government for court services, not to Joseph. There is no record of any fine against him, or of him serving any time in relation to this charge. His life is pretty well-documented, so if he served jail time for any length of time longer than about a week, we would be aware of it. There is also no conviction mentioned by any of his detractors from this time period, despite their affidavits being quoted in full in Howe’s Mormonism Unvailed. This all suggests that he was not found guilty.

Additionally, under the law at the time, only Josiah Stowell could bring a complaint against Joseph as the victim of the fraud, but he testified in favor of Joseph. As Madsen explains:

The pivotal testimony, in my view, was that of Josiah Stowell. Both accounts [the Purple and the Pearsall accounts] agree on the facts. The Pearsall account states: “[Joseph] had been employed by him [Stowell] to work on farm part of time; …that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and professed the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone.” The Purple account states:

Justice Neely soberly looked at the witness and in a solemn, dignified voice said, “Deacon Stowell, do I understand you as swearing before God, under the solemn oath you have taken, that you believethe prisoner can see by the aid of the stone fifty feet below the surface of the earth, as plainly as you can see what is on my table?” “Do I believe it?” says Deacon Stowell, “do I believe it? No, it is not a matter of belief. I positively know it to be true.”

From the array of the other witnesses there was no testimony that any of them parted with any money or other thing of value to Joseph Smith. Only Josiah Stowell did so, and then for part-time work on his farm in addition to services rendered in pursuit of treasure. More to the point, he emphatically denied that he had been deceived or defrauded. On the contrary, he “positively” knew the accused could discern the whereabouts of subterranean objects. In short, only Josiah Stowell had any legal basis to complain, and he was not complaining. Hence Purple’s concluding comment: “It is hardly necessary to say that, as the testimony of Deacon Stowell could not be impeached, the prisoner was discharged, and in a few weeks he left the town.” Indeed Justice Neely had no other choice.

The Pearsall account he describes is the Marshall account found in Fraser’s Magazine. This same account is partially quoted by Thomas Faulk in the LFMW:

Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowell in Bainbridge … That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally look at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were at a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowell several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowell had been engaged in digging for them.

Josiah Stowell sworn: says that prisoner had … pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes; once to tell him about money buried in Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania [and] once for gold on Monument Hill.

Jonathon Thompson: says that prisoner was requested to look for chest of money; did look, and pretended to know where it was … Smith looked in his hat while there, and when very dark, and told how the chest was situated…That the last time he looked he discovered distinctly the two Indians who buried the trunk, that a quarrel ensued between them, and that one of said Indians was killed by the other, and thrown into the hold beside the trunk, to guard it, as he supposed.

And therefore the Court find the Defendant guilty.” (Joseph Smith’s 1826 court transcript)

Again, there are issues with omitting part of the text and not showing it. Faulk at least added some editing marks this time around, so I’ll give him props for that, but he also cut out multiple paragraphs of text without indication.

Additionally, this is not the “court transcript.” There was no official court transcript made. Madsen explains:

What really happened? What can we draw from the statutory and case law, the bills, the admittedly incomplete and inconsistent reports of the notetakers, and the even more inconsistent conclusions of the commentators? Let us first resort to The Justice’s Manual as a basis for judging the reliability of the Pearsall and Purple notes and their pretensions at being official. Purple claimed that Justice Neely was his friend and asked him to make notes of the trial. He also admitted telling the story repeatedly over the more than forty years before he submitted his article to the Chenango Union in May 1877. Miss Pearsall, according to Tuttle, had torn her notes from her Uncle Albert Neely’s docket book. How close does either come to meeting the requirements of a transcript of testimony required of a justice of the peace at that time?

The statute provides that in all cases where any conviction shall be had before any court of special sessions, in pursuance of the act hereby amended, it shall be the duty of the justices holding such court of special sessions, to make a certificate of such conviction, under their hands and seals, in which shall be briefly stated the offence, conviction and judgment thereon; and the said justices shall within forty days after such conviction had, cause such certificate to be filed in the office of the clerk of the county in which the offender shall be convicted, and such certificate, under the hands and seals of such justices, or any two of them, and so filed, or the exemplification thereof by such clerk, under his seal of office, shall be good and legal evidence in any court in this state, to prove the facts contained in such certificate or exemplification….

So, if … a court of special sessions convened, and the Pearsall notes were “The Official Trial Record” (as he maintains), where is the certification “under their hands and seals” wherein is “briefly stated the offence, conviction and judgment thereon”? The Purple notes are equally lacking such certification. On the other hand, if (as I maintain) Justice Neely alone tried the matter, and if a conviction resulted, far more particularity would have been needed in such notes demonstrating jurisdiction, the regularity of the proceedings, the conviction, and the sentence. In either event, the record of conviction would have needed to be filed with the county clerk within forty days. No such record as to date been unearthed in the office of the Clerk of Chenango County.

The “he” in question is Reverend Wesley P. Walters, the man who apparently found the two court bills linked above. He wrote a few articles bundled together into a book titled Joseph Smith’s Bainbridge, N.Y. Court Trials, which included an adjoining pamphlet titled “From Occult to Cult With Joseph Smith,” which Madsen was responding to.

This is almost certainly not an official court transcript that Faulk quoted, and neither is the other record. Both are lacking required elements to meet that designation, and neither of them were ever filed with the county. This suggests that, instead, these are simply the personal notes of Neely regarding the case.

It also needs to be remembered that the provenance of this account is in dispute. No one can confirm where it came from. Neely’s niece just showed up with them one day, and there’s no telling what was altered or where she got them. There’s also no telling what they actually said, because all three transcripts of the papers differ from one another in key points and the originals no longer exist to compare them to.

Those aren’t the only issues with this account. Let’s talk about the word “pretend” for a minute.

The Pearsall account claims that Josiah Stowell said that Joseph “pretended” to have the skill of using a seer stone. However, as we quoted above, in the same account Stowell says he “positively knew” it was true. Stowell did not use the word “pretend.” Neely or Pearsall—or whomever wrote those original papers—did.

Of the word “pretend,” religious anthropologist Manu Padro wrote:

[T]he use of the word “pretended” to describe supernatural claims of miraculous power is not a clear-cut statement about fraud. It is a recategorization of disparaged religious beliefs and practices to better police and penalize them. This is most commonly seen in skeptical English demonologists’ descriptions of non-Calvinist religious traditions from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries. This understanding of the word “pretended” also appears in the Pearsall narrative’s depiction of the 1826 pre-trial.

The Pearsall narrative follows this tradition. It relies almost entirely upon “pretended” powers, claiming that Joseph Smith “had pretended to tell by looking at this stone, where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra he had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds.” Oddly, it depicts Josiah Stowell as claiming that Joseph Smith Jr. “pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone.” When compared to statements in both narratives that assert Stowell’s belief in Smith’s abilities, this statement seems to be an insertion or a scribal distortion. In the Pearsall narrative, Johnathon Thompson testified that Joseph Smith Jr. “pretended to know” where the treasure was buried and “pretending that he was alarmed” when they thought their shovels had hit a chest. The Pearsall narrative then claims that Johnathon Thompson believed “in the prisoner’s professed skill, that the board he struck his spade upon was probably the chest but on account of an enchantment, the trunk kept settling away from under them while digging.” This should be compared to the Purple narrative’s version of Johnathon Thompson’s testimony. There, Thompson never presents these alleged practices or beliefs as pretended. On the contrary, the Purple document’s version of the Johnathon Thompson testimony portrays Smith’s folk-Christian beliefs as genuine even if it later repackages them as delusional beliefs leading to unprofitable diabolical witchcraft. Thus, potential scribal distortion also appears in the Johnathon Thompson testimony. The Pearsall narrative’s consistent depiction of Smith’s activities as “pretended” also occurs in its presentation of the Horace Stowell and McMaster testimonies.

The two literary sources for the 1826 pretrial diverge strongly on their description of Smith’s activities as pretended witchcraft and diabolical witchcraft. Of these two accounts, the Purple narrative matches the allegations of diabolism that Smith’s neighbors claimed to have of his activities after 1824. However, the Pearsall account contains the justice’s itemized fee bill, which matches Justice Neeley’s and Constable De Zing’s bill of costs. This conundrum would suggest that the Pearsall account is not a faithful reproduction of the original trial notes. It would appear that working with the original notes, Emily Pearsall may have fabricated an account of the trial by removing elements of folk-Christian belief frequently associated with witchcraft and the allegations of diabolical witchcraft. For example, Joseph Smith Sr.’s and Joseph Smith Jr.’s testimonies, which explicitly characterize treasure seeking as a Christian act in the Purple narrative, are both completely omitted in the Pearsall narrative. These elements of Joseph Smith’s early life would have triggered the skepticism of a late nineteenth-century audience. Their absence in the Pearsall narrative reflects a later reframing of the events. … If the original trial notes included Smith’s confessions’ folk-Christian belief conflated with witchcraft or if it contained allegations of diabolical witchcraft, the recreation of these elements in the Pearsall articles from later in the century would have triggered skepticism among people from Emily Pearsall’s generation of Americans. William Purple, on the other hand, was from an antebellum generation of nineteenth-century Americans who had not internalized this understanding of Salem or skepticism about diabolical witchcraft. Hence, Purple’s account included the folk-Christian confessions from both Joseph Smiths. For William Purple and other believers in diabolical witchcraft, the conflation of folk-Christianity with witchcraft meant that the Smiths’ confessions of folk-Christian activity would have been seen as blasphemous confessions of implicit pacts, which believers imagined to be witchcraft. On the other hand, Emily Pearsall would have been motivated to modify an account of the 1826 pretrial by stripping the actual trial notes of inconvenient and embarrassing material, focusing instead on post-Enlightenment concerns with pretended witchcraft, painting it as fraud. … The Pearsall narrative’s scribal insertion portraying Josiah Stowell as describing Joseph Smith’s practices as pretended suggest that Emily Pearsall may have added and embellished material in her account. This is suggested by alleged accounts of deliberate deception in the Horace Stowell, Arad Stowell, and McMaster testimonies. These accounts of deliberate deception do not appear in the Purple narrative. Further evidence for selective distortion in the Pearsall account can be found in the Pearsall narrative’s guilty verdict, which strongly contradicts William Purple’s claims that the prisoner was discharged on Josiah Stowell’s testimony. The motive and the ways the Pearsall account do not match the larger body of evidence would strongly suggest that such a chain of events shaped the final document used to generate this account. The divergences in these narratives suggest that the allegations in the pre-trial as remembered by William Purple focused on diabolical witchcraft while Emily Pearsall heavily edited her account to create a narrative that focused on post-Enlightenment concerns with pretended powers.

Essentially, there is good evidence to suggest that Emily Pearsall heavily altered her uncle’s trial notes before allowing anyone to copy them. Her papers don’t match the other account’s testimonies, nor do they match the types of stories being told in the testimonies from the 1829 and 1830 trials. The Pearsall papers don’t match the rest of the evidence pointing to an acquittal/dismissal either, as outlined above. So, there’s valid reason to be skeptical of the account Faulk labels as the official “court transcript.”

He continues:

Context

BYU Professor, Ronald Walker, states that the events surrounding Joseph and the gold plates were very typical of early 19th century folk magic practitioners.

Oof. I’m a big fan of putting things back in context, but that context needs to be correct and this…isn’t. That isn’t what Walker said at all.

For this, we’re jumping back to one of the papers we discussed last week.

What Walker actually said was that Joseph Smith’s personal use of a seer stone was typical of early 19th century folk-magic practitioners. He also said, “I wish to make another point explicit. Nothing in my study should be taken as suggesting that Joseph Smith was merely a product of his folk culture environment. No English or American village adept ever produced a Book of Mormon. None produced a Vision of Moses, the Olive Leaf, the Three Degrees of Glory, or such magisterial ideas as sections 93 and 98 of the Doctrine and Covenants. At every major point in his career, there were second and third witnesses for Joseph Smith’s work. And when he died, he left a church that dwarfed anything that might have been built by a run-of-the-mill village holy man.”

He literally said the opposite of what Faulk claims here. Things like that irritate me. If your position is so strong and your argument is so solid, why do you have to lie in order to make your claims? Why do you have to erase chunks from the quotes you choose, and blatantly twist what the papers you cite actually say? When you pull stunts like that, why do you think we’ll actually trust you over the Holy Ghost and the prophets? I just don’t get it.

Faulk then presents a little table to back up his assertion:

| Common folk magic themes in 19th century New England | Joseph Smith’s story also included | | Divine visitations | Visitation from the Lord during the First Vision | | Visions that recur 3 times | Visited by Moroni 3 times in one night | | The Devil | Overcome by the Devil when he went to the grove to pray | | Buried box of gold with spirit guardians, often Native Americans | Golden plates buried in a stone box protected by Moroni, a Native American | | Seer stones in hats | Used the seer stone in a hat to dictate the Book of Mormon |

These are again simplistic distortions of what Walker actually said. For example, Walker’s paper doesn’t discuss divine visitations, unless you consider attempts to conjure ghosts and other spirits as divine. There is no discussion of those spirits or ghosts ever actually appearing to anyone.

As explained in footnote 60 of the paper, the number three was seen as a signifier of completeness in the New Testament: the three gifts of the wise men to the baby Jesus; the three temptations of Christ in the wilderness; the three denials of Peter; the three falls on the road to Golgotha; the three days between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection; the three appearances of the risen Christ to His disciples; etc. It was long taught in Christian mythology that the number was symbolic of the Godhead/Trinity. We actually see the number three popping up all over our society in secular places as well, and it has been a prominent number for centuries. We see it in nursery rhymes such as “Three Blind Mice,” fairy tales such as “Goldilocks and the Three Bears,” and idioms like “the third time’s the charm.” Ancient cultures prominently used triskelions, tridents, shamrocks, and other symbols with three prongs to also symbolize completeness, power, or unity. The number three pops up in multiple other incidents Walker lists, in a variety of ways. It’s not actually referred to as being involved with visions in Walker’s paper either, but rather with recurring dreams. Those dreams were not likened to visions, and the trend has scriptural backing. It wasn’t something Joseph just absorbed from his community.

Additionally, he never said he was overcome by “the Devil” when he went to pray, but that it was “thick darkness” in one account, and that his tongue felt swollen so that he could not speak and he heard someone walking behind him but saw no one in another account.

Moroni did not “protect” the golden plates the way a treasure guardian would. The extent of his protection was simply to bury the plates before he died where they would not be damaged or found until the time was right. God was the one protecting them, not Moroni. A treasure guardian’s job was not to lead a seeker to the treasure and to then teach him all about where it came from and the people it belonged to. It’s job was to stop anyone from ever finding the treasure, either by moving it whenever they got close or by inducing them to speak and break their silence, thereby destroying their ability to find the treasure a second time.

The only thing that actually aligns on that table is that seer stones worked best when put inside a hat to block out the light. In Joseph’s day, that was the best means of creating darkness black enough for it to work properly, without straining his eyes.

If Joseph was using the same stone to defraud people as he later used to write the Book of Mormon, then it speaks to the credibility of his claims.

If that were true, I’d agree. But there is no valid evidence whatsoever that Joseph ever committed fraud against anyone. Faulk certainly didn’t provide any, and neither has anyone else. The closest they can find is the Pearsall accounts, which appear to have been heavily altered and do not match the other existing evidence.

It appears that Joseph used a seer stone to sell treasure-hunting services and when that didn’t turn out well for him, he used the same stone to sell religious services.

One of the big points made by many of the papers cited is that Joseph wasn’t selling anything. He didn’t advertise his services. He didn’t seek out people who would hire him. They all approached him, not the other way around. And when it became clear it wasn’t working the way they hoped it would, Joseph was the one to call it off.

Using his personal seer stone sometimes for convenience’s sake instead of dealing with the spectacles that didn’t fit is not “selling religious services.” It’s using one of your spiritual gifts in the service of God, the way that you’re meant to use them. He wasn’t charging God money to translate the plates.

(“sell religious services” is both referring to collecting tithing and also to Joseph’s attempt to sell the copyright to the Book of Mormon shortly after publication. He sent Oliver Cowdery, Hyram Page and Josiah Stowell to Toronto, Canada but they returned unsuccessful. http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelationbook-1/15)

Well, that took an abrupt detour, didn’t it? Tithing has been a principle in place since before the time of Abraham. It is also not “selling religious services.” It is giving some of your blessings back to God because He is the one who gave them to you in the first place.

As for the copyright, that deserves more than a quick paragraph of explanation. However, I’m running short on room, so this will have to do for now. The copyright that Joseph attempted to sell was not the intellectual copyright over the contents of the Book of Mormon. It was the printing rights, because certain publishers have the right to publish certain books in certain countries. They were trying to find a publisher who would buy the Canadian publishing rights. Moreover, they were commanded to do so. We have a copy of the revelation at the Joseph Smith Papers Project. That’s a very big difference from what Faulk is trying to imply. Once again, he is incorrect in his statements.

Considering that Joseph did not even use the plates during the translation, considering that folk magic was common in the New England area, and he had been in trouble with the law for treasure hunting, it seems hard to feel confident in the authenticity of the official translation story.

Joseph absolutely used the plates during the translation. He couldn’t read them, but he never claimed to be able to do that. “Translate” is not the proper word for what Joseph did with the plates, though it’s the word that we frequently use. A better word might be “transmit,” and he was the receiver, not the one doing the transmitting. The Spirit was the transmitter.

But the plates were a tangible evidence that his story was true. Numerous people were aware that he had them. They saw them, they held them, they saw the corner peeking out from under a cloth, they rustled their edges, they carried them in a box, etc. There is no denying that Joseph had something that resembled the plates. Why do you think some of his neighbors tried so hard to steal them from him so many times if he didn’t have anything to back up his story?

He also didn’t have the money or the ability to fake them, and no stories ever emerged of anyone helping him create them, the way they did for similar hoaxes.

I don’t find Joseph Smith’s story of the translation of the Book of Mormon difficult to believe. It is not hard for me to feel confident in that. You know why? Because my testimony isn’t built on Rough Stone Rolling or any other history book about Joseph’s life. It’s not built on whichever instrument Joseph used to aid his revelatory process during that translation.

My testimony is built on the Spirit of Christ. That Spirit testifies of the truth, and He has testified to me that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. He has testified to me that the Book of Mormon is exactly what it claims to be. He has testified to me that Christ’s Priesthood was restored to the Earth. He has testified to me that this belongs to Him. He has testified to me that His prophets still lead our church today.

And because He has testified of that to me, I don’t personally care what hobbies Joseph may have had that are a little on the weird side. He’d probably think my hobbies are weird, too.

None of that changes the truthfulness of his claims. None of it changes the facts that the Book of Mormon is both an ancient record of people who really lived and holy scripture. And none of it changes this church from being the true Church of Christ.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 7: The Early Church – The Translation [C] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Two topics that are often misunderstood in Latter-day Saint circles are those of folklore and what is sometimes termed “folk magic.” When we hear those words, as a people we tend to think of something negative or spiritually dangerous. We might think of examples such as Ouija boards or tarot cards. But the actual definitions are a lot more benign than that.

Folklore, for instance, is simply pieces of knowledge or stories that are passed down from one person to the next over the generations. Santa Claus; the Tooth Fairy; the Easter Bunny; vampires and werewolves; George Washington and the cherry tree; the seagulls eating the crickets in the Salt Lake Valley; the family stories you tell over and over again about how your brother microwaved a fork and fried the appliance or how your sister used to eat a single bite out of the center of a piece of bologna and discard the rest; or perhaps the oft-told story of how your friend once bit into an apple and found half a worm; these are all examples of folklore.

Folk magic is a little different. As Greg Smith points out, “folk” means “of the common people.” It was something the educated class looked down on, but that the common people engaged in. They often mixed these practices with Christianity, believing they were gifts and knowledge from God. Yes, Ouija boards and tarot cards fall under this umbrella. So does energy healing. Voodoo might also be considered an extreme example that falls under this category.

But it can also be equally as innocent as folklore. Examples can include your grandmother’s home remedy for colds; your co-worker’s favorite hangover cure; hanging mistletoe at Christmas to draw kisses; drinking sugar water to get rid of hiccups; the old man in your ward who can use his bad knee to predict the weather; singing to your plants while gardening to make them grow; using essential oils on your menstrual cramps; drinking ginger ale for an upset stomach; people who listen to their “gut instinct” or “mother’s intuition”; etc. Even things as innocent as painting Easter eggs or decorating Christmas trees can fall under this category.

Examples of divinely sanctioned “folk magic” also abound in the scriptures: Joseph of Egypt’s divining cup; Jacob’s rod of poplars that he used to make sheep bear more of the types of lambs Laban had given him; Moses’s staff; the ephod or Urim and Thummim the Levite priests used; the Ark of the Covenant; Oliver Cowdery’s divining rod; the lots the Apostles cast; the Liahona; the glowing stones that guided the Jaredites; Abraham’s Urim and Thummim; Christ spitting in the dirt to make clay to cure blindness; the words the Savior used to raise Jairus’s daughter from the dead being similar to a magic spell of the day; the use of consecrated oil; the brass serpent; and, of course, the Nephite interpreters.

We don’t think of those things as being “magic” or “occultish” or anything spiritually dangerous, because they’re not. The word “magic” in this sense is incorrect. Heavenly Father has a long history of using physical objects as well as the knowledge and beliefs of His followers to teach them lessons and help them receive revelation. If someone believes in the power of casting lots to receive direction from God, for example, He will sometimes give them direction through that means.

“Magic” doesn’t inherently equal “bad” or “wrong.” It just depends on how the word is being used. When it’s sanctioned by God, it’s an effective teaching tool. It’s simply a means to achieving His goals. That’s an important concept to understand before we dive into what the Letter For My Wife has to say about the topic.

President Oaks once clarified this difference:

It should be recognized that such tools as the Urim and Thummim, the Liahona, seer stones, and other articles have been used appropriately in biblical, Book of Mormon, and modern times by those who have the gift and authority to obtain revelation from God in connection with their use. At the same time, scriptural accounts and personal experience show that unauthorized though perhaps well-meaning persons have made inappropriate use of tangible objects while seeking or claiming to receive spiritual guidance. Those who define folk magic to include any use of tangible objects to aid in obtaining spiritual guidance confound the real with the counterfeit. They mislead themselves and their readers.

The use of these physical objects or unusual means has to be sanctioned by God, or it’s not appropriate. But when it is appropriate, there’s nothing wrong with it. It might be a little weird to us in our day and age to think about, for sure. It’s not common in our society, so it’s not something we’re used to. But “different” doesn’t mean “bad.” Remember, God works in mysterious ways, and those ways are not always our ways.

And because there was some confusion on Reddit over what I am trying to say, I am not defining “folk magic” as “the use of all tangible objects to aid in obtaining spiritual guidance” the way that President Oaks told us not to do. I am saying that some people define it that way. Some people consider things like crystal balls or tarot cards, or perhaps people who claim to be psychic, as gifts from God. They conflate those things with spiritual gifts and mix the pagan with the divine. They use the same umbrella term of “folk magic” regardless of whether it was a spiritual gift or not.

The Church does not define it that way and states that only sanctioned use of physical objects to channel faith is legitimate and appropriate. In those cases, the common umbrella term of “folk magic” is incorrect. Because it’s confusing to use such a broad term to discuss such nebulous concepts, there is now a trend away from this term in religious scholarship. Even Joseph Smith separated his ability to use a seer stone for the mundane (like finding lost objects) and for the holy (like translating ancient records by the power of God) as being two different things. My intention was to show what was being implied by the “folk magic” label vs. what the reality actually is when it comes to divinely sanctioned objects and gifts. I hope that clarifies what I’m trying to say here.

So, with that said, what does Thomas Faulk think about all of this?

Folk Magic

Could Joseph Smith’s experiences actually be products of his family’s practice of local folk magic? BYU Studies Quarterly describes the Smith family culture when it stated, “In frontier America, seer stones or ‘peep stones’ were commonly used by lost object finders, people engaged in the widespread practice of lost treasure digging.” (BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol.55, No.1, 2016)

It took me a moment to hunt this paper down, since Faulk didn’t name it or link to it. I was pleasantly surprised when I did, though. I’d never read it before, but I found it fascinating and very helpful in explaining some things I’d had questions about.

Faulk positions this quote as though it’s casting doubt on Joseph’s prophetic calling, but in context, it’s not. The author, Eric Eliason, instead spends his time defending the use of seer stones against claims of “weirdness” or of its being “a troubling problem” in our Church’s history. Faulk actually cuts the quote off mid-sentence, again without any indication that the quote has been edited down. I still maintain that using a partial quote made to look like a full quote is dishonest behavior.

The actual quote, in context, reads:

In frontier America, seer stones or “peep stones” were commonly used by lost object finders, people engaged in the widespread practice of lost treasure digging, and sometimes by people seeking to uncover the kind of truths we might call a private or police detective for today. It is unclear how much of this kind of activity Joseph Smith was involved in, except for water divining and treasure digging, which are widely attested. The “seer” in seer stone is a biblically literate early American culture’s reference to the biblical term seer explained in 1 Samuel 9:9 as an earlier term for a prophet—more specifically one who saw visions, dreams, or scenes in the mind’s eye, or even with the natural eyes. Moreover, God gives the seer insight into the meaning of his or her visions (2 Sam. 24:11; 2 Chr. 9:29; Jer. 1:11–18). All of this fits quite nicely with how Joseph Smith saw himself.

To Bible scholars, the Urim and Thummim is one of several items similar to the ephod and lots used to determine the will of God or seek information from him. (The Liahona in the Book of Mormon follows this pattern.) It seems that early Mormons began to use the terms seer stone and Urim and Thummim interchangeably, with the latter convention winning the day. But both terms emerge from biblical practices and understandings.

As you can see, his point was actually that Joseph using a seer stone was perfectly in line with the Biblical patterns of “seers,” something that Joseph was specifically called to be.

In fact, there is a late, thirdhand account of the First Vision in which Joseph is described as saying that the Father touched Joseph’s eyes, which allowed him to see the Savior. Joseph apparently physically touched his eyes to show how this was done as he recounted the vision. (This account can be found in full at the link by scrolling to pages 755-756. It can also be found in Paul Cheesman’s infamous thesis, as well as in many of the following links.)

Now, this account was recorded in 1893 in the journal of a man named Charles Lowell Walker. Walker heard it from John Alger, the brother of Fanny Alger, who heard it from Joseph. The Algers were obviously quite close to Joseph, and this account was apparently given in an intimate gathering in Joseph Sr.’s home. This sets it apart from other second- and thirdhand accounts. However, it came very late and it is a thirdhand account, so we do need to treat it with the proper caution.

Scholars such as Matthew Brown and Dan Peterson don’t believe this was a literal, physical touch if the account is accurate, but a metaphorical one.

Conversely, historian Don Bradley argued passionately for its literalness in both a FAIR presentation and a paper published in the Journal of Mormon History, which can be downloaded here for free. A prominent reason he gives for taking the account literally is that it follows scriptural pattern. Isaiah describes his mouth being touched by a seraphim, allowing him to speak on the Lord’s behalf. The Savior cures one blind man by anointing his eyes with clay, and two more by simply touching their eyes. In the Book of Abraham, the Lord touched Abraham’s eyes, letting him see all of creation. In the Book of Moses, the Lord also had Enoch anoint his own eyes with clay, letting him see things that were not visible to the normal eye and calling him as a seer. And the Brother of Jared saw the Lord’s finger touching the stones to light the barges, as well as the interpreters given to him for the record he would later write.

Greg Smith also covered some of this in a fantastic fireside, seeming to agree with Bradley that it was a literal touch.

However, regardless of where we come down on the physical touch vs metaphorical touch issue, Bradley lays out some strong supporting evidence. In that light, I do think we need to at least consider the possibility that this thirdhand account is accurate. Again, it should be viewed skeptically, but I think there’s enough there to grant it hesitant legitimacy.

If true, it’s an absolutely beautiful detail that I wish was preserved in other accounts. Whether a literal touch or not, it follows the Lord’s pattern. And the Lord does love patterns. In each of those scriptural instances, the touch was a manifestation of the prophet’s call to see and to speak. When it was the Savior Himself doing the touching, it was as a manifestation of His own divine role. It would stand to reason, then, that Joseph also received a manifestation of his calling as a prophet, seer, and revelator.

Next in the letter comes a series of quotes. The first is a lengthy one from Ronald W. Walker:

Director of Center for Western Studies at BYU and president of the Mormon History Association, Ronald W. Walker, put the Smith family’s activities in historical context.

“From Colonial times to at least the age of Jackson [1776-1837] Americans dug for magical treasure. There were hundreds and probably thousands of these money diggers all seeking troves of fabled coins, mines, jewels and other valued prizes.

“The money diggers placed faith in conjuring elemental spirits, thrice spoken dreams, seeric gifts and enchanted treasure.”

“Clearly the ideas of hidden but guarded treasure with their secondary and accompanying motifs of ancient texts, animals, boxes, devils, caves, gold, incantations, mountains and even the ratifying number three, were an ancient bequest.”

“A treasure-finding device used by adepts was the “peep” or “seer” stone, whose acclaimed gifts excelled even those of the divining rod. Such stones seemed to be everywhere and were of every possible description. Joseph Smith’s various stones reportedly included a smooth, grey, egg-shaped rock found in a neighbor’s well, a second which he reportedly dug up near Lake Erie after espying it in his neighbor’s stone, and still others collected from the Mississippi River sands near Nauvoo, Illinois.”

“With most village seers requiring that the light be secluded, this stone-in-the-hat procedure was standard. By this method, an adept could see within the stone crystal a helpful spirit or the precise locality of the underground treasure.”

“While finding the right moment to dig was important, the need to circumvent the treasure’s guardian was crucial. Like its Old World antecedents, the American treasure keeper might be demonic or divine. Or it could be a cat, dog, snake or some other protecting animal. But generally the American treasure guardian was a murdered youth or man whose body had been left with the buried valuables to ensure their protection. Guardian Indians were a frequent motif while a murdered pirate protected Captain Kidd’s troves.”

“As Vermont’s early nineteenth century emigration swept into upstate New York the money digging frenzy came with it. Such superstition was frequent in the new settlements. The Palmyra Reflector labeled the New York money hunting mania, “Men and women without distinction of age or sex became marvelously wise in the occult sciences, many dreamed and others saw visions disclosing to them, deep in the bowels of the earth, rich and shining treasures (Palmyra Reflector, February 1, 1831).”

“Rumors constantly swirled about hunters’ smiling fortunes, which excited still others to further digging. Smith family reportedly found objects as a cannon ball, a cache of gold watches, and according to the viewpoint of some of their neighbors, the golden plates which produced the Book of Mormon. Indeed in ways that are yet to be explored, money digging may have influenced two of the nineteenth century’s major social and religious movements Mormonism and Spiritualism. Its touch on American society was not light.” (Ronald W. Walker, The Persistent Idea of Treasure Hunting in America. https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/ index.php/BYUStudies/article/viewFile/5447/5097)

Before I dive into the actual quoted material, I do just want to point out that the paper in question begins with this caution, which Faulk appears to have ignored:

I wish to make another point explicit. Nothing in my study should be taken as suggesting that Joseph Smith was merely a product of his folk culture environment. No English or American village adept ever produced a Book of Mormon. None produced a Vision of Moses, the Olive Leaf, the Three Degrees of Glory, or such magisterial ideas as sections 93 and 98 of the Doctrine and Covenants. At every major point in his career, there were second and third witnesses for Joseph Smith’s work. And when he died, he left a church that dwarfed anything that might have been built by a run-of-the-mill village holy man. Some may see this success as simply the work of a “religious genius.” My own conviction is that Joseph was a religious genius because of an active and guiding Providence.

Walker also states that this paper was written in an academic, neutral tone and advises the reader not to be thrown off by that. He confirms that he does believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet guided by the Lord. This paper was also not written to cast doubt on Joseph’s calling. It was merely to research the history of “money digging” in New York and New England during the 1800s, and to see what kind of affect that may have had on Joseph’s family and upbringing.

And again, there are huge chunks of omitted text from this quoted portion. Multiple paragraphs and even full pages were removed and there are more partial sentences, all without any indication that they were edited. I know I keep stressing how shady this practice is, but there’s a reason for that. It truly is dishonest to imply that you’re quoting the full material when you aren’t. I don’t have the space to quote the full thing here, and I don’t begrudge Faulk for not quoting the entire thing either. But you have to show omission marks when printing an edited quote. Please, don’t accept these quotes at face value because they are not complete.

For one notable example, the line, “Such superstition was frequent in the new settlements,” is actually a line by a fictional character from a James Fenimore Cooper novel, not Walker’s own words. Faulk completely cut out the attribution, as well as the acknowledgment that it was a quoted passage.

Also missing are several passages describing those who engaged in this practice as upstanding and respectable citizens who were honest, hard-working Christians. These people were not acting under any demonic influences, nor were they lazy men and women unwilling to work. Though in certain places and times, the practice was looked down on, in other times and places, it was highly regarded. It was commonplace and a well-accepted practice in Vermont, where the Smith family was from, as well as in upstate New York, where they eventually moved. Joseph wasn’t even the only “village seer” in and around Palmyra. As recounted last week, he found his first seer stone by looking in the stone of another Palmyra seer, Sally Chase.

However, by the early 19th Century, these practices were starting to fall out of favor in the Americas. Parts of the country shunned the practices on religious grounds. And, as stated, in many places the educated class, which often included the clergy, looked down on these folk practices as either superstition and nonsense, or as something evil or dangerous. Joseph, in particular, became a target of this religious wrath after his First Vision became publicly known.

As Mark Ashurst-McGee explained, “Joseph wrote that because he had claimed to see a vision the local ministers united against him and spoke against him to their congregations, but they did not speak against his visions. As Joseph had claimed that Jesus told him all current churches were false, he posed a threat to the clergy. By denouncing Joseph’s treasure dowsing, the minsters could undercut his visionary claims to any who might have heard it without informing any of the flock who had not.”

I know that’s straying a little far from the quoted sections Faulk cited, but I think it’s an important point to note. Joseph’s character and his practices of treasure hunting and using a seer stone were condemned while others engaging in the same practices in his town were not. A significant reason for this is because his claims threatened the beliefs and the livelihoods of the local clergy.

Faulk continues:

“Like many other New Englanders, they were familiar with searches for lost treasure by supernatural means. Joseph Smith’s father was reputed to be one of these treasureseekers, and Joseph Smith himself had found a stone, called a seer stone, which reportedly enabled him to find lost objects. Treasure-seekers wanted to employ him to help with their searches. One, a man named Josiah Stowell, hired Joseph and his father in 1825 to dig for a supposed Spanish treasure near harmony, Pennsylvania. The effort came to nothing, and the Smiths returned home, but the neighbors continued to think of the Smiths as part of the treasure-seeking company.” (http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Smith,Joseph)

Again, this is an edited quote and an incorrect URL. The paragraph in question is as follows:

The discovery of gold plates in a hillside resonated strangely with other experiences of the Smith family. Like many other New Englanders, they were familiar with searches for lost treasure by supernatural means. Joseph Smith’s father was reputed to be one of these treasure-seekers, and Joseph Smith himself had found a stone, called a seer stone, which reportedly enabled him to find lost objects. Treasure-seekers wanted to employ him to help with their searches. One, a man named Josiah Stowell (sometimes spelled Stoal), hired Joseph and his father in 1825 to dig for a supposed Spanish treasure near Harmony, Pennsylvania. The effort came to nothing, and the Smiths returned home, but the neighbors continued to think of the Smiths as part of the treasure-seeking company. Joseph Smith had to learn, in his four years of waiting, to appreciate the plates solely for their religious worth and not for their monetary value. The angel forbade Joseph to remove the plates on his first viewing because thoughts of their commercial worth had crossed his mind. Joseph had to learn to focus on the religious purpose of the plates and put aside considerations of their value as gold.

The point of the paragraph was not to highlight the weirdness of Joseph engaging in treasure-hunting. It was to show that he ironically found the buried treasure he was looking for, but couldn’t use it for financial gain. He wasn’t allowed to obtain it until he could put aside those desires for money and seek instead to glorify God and help build His kingdom.

“By 1825, [19 yrs old – 5 years after the First Vision] young Joseph had a reputation in Manchester and Palmyra for his activities as a treasure seer, or someone who used a seer stone to locate gold or other valuable objects buried in the earth.” (Elder Steven E. Snow, Church Historian, Ensign, September 2015)

Yep. Putting this quote back in context, the article in question says:

Joseph Smith first arrived in Harmony in the autumn of 1825. Joseph’s mother, Lucy Mack Smith, wrote that earlier that year “a man by the name of Josiah Stoal [Stowell] came from Chenango County, New York, to get Joseph to assist him in digging for a silver mine. He came for Joseph from having heard, that [Joseph] was in possession of certain means, by which he could discern things, that could not be seen by the natural eye.”

Stowell was a prominent resident of South Bainbridge, New York, and for a man of his standing to be searching for buried treasure was not at all unusual, since it was a common folk practice of the time. By 1825, young Joseph had a reputation in Manchester and Palmyra for his activities as a treasure seer, or someone who used a seer stone to locate gold or other valuable objects buried in the earth. Thus, it was no surprise that Stowell specifically sought out Joseph’s services.

What this article doesn’t say is that, during Joseph’s 1826 trial for “glass-looking,” which we’ll discuss next week, Stowell testified on Joseph’s behalf. During that testimony, he explained that while he was considering hiring Joseph, he tested his seeing ability. Joseph looked into one of his seer stones and perfectly described Stowell’s farm and buildings, as well as a tree that had a man’s hand painted on it. This is what convinced Stowell that Joseph really could see things in his stone.

“Yet on that visit there was an attempt to reconcile Joseph and his father-in-law, for an invitation was extended to Joseph and Emma to make their home in Harmony. Isaac, with evident paternal concern and with some compassion, indicated to Joseph that if he would move to Pennsylvania and work, giving up “his old practice of looking in the stone,” Isaac would assist him in getting into business. Isaac claims, “Smith stated to me he had given up what he called ‘glass-looking,’ and that he expected and was willing to work hard for a living.” (Isaac Hale, father of Emma Hale Smith, History of the Church, Vol.1. Ch.2)

This quote is not from The History of the Church, Volume 1, Chapter 2, as claimed. It’s from the notes of the Annotated History of the Church found at the Book of Abraham Project website. In turn, this footnote information was taken from Susan Easton Black’s chapter in Regional Studies in Latter-day Saint Church History: New York, “Isaac Hale: Antagonist of Joseph Smith.” The ultimate source of this information is from an article titled “Mormonism,” containing several affidavits of the Hale family and others from Harmony. This article was published in the Susquehanna Register on May 1, 1834. The Isaac Hale affidavit is dated March 20, 1834, and claims to be taken largely from a letter Hale wrote to D.P. Hurlbut in December, 1833. The affidavits collected by Hurlbut comprised some of the material used in the creation of E.D. Howe’s Mormonism Unvailed. Howe paraphrased some of Hale’s affidavit in the text.

There’s some slight controversy over whether or not this affidavit was fake. Apparently, there were accusations that Hale had gone blind in his old age—he was in his 70s by this time—and was incapable of signing his name to the affidavit or of knowing what it truly said as written. However, most historians do accept it as accurate, as there is no record of Hale ever disputing its contents.

The following information was taken from Susan Easton Black’s chapter cited above.

Hale was openly hostile to Joseph by this time, and blamed Joseph for stealing away his daughter. He personally had engaged in treasure-hunting with his brother, and allowed Joseph and the other diggers working with Josiah Stowell to live on his property while they searched for the treasure. Ultimately, he had soured on the practice after no treasure was found. He seemed to hold Joseph personally responsible for this failure and refused him permission to marry Emma. Later, they eloped, which caused a lot of strain with the Hale family.

However, for a time, Hale was willing to let Joseph and Emma live in a house on his property and to defend them against the neighbors’ persecutions. This only extended so far, unfortunately. When his brother-in-law, Nathaniel Lewis, a local Methodist preacher, ramped up his own vitriol against Joseph, Hale unfortunately followed suit. The last time Emma ever saw her parents was in 1830. Things had grown so hostile between them all that she never returned to visit. By 1834, Hale was quite bitter against Joseph, and it showed in his affidavit.

Of course, he made no mention of his own history of treasure-seeking, and used it instead as an attack against Joseph. And by the point in time that Joseph allegedly made that promise, he was done with “glass-looking” for profit. He hadn’t yet figured out how to translate the plates, and was actively looking for someone else to do it for him. Though he shortly began translating through the Interpreters and his own seer stones, I don’t believe that Joseph was lying when he gave that promise to Hale. If he did indeed make the promise, I think that he considered using his stones in his calling as a prophet to be entirely different from using his stones to seek treasure and other lost objects. That was a hobby; translating the plates was a calling.

Faulk wraps up this topic with one last sentence:

The Smith family’s use of seer stones to find buried gold treasure was a common folk magic practice in New England.

Yes, it was—but the treasure Joseph ultimately found was far from common.

At this stage of my life, my testimony is pretty unflappable. I’ve read most of this stuff many times before. I’ve spent years studying Church history as a hobby. I read a lot, and I’ve taken the time to sort through how I really feel about all of these topics. These things simply don’t bother me.

But they might bother you, and that’s okay. It really is okay to take the time to sort through your feelings and to pray and study the information. It’s why I source as much as I can, and why I try to link to as many online resources as possible. I want you all to be able to read it for yourselves. I want you to learn how to study this kind of thing with the Holy Ghost’s help. You can access the Spirit when you study secular things. You can do it when you study Church history, too.

His help isn’t just for studying the scriptures or for asking questions about doctrine or leadership. He doesn’t just guide us to the truth of the Gospel. He guides us to the truth of all things. That means that, with His help, we can sort through the lies and distortions and come to an understanding of what really happened. We can pray for enlightenment and the ability to understand why things happened the way they did.

In closing out this post, I just wanted to touch briefly on the words of President Monson:

We live in a time of great trouble and wickedness. What will protect us from the sin and evil so prevalent in the world today? I maintain that a strong testimony of our Savior, Jesus Christ, and of His gospel will help see us through to safety. If you are not reading the Book of Mormon each day, please do so. If you will read it prayerfully and with a sincere desire to know the truth, the Holy Ghost will manifest its truth to you. If it is true—and I solemnly testify that it is—then Joseph Smith was a prophet who saw God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.

Because the Book of Mormon is true, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord’s Church on the earth, and the holy priesthood of God has been restored for the benefit and blessing of His children.

If you do not have a firm testimony of these things, do that which is necessary to obtain one. It is essential for you to have your own testimony in these difficult times, for the testimonies of others will carry you only so far.

When you study the history of Joseph Smith, you’re studying the history of the Restoration of the fulness of the Gospel. When you study the Book of Mormon, you’re studying the fruits of Joseph’s calling as a prophet. They go hand in hand.

While you study these topics and other events in Church history, do it with the scriptures and the Holy Ghost at your side. Don’t neglect those things for the sake of academic pursuit. They work together. Keep praying, and keep Heavenly Father apprised of your progress. Ask Him your questions. Lean on His Spirit to guide you to the truth. We all need to learn how to obtain and also maintain our testimonies. We all need to become as unflappable as possible. Otherwise, the prophets have warned that it won’t be possible to survive spiritually in the coming days. That’s a dire warning that we all need to take seriously. We need to learn to rely on the Holy Ghost, and that includes while we’re studying difficult or controversial topics. It’s the only way we’re going to see the truth.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 6: The Early Church – The Translation [B] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

By David W. Smith

In the October 2022 general conference, Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf announced an updated version of the youth standards guidebook For the Strength of Youth: A Guide for Making Choices. Elder Uchtdorf explained that the booklet “has been updated and refreshed to better cope with the challenges and temptations of our day.”

With the purpose of pointing youth to Christ, this new version is focused on “teach[ing] you eternal truths of His restored gospel” and “how to make righteous choices based on those eternal truths. . . . It focuses on values, principles, and doctrine instead of every specific behavior.” [1]

Have the Standards Been Relaxed?

Because the updated guidebook lacks many of the behavior-specific instructions of the previous version, some people feel that the new guidebook allows youth to do many things they were previously prohibited from doing. Or in other words, they feel the standards are “being relaxed” or “being weakened.”

For example, one young man approached his father and “said his friends told him that Elder Uchtdorf announced in conference that now tattoos are OK,” and so this young man wanted to get one. [2] This young man thought the standards had been relaxed because the guidebook no longer contained a specific prohibition against tattoos.

However, a lack of behavior-specific instructions does not mean the standards have been relaxed. In fact, the opposite is true: the standards have been enhanced. Young Men General President Steven J. Lund addressed the idea of relaxing standards and responded, “It’s never really been that way, has it? When we speak of a higher and holier way, that calls for us to be more vigilant about making sure that we’re complying to what Heavenly Father would have us do.” [3]

President Lund further explained:

We’re moving to a higher and holier way, where the guidance that we receive from the brethren, from the Church, from each other, is less prescriptive and more spiritually-based. We’re being asked to, you know, not look to somebody else to decide what our standard should be, but recognizing the weight of membership and the weight of holiness that belongs to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will by itself prescribe how we behave and how we are, how we dress and how we comport ourselves.

Sister Michelle D. Craig of the Young Women General Presidency affirmed this: “I think it’s important to know that it’s not a relaxing of standards . . . But now we hope that they’re very intentional about getting on their knees and praying to find out, ‘What does this look like in my life?’” [4]

Instead of having more relaxed standards, the new guidebook requires a more diligent form of discipleship.

Principles and Doctrines

Returning to the experience of the young man: his father invited him to listen to Elder Uchtdorf’s talk (the young man hadn’t watched that session of conference) and read the updated guidebook. After doing so, the son approached his father again:

I [the father] asked, ‘Did Elder Uchtdorf announce that tattoos are OK?’ He [the son] said, ‘No. In fact, he said, The Lord is not saying, “Do whatever you want.”’ I asked, ‘Does the guide say tattoos are OK?’ He said, ‘It says we are supposed to honor the sacredness of our bodies, even when that means being different from the world. It says that we must make wise decisions — especially when they can have lasting effects on our bodies. But, Dad, it doesn’t say we can’t.’

I responded: ‘It doesn’t say we can’t rob a bank either but that doesn’t make it a smart choice. What does your discipleship call on you to do? You know how I feel about it. Maybe it is time to ask how Heavenly Father feels about it?’

At this point the experience ends, and the son may or may not have decided to get a tattoo. But “the point is not what these particular youth decided. Rather, it is to emphasize how these parents used questions to guide the youth toward values, principles and doctrines. Most importantly, they asked their children to seek personal revelation.” And that is the model we should follow for ourselves and when helping others choose how to apply the standards.

President Russell M. Nelson exhorted: “Set a standard for the rest of the world. . . . Embrace being different. The booklet entitled ‘For the Strength of Youth’ should be your standard. It is the standard that the Lord expects all His youth to uphold.” [5]

Role of Parents and Other Adults

So what should parents and other adults do? They first provide counsel and wisdom to youth. The new guidebook encourages youth to “be wise and faithful, and seek counsel from your parents and leaders.” [6]

The guidebook also reminds youth that “having questions is not a sign of weakness or lack of faith. . . . Seek answers in the scriptures, in the words of God’s prophets, from your leaders and faithful parents, and from God Himself. If answers don’t come right away, trust that you will learn line upon line. Keep living by what you already know, and keep seeking for truth.” [7] So parents and others shouldn’t discourage questions or accuse youth of being faithless when asking honest questions. (Of course, there is a difference between faithful questions and faithless questions, or put another way, “the term question is not synonymous with the term doubt.”) [8]

Parents and others can also ask questions to youth to prompt spiritual seeking. The Young Women General Presidency reminded us that “our desire is to see them [the youth] turn to their Father in Heaven for answers and learn ways to strengthen their individual relationship with Him.” [9] As adults ask questions like “What do you already know about the topic or question?” and “How did Jesus Christ live the truth/principle?”, the youth will be inspired to find answers from divine sources.

The Young Women General Presidency also reminded us, “It is important during this process that we are not too quick to give our own responses to their questions.” In fact, the most important thing parents and leaders can do is not give the answers but rather help youth recognize when the Spirit is giving the answers. One young woman noted, “So what can leaders do? They can maybe help us learn what it’s like for you when you feel the Holy Ghost. Talk to us about that and tell us specific stories about it. . . . I think the whole point of ‘For Strength of Youth’ is to learn this lesson so we can make choices based on what the Holy Ghost is telling us.” [10]

One way parents and leaders can help youth recognize the Spirit is to ask “a few simple questions like, ‘What did you learn from that choice? Would you do anything different next time? Did it bring you closer to Jesus Christ or take you further away from Him?’” These types of questions “are essential in helping them continue to process what is happening for them. The Holy Ghost can help them see things ‘as they really are’ (Jacob 4:13) when they pause to take a moment and review what they are learning and experiencing.” [11]

Hope of Israel

So instead of providing long lists of things to do and things not to do, the updated guidebook teaches the doctrine of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and invites youth to seek revelation about how to act on that doctrine. The result will be a generation of members who have more experience than any previous generation in studying Christ’s restored doctrine and seeking revelation for their lives. And that will be sorely needed, as President Russell M. Nelson warned in his April 2018 general conference address on revelation: “In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.” [12]

We see that this updated guidebook is focused on helping youth “take unto [them] the whole armour of God, that [they] may be able to withstand in the evil day” (Ephesians 6:13). The final piece of the armor is “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ephesians 6:17). And so we arrive at the imagery in the beloved hymn “Hope of Israel”:

Hope of Israel, rise in might
With the sword of truth and right, . . .
Onward, onward, youth of Zion;
Thy reward the victor’s crown. [13]

Notes

[1] Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “Jesus Christ Is the Strength of Youth,” October 2022 general conference.

[2] Young Men and Young Women General Presidencies, “Young Men and Young Women general leaders: Changing how we talk with youth about standards,” The Church News, 26 October 2022.

[3] In Sarah Jane Weaver, “Episode 106: The Young Men general presidency on how the new ‘For the Strength of the Youth’ guide helps youth choose Christ,” The Church News, 18 October 2022.

[4] In Sydney Walker, “‘Parents, we need to be all in,’ Young Women general presidency says of new ‘For the Strength of Youth’ guide,” The Church News, 5 February 2023.

[5] Russell M. Nelson, “Hope of Israel,” worldwide youth devotional, 3 June 2018; as cited in Walker, “Parents, we need to be all in.”

[6] “Your body is sacred,” For the Strength of Youth: A Guide for Making Choices.

[7] “Truth will make you free,” For the Strength of Youth: A Guide for Making Choices.

[8] “Answering Gospel Questions,” Gospel Topics in Gospel Library. See also Adam Kotter, “When Doubts and Questions Arise,” Ensign, March 2015.

[9] Young Women General Presidency and advisory council, “Young Women general presidency: Using the ‘For the Strength of Youth’ guide to increase discipleship,” The Church News, 10 February 2023.

[10] In Walker, “Parents, we need to be all in.”

[11] Young Women General Presidency, “Using the ‘For the Strength of Youth’ guide to increase discipleship.”

[12] Russell M. Nelson, “Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives,” April 2018 general conference.

[13] “Hope of Israel,” Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1985), no. 259.

David W. Smith has volunteered with FAIR since August 2019. He has had an article published in BYU Studies, and he presented at the Joseph Smith Papers Conference in 2019. He has a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and a master’s degree in public administration, both from Brigham Young University.

The post For the Strength of Youth: A Higher and Holier Way appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: Why Do You Need Prophets Anyway?by Jennifer Roach, MDiv, LMHC

Matthew 7:15-20 Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Welcome back to Come Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful answers to New Testament questions. My name is Jennifer Roach and today we’re going to talk about prophets. As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common questions that Evangelicals ask about our faith as we go along. Our purpose here is not to fuel debate but to help you understand where your Evangelical friends and family are coming from so that you can have better conversations with them, and perhaps even be able to offer them a bit of our faith in a way they can understand.

A common question from Evangelicals is why do we think we need prophets? Aren’t they easily identified as false prophets? And to be honest, when I was investigating the church this was the hardest issue for me to grapple with. The idea of having prophets made literally no sense to me. These days I can see it how other Latter-day Saints see it – it’s a blessing and a gift – but back then I felt suspicious. So why is it so hard for Evangelicals to understand the need for modern prophets? I think there’s two reasons and we’ll talk about both of them.

First, Evangelicals are suspicious of the idea because they have a belief that Jesus is the last prophet – and to call anyone who comes after him a prophet is to be disrespectful to Christ. Where does this belief come from? Let’s look at Hebrews 1:1-2 “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” I know, to your Latter-day Saint ears there is no problem with that verse. You don’t hear it how they hear it. For them that verse sounds more like, “but in these last days we will only hear from Jesus.” As with most scripture quagmires, a careful reading of the text helps us out a bit. All they hear is, “Jesus was the final prophet, no more prophets will come.” But that’s not what the text says, and it’s not what the New Testament shows.

“In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets, at many times and in various ways” – We have no disagreement with Evangelicals there. The problem comes here, “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things.” In that they hear that Jesus is the last and greatest prophet, that him being the “heir of all things” means that no other “heirs” are needed. The problem here, of course, is that we’re talking about prophecy in a few different ways. When we say that we have a living prophet on the earth today we are not saying that the prophet is greater than Jesus. The Old Testament prophets pointed to a future day when God would save his people. Then Jesus came. Now modern prophets still point to Jesus. Evangelicals are confusing the role of Jesus as prophet with the role of all the Old Testament and modern day prophets. It’s a bit nonsensical since they don’t literally think Daniel or Habakkuk are in competition with Jesus. But they feel very sensitive to the idea of upstaging Jesus. One way to talk about this with them is to talk about what a modern prophet does – points us to Christ over and over.

And then the second issue comes up. Evangelicals wonder why they would need someone to, “point to Jesus” when they already have a few reliable sources of doing that. They see the New Testament as pointing to Jesus (and we certainly wouldn’t disagree with them there); they see the Holy Spirit testifying to them of Jesus (again, no disagreement, we believe the Holy Ghost does that too); and they rely heavily on the concept of the, “priesthood of all believers” meaning that they themselves contain all the needed gifts to hear from God, no “mediator” needed. We’ll talk much more about the priesthood of all believers and what that means when we get to that section of scripture but for now we’ll just say that Evangelicals basically believe that no leader can hear from God any better than they can. Their own pastors teach them, but if the individual doesn’t like what is being taught then they move to another church where they like the teaching better.

Latter-day Saints may find it odd to say it this way, but there is a sense in which Evangelicals believe that by doing this they are emulating, as closely as possible, the New Testament church. They would say they’re just trying to boil down to the essence of the gospel and follow that as much as they can. And it might sound odd to you, but underneath that is a desire for Restoration.

They can easily look around and see that the Evangelical world is in trouble in some very real ways. And they long for God to reach down and set things straight. Sound familiar? What a fascinating opening to talk about what it means that we have a restored church. It might surprise you, Latter-day Saint to learn that many, maybe even most, Evangelical churches sometimes talk about how they’re really just trying to live in a way that contextualizes the New Testament for today’s world. They think they’re living a kind of restoration. I want to talk a little more about that in way you might be somewhat familiar with.

This comes from the work of Dr. RoseAnn Benson. She previously had been in the Ancient Scripture department at BYU and now teaches at Southern Illinois University. Her book is Alexander Campbell and Joseph Smith: 19th-Century Restorationists and it’s worth reading. Let me explain what she says and then you’ll see how it relates to Evangelicals. My apologies to Dr. Benson for this simplistic summary. Her work is layered and deep and beautiful and I cringe at the way I’m about to summarize it for you, but summarize it I will.

The year is 1830 and Parley P. Prat (PPP) has been corresponding with his friend Sydney Rigdon. You know from church history that Rigdon is a Campbellite preacher at this time. PPP and other missionaries convert him and about 100 others including 5th President of our church Lorenzo Snow and his sister Eliza R. Snow. This is the basic church history information that you probably already know. What you might not know is that the Campbellite movement considered themselves a Restorationist movement. They thought they were doing the work of bringing the restoration, but they were going about it with an entirely different strategy. The Campbellites believed at that time that in order to restore the Lord’s true church they needed to pare down the essence of the gospel and remove everything that wasn’t essential.They wanted to strip away everything that was not the very basics. They wanted to clear things to the side that didn’t support the goal of restoring the the very essence of the gospel. They were trying to take the very heart of what the Bible teaches and bring it into their day in a way that would get rid of all the errors that had crept into the church over the decades. You can kind of see the logic in what they’re doing.

What happens when PPP and Sydney Rigdon meet in person is that PPP is able to agree with him about the need for a restoration – but that Joseph Smith was teaching the restoration doesn’t come from paring everything down. Joseph doesn’t want to take everything away that isn’t the rock-bottom essentials. Joseph wants to restore everything. Every, everything. He didn’t want to push anything to the side – he wanted to open everything up. To restore it all. Once Rigdon, and 100 others including the Snow family, hear this they understand. They already believed a restoration was necessary – but now they understood it wasn’t going to come through removing parts of what God had established, it was going to come through restoring everything.

Back to our Evangelical friends.

They already know things need to be restored. This is where the mental health therapist comes out in me. If they don’t trust you, or you don’t have enough relationship with you, they are not going to feel safe admitting that any kind of restoration is needed. They will feel defensive and not open up. That’s okay, it just means you need to earn more relationship collateral with them. But if they trust you enough to admit that there can be some issues with their church from time to time, you can probably have a pretty cool conversation about what restoration would look like – is it a paring down of everything so that an individual person sitting alone with their Bible is enough? Or is it a restoration of everything – so that the individual can certainly sit alone with their Bible, but they are also guided by a Prophet from time to time to keep them headed in the right direction?

Now, I told you I would tell you how I gained a testimony of having a Prophet and here it is.

Three and a half years ago I was in the middle of taking lessons from the missionaries. (If you haven’t heard my conversion story it’s a fun one and I’ll put a link to it in the description below where you can listen to it on the FAIR website. But, warning, it has some difficult themes in it and probably isn’t great to listen to around small kids – teens and up would be fine.) From Anglican Minister to Relief Society Sister – Interview with Jennifer Roach – FAIR (fairlatterdaysaints.org) And honestly I was struggling with the idea of having a Prophet. I’ve seen the worst of what can happen in churches when people in power take advantage of that power (listen to my story if you want to know more about that) and I was skeptical that a man with that much power could be trusted.

One day the missionaries say, “The Prophet is coming to Seattle and we have tickets for you.” At the time I didn’t know that this was an unusual thing. Maybe the Prophet just drops by from time to time. But it was a very special event and it was held at Safeco Field, the baseball stadium. It was a beautiful summer evening and 50,000 people showed up to see Russel M. Nelson. And he was great, just like you’d imagine. But it wasn’t his talk or anything in the evening’s program that made me change my mind. What helped me was that when I arrived about half an hour before the event was to begin and sat with friends from my ward. While we were waiting everyone around us was talking about “their prophet” – usually the one who had been leading the church when they were young, and what it meant to them to have a leader like that. To be totally honest I think my own skeptical nature on this topic would have kept me from trusting a man I didn’t know and will never meet. But I saw what having a Prophet did in the lives of my friends and how much goodness it brought to them. And I was converted to the idea that very night – not by President Nelson’s words, though they were great, but by the testimonies of my friends.

I hope these words have given you some thoughts about how to talk with your Evangelical friends about the idea of Prophets. If you have a question an Evangelical friend has asked you that you’d like to get some insight on please email me at jroach@fairlatterdaysaints.com. I got an email this week from some Sister Missionaries in the Houston, Texas mission so shout-out to Sister Cox and her companions. I’ll be answering their question in an upcoming episode. And I look forward to seeing you all next time.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Matthew 6–7 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Christmas Message, Christmas Prophets, Christmas Joyby David W. Smith

Jerusalem, 600 BC

The year is approximately 600 BC. The place is Jerusalem. It has been about 20 years since a major religious reform has changed how people worshiped. The prophet Jeremiah has been warning the people of Jerusalem that they need to repent or else watch as their city is destroyed and they are taken into captivity. Many other prophets echo his message. Now, after preaching for over 20 years, he is in prison.

In this tumultuous time, a man sees an amazing vision. He sees a great person come down out of heaven, shining more brightly than the sun. He sees twelve others follow him, shining brighter than the stars. The great person comes to him, gives him a book, and asks him to read. He then goes out to share with the people of Jerusalem what he saw and heard. He joins the other prophets in warning the people of their coming doom. He adds a message of hope: because of what he saw and read, he knows that a Messiah will come and redeem the world.

The people of Jerusalem are so upset at this message that they try to kill him. But through the Lord’s mercies, he escapes into the wilderness with his family.[1]

Visions in the Wilderness

While in the wilderness, he shares more with his family about this great message of joy. He shares a vision he had about a tree with fruit that “was desirable to make one happy.” He ate this fruit and was filled “with exceedingly great joy” (1 Nephi 8:10, 12). After sharing this dream, he teaches more about the Messiah who will come. He says that in 600 years this Messiah will come among the Jews and be the Savior of the world. “He also spake concerning the prophets, how a great number had testified of these things, concerning this Messiah, of whom he had spoken, or this Redeemer of the world. Wherefore, all mankind were in a lost and in a fallen state, and ever would be save they should rely on this Redeemer” (1 Nephi 10:4). He teaches that this Messiah will be slain by the Jews and then will rise again.

One of this man’s sons wants to know more, so the son diligently seeks for revelation from God. The Lord blesses the son with a vision, guided by an angel. In this vision he sees the tree his father saw and the fruit his father ate. He also sees his old home, Jerusalem. He sees other cities, including Nazareth, a city north of Jerusalem. “In the city of Nazareth I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white. . . . And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms. And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father” (1 Nephi 11:13, 20–21).

At this point—as this young man is seeing this special child in the arms of his mother—the angel asks, “Knowest thou the meaning of the tree which thy father saw?” The young man responds, “Yea, it is the love of God, which sheddeth itself abroad in the hearts of the children of men; wherefore, it is the most desirable above all things. And [the angel] spake unto me, saying: Yea, and the most joyous to the soul” (1 Nephi 11:22–23).

The young man then sees this child become a man who goes about ministering and healing, with twelve others following him. The young man sees the man taken, judged, and slain for the sins of the world. After that, he sees people fighting against the twelve who were with the Messiah. He sees these people fall, and the angel warns: “Thus shall be the destruction of all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, that shall fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (1 Nephi 11:34–36).

Glad Tidings of Great Joy

This young man and his family continued their journey in the wilderness. Eventually they came to the seashore, built a boat, and sailed across the sea to a new land. And the young man continued to teach the message of the Messiah using scripture and his own visions. He “did read unto [his people] that which was written by the prophet Isaiah” in order to “more fully persuade them to believe in the Lord their Redeemer.” He did this “that ye may have hope as well as your brethren from whom ye have been broken off” (1 Nephi 19:23–24). One of Isaiah’s prophesies was of the joy to come through the publishing of this message: “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation” (Isaiah 52:7).

Centuries after this young man, another prophet heard these good tidings from an angel and was told to share these tidings with the people. Said the angel:

Behold, I am come to declare unto you the glad tidings of great joy. For the Lord . . . hath sent me to declare unto thee that thou mayest rejoice; and that thou mayest declare unto thy people, that they may also be filled with joy. For behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth . . . shall come down from heaven among the children of men . . . And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary. And lo, he cometh unto his own, that salvation might come unto the children of men even through faith on his name. (Mosiah 3:3–9)

The birth of Jesus Christ fulfilled this prophecy. The night Jesus was born, there were shepherds “keeping watch over their flock over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them . . . And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:8–11).

This was the message of the prophets from the beginning. Starting with Adam and Eve, “Old Testament patriarchs, prophets, poets, and people looked forward to better days, filled with hope for renewal and deliverance by the Messiah. . . . Through it all, prophets reminded them that a Messiah, a Deliverer would come ‘to proclaim liberty to the captives’ (Isaiah 61:1).”[2] As Isaiah prophesied, this Messiah would “comfort all that mourn; to appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning” (Isaiah 61:2–3).

The Horn of Salvation

Others also prophesied of the Messiah. While speaking of Zion, the Psalmist prophesied, “Her saints shall shout aloud for joy. There will I make the horn of David to bud: I have ordained a lamp for mine anointed” (Psalm 132:16–17). The birth of Jesus Christ fulfilled this prophecy. Zacharias, a priest in Jerusalem, announced just before the Savior’s birth: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; as he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began” (Luke 1:68–70; cf. 71–79). Simeon, a holy man in Jerusalem, saw the child Jesus and declared, “Mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people” (Luke 2:30–31; cf. 25–33). Anna, a prophetess, came to where Simeon was and “gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38; cf. 36–38).

These prophecies and others let people know of redemption through the Messiah. This message was shared by prophets, and joy came to those who listened to their message. After one prophet testified of this message, someone who heard “had infused such joy into his soul” that he was overcome and became unconscious. When he regained consciousness, he stood and declared, “Blessed be the name of God . . . [for] behold, I have seen my Redeemer; and he shall come forth, and be born of a woman, and he shall redeem all mankind who believe on his name” (Alma 19:6, 12–13).

Another person was so wicked that an angel came to him to call him to repentance. After being overcome and being unconscious for days, he said, “I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world. Now, as my mind caught hold upon this thought, I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me . . . And oh, what joy, and what marvelous light I did behold” (Alma 36:17–20). This person then went on to share these glad tidings.

The Testimony of Apostles

At this Christmas season, and as we conclude our study of the Old Testament for this year’s Come, Follow Me curriculum, let us reflect on the message of the Old Testament: that God will deliver His people through His Messiah, born of Mary, and that God “declared unto prophets, by his own mouth, that Christ should come.” They received this message “that they may bear testimony of him. And by so doing, the Lord God prepareth the way that [all people] may have faith in Christ” and be saved (Moroni 7:23–34). The Christmas message (which is the glad tidings) came from Christmas prophets to help people have Christmas joy.

The Prophet Joseph Smith explained, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ.”[3] Paul taught that the Saints “are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, [with] Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone” (Ephesians 2:20), as Isaiah prophesied: “Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded” (1 Peter 2:6, quoting Isaiah 28:16).

Let us listen to the words of the prophets and receive the glad tidings of great joy. We will then be the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy: “It shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation” (Isaiah 25:9).

Returning to our introductory story, the young man saw the Messiah’s birth and understood the joy that comes through the salvation He offers. The twelve apostles who were with the Messiah brought that message to the world. All who embrace their message embrace joy both now and after this life, having everlasting salvation, as proclaimed by God’s living Apostles:

“Jesus Christ has once again called Apostles and has given them priesthood authority. He invites all of us to come unto Him and His Church, to receive the Holy Ghost, the ordinances of salvation, and to gain enduring joy.”[4]

“We bear testimony, as His duly ordained Apostles—that Jesus is the Living Christ, the immortal Son of God. He is the great King Immanuel, who stands today on the right hand of His Father. He is the light, the life, and the hope of the world. His way is the path that leads to happiness in this life and eternal life in the world to come. God be thanked for the matchless gift of His divine Son.”[5]

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

[1] See 1 Nephi chapters 1 and 2.

[2] “December 19–25: Christmas: ‘We Have Waited for Him, and He Will Save Us,’” in Come, Follow Me—For Individuals and Families: Old Testament 2022.

[3] “Chapter 3: Jesus Christ, the Divine Redeemer of the World,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith.

[4] “The Restoration of the Fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ: A Bicentennial Proclamation to the World,” Gospel Library.

[5] “The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles,” Gospel Library.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 52 – Christmas appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Malachi and Turning the Hearts of the Children to Their Fathersby Craig Foster

While the Book of Malachi is the last book of the Old Testament, it is certainly not the least in terms of the eternal teachings within the book. The name Malachi means “My Messenger” and the Malachi certainly fulfilled the purpose of his name in his prophetic calling as he discussed the end-time which is currently being fulfilled.[1]

Malachi is filled with passages regarding pure and righteous offerings, repentance, and preparing for the Second Coming. But by far, the most important teaching contained within this concluding Old Testament book is the fourth and final chapter in which the reader is warned, “the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.”[2] Root refers to our ancestry while branch refers to posterity.

In other words, as Elder Jeffrey R. Holland explained, without proper eternal links, “no family ties would exist in the eternities, and indeed the family of man would have been left in eternity with ‘neither root [ancestors] nor branch [descendants].’”[3] All would be destroyed, leaving those who have experienced mortality without not only ancestors and heritage, but also posterity and name. Holland continued, “Inasmuch as such a sealed, united, celestially saved family of God is the ultimate purpose of mortality, any failure here would have been a curse indeed, rendering the entire plan of salvation ‘utterly wasted.’”

But when the reader is left wondering if all is for naught, comes the most powerful and beautiful promise of Malachi. In the final two verses:

5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:

6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.[4]

When the Angel Moroni visited Joseph Smith, he quoted Malachi with a slight but significant variation:

Behold, I will reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers. If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming.[5]

The Prophet Joseph Smith explained, “Now, the word turn here should be translated bind, or seal.”[6] Thankfully, the sealing powers were restored on the 3rd day of April, 1836 by the visitation of the prophet Elijah to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple. President Russell M. Nelson explained, “The earth was created, and this Church was restored so that families could be formed, sealed, and exalted eternally.”[7]

What is bound on earth can and will be bound in heaven when performed by priesthood power in temples of the Lord. In an epistle from Joseph Smith giving further directions on baptism for the dead, he stated, “It may seem to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of—a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven.”[8] Relationships no doubt created in the premortal existence and continued in mortality will also continue in our post-mortal existence.

These eternal bonds are generational and multidimensional “for we without [our deceased loved ones] cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect.”[9] President Joseph Fielding Smith taught, “What was the promise made to the fathers that was to be fulfilled in the latter days by the turning of the hearts of the children to their fathers? It was the promise of the Lord made through Enoch, Isaiah, and the prophets, to the nations of the earth, that the time should come when the dead should be redeemed.”[10]

As we seek after our dead and perform the necessary saving ordinances, we are blessed. As Elder Gerrit W. Gong explained, “Connecting with our ancestors can change our lives in surprising ways. From their trials and accomplishments, we gain faith and strength. From their love and sacrifices, we learn to forgive and move forward. Our children become resilient. We gain protection and power. Ties with ancestors increase family closeness, gratitude, miracles. Such ties can bring help from the other side of the veil.”[11]

Truly, as we turn our hearts to our ancestors by searching after our deceased ancestors and performing the saving ordinances in temples of the Lord, we will feel the Spirit of Elijah which is the Holy Ghost and His guiding us as we participate in family history and temple work. Everyday, millions, and soon billions, on both sides of the veil benefit from Elijah’s restoring the sealing powers as prophesized in the Book of Malachi.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The author would like to thank Suzanne L. Foster and David S. Young.

[1] See “Malachi” at https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-individuals-and-families-old-testament-2022/51?lang=eng.

[2] Malachi 4:1.

[3] Jeffrey R. Holland, Christ and the New Covenant: The Messianic Message of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1997), 297–98.

[4] Malachi 4:5-6.

[5] Joseph Smith—History 1:38-39.

[6] Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, Utah: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2007), 472.

[7] Russell M. Nelson, “Celestial Marriage,” October General Conference, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2008/10/celestial-marriage?lang=eng.

[8] Doctrine and Covenants 128:9.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Bruce R. McConkie, comp., Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954–56), 2:154.

[11] Gerrit W. Gong, “We Each Have a Story,” April 2022 General Conference, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2022/04/26gong?lang=eng.

Craig L. Foster earned a MA and MLIS at Brigham Young University. He is also an accredited genealogist and worked as a research consultant at the Family History Library in Salt Lake City for over thirty years before retiring in December 2021. He has published multiple books and articles about different aspects of Mormon history, including co-editing the Persistence of Polygamy series with Newell G. Bringhurst and co-authored American Polygamy: A History of Fundamentalist Mormon Faith with Marianne T. Watson. Craig is also on the editorial board of the John Whitmer Historical Association Journal.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 51 – Malachi appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

*by Daniel Ortner*

There are many powerful prophecies of the events leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. But as someone who comes from a Jewish background one prophecy stands out as particularly vivid and poignant, and that is that one day the people of Israel who did not recognize Jesus as their Messiah and Lord will come to recognize him.

Zechariah describes the moment when the Jewish people will look upon their crucified Lord:

“And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.” (Zechariah 13:6)

In the Doctrine and Covenants 45 the Lord elaborated upon this vision and left no doubt of its fulfilment.

“And then shall the Jews look upon me and say: What are these wounds in thine hands and in thy feet?

Then shall they know that I am the Lord; for I will say unto them: These wounds are the wounds with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. I am he who was lifted up. I am Jesus that was crucified. I am the Son of God.”

And then shall they weep because of their iniquities; then shall they lament because they persecuted their king.” (D&C 45:51-53).

My heart is filed with eager anticipation for this day when a people that has spent millennia longing for their Messiah will finally recognize him. In that day, I imagine him welcoming then to come and see and come and feel just as he invited the Nephites to do in 3 Nephi 11. I imagine the tears that will be shed both of sorrow and of happiness.

Although this prophesied day has been delayed for thousands of years, we have the sure testimony of the prophet Zechariah and the Lord himself that all these things will be fulfilled.

As one who received a witness of Jesus Christ as my Savior, I long for the day when by Jewish brothers and sisters will come to recognize Christ and receive him as their Lord and Savior. What a glorious day that will be.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

Daniel Ortner is a public interest lawyer who focuses on the First Amendment. He joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as an undergraduate from a Jewish background.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 50 – Haggai; Zechariah 1–3; 7–14 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Habakkuk – For our dayby Jennifer Roach, LMHC

Habakkuk is the book you never knew you needed.

The problem of evil is a question every generation must grapple with. If God exists, why does he allow school children to be killed in a shooting? If God is good, how can he let people suffer as they do? If God cares about his children, how can poverty, disease, and violence rampage us as they do?

Habakkuk grappled with this question too. In his day the question was, “If God loves us, why do the Babylonians terrorize us?” I offer the following reading of Habakkuk – for his day, and for our day – as an answer to the problem of evil.

| For Our Day – The Complaint | King James – The Complaint | | I wake up early and read the papers. Another shooting. No, two more. Violence all around.I pray and tell God about the violence and wonder why he does not save us from it. | Verse 2. How long, Lord, must I call for help,but you do not listen?Or cry out to you, “Violence!”but you do not save? | | And not just in the news. Family members doing wrong to each other. Destruction of faith and love. We’re swimming in conflict. It’s everywhere. | 3. Why do you make me look at injustice?Why do you tolerate wrongdoing?Destruction and violence are before me;there is strife, and conflict abounds. | | The laws don’t help. The legal system doesn’t either. We all see how much is going wrong in the world, but no one can do anything. It feels like wickedness is winning. | 4. Therefore the law is paralyzed,and justice never prevails.The wicked hem in the righteous,so that justice is perverted. | | The Lord’s Response | The Lord’s Response | | Oh, you’ve noticed the violence.Well, watch this, you wouldn’t believe it, even if you were told.I let violence happen. You cry, “How can God let this happen?”There are dreaded people who are intent on violence.They’ll amaze you with how violent they are.They care nothing about you or me, they only care about the damage they can do.I let violence exist in your world.And you cannot understand why. | 5 – 11. “Look at the nations and watch—and be utterly amazed.For I am going to do something in your daysthat you would not believe,even if you were told.6 I am raising up the Babylonians,that ruthless and impetuous people…7 They are a feared and dreaded people;they are a law to themselves…9 they all come intent on violence….11 Then they sweep past like the wind and go on—guilty people, whose own strength is their god.” | | The 2nd Complaint | The 2nd Complaint | | God, I don’t understand. You are an eternal and holy God.I know that your eyes are too pure to even look at this level of evil.I know that you can’t tolerate wrongdoing.So, I’m very confused, why do you let all this violence happen?Your children suffer.Why do you let the wicked get away with this?I will wait for your answer | 12 – 13. Lord, are you not from everlasting?My God, my Holy One, you will never die.You, Lord, have appointed them to execute judgment;you, my Rock, have ordained them to punish.13 Your eyes are too pure to look on evil;you cannot tolerate wrongdoing.Why then do you tolerate the treacherous?Why are you silent while the wickedswallow up those more righteous than themselves? | | The Lord’s 2nd ResponseChapter 2 | The Lord’s 2nd ResponseChapter 2 | | You are only seeing part of the picture. Violence only seems to be prevailing.These violent men are never satisfied by the evil they do – they always want more.That’s why it keeps happening.They can’t get enough – in fact it is impossible for them to ever get enough.There is no end to their stealing.They can’t steal enough.There is no end to their plundering.They can’t plunder enough.There is no end to shedding blood.They can’t get enough blood.They indulge in too much vanity.They love the shedding of blood.The thirst of violence is never satisfied.You wake up and see that another act of violence has been done and ask me, “Why is this happening? And “When will this end?”You can not understand how strongly violence hungers for more.But the Lord is in his Holy Temple. | Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time… 6 Shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! how long?….9 Woe to him that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house, that he may set his nest on high, that he may be delivered from the power of evil!…12 Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and stablisheth a city by iniquity! 13 Behold, is it not of the Lord of hosts that the people shall labour in the very fire, and the people shall weary themselves for very vanity? 14 For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea….17 For the violence of Lebanon shall cover thee, and the spoil of beasts, which made them afraid, because of men’s blood, and for the violence of the land, of the city, and of all that dwell therein.20 But the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him. | | Habakkuk’s Prayer for TodayChapter 3 | Habakkuk’s PrayerChapter 3 | | The Lord does not give Habakkuk an explanation of the problem of evil.He could have.In fact, Habakkuk is just like us – he asked for the explanation. “Why do you make me look at suffering?”But God knew that the explanation would not satisfy Habakkuk. Just like it would not satisfy us.God could have explained all the theology behind evil. He could have explained why evil always thirsts for more and is never satisfied.But he knew that answer would not satisfy us.Instead, God give Habakkuk a vision of Himself, in all this glory. And he asks Habakkuk to be satisfied with that answer.The point being that evil and violence are never satisfied. So no explanation of them could ever really satisfy either.So God reminds Habakkuk who He really is. That he rules the universe. And he asks Habakkuk to allow this vision of Him to suffice. He asks Habakkuk to not be like evil – something that is never satisfied – and to accept the answer he has been given God. | 2 O Lord, I have heard thy speech, and was afraid…3 God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise. 4 And his brightness was as the light; he had horns coming out of his hand: and there was the hiding of his power. 5 Before him went the pestilence, and burning coals went forth at his feet….7 I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction: and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble. 8 Was the Lord displeased against the rivers?…Thou didst cleave the earth with rivers….10 The mountains saw thee, and they trembled: the overflowing of the water passed by: the deep uttered his voice, and lifted up his hands on high. 11 The sun and moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the shining of thy glittering spear….13 Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, even for salvation with thine anointed; thou woundedst the head out of the house of the wicked, by discovering the foundation unto the neck. 18 Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.19 The Lord God is my strength, and he will make my feet like hinds’ feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places. To the chief singer on my stringed instruments. |

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 49 – Nahum; Habakkuk; Zephaniah appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Gourd, a Worm, and an East Wind: Discovering God’s Extensions of Love in the Book of Jonahby Matt Crawford

Jonah called Gath-hepher home—a town which was west of the present-day Sea of Galilee (see 2 Kings 14:25). When the Lord called Jonah on a mission from his comfortable home to the Assyrian city of Nineveh,[1] he did not hesitate to act. Jonah immediately “rose up to flee unto Tarshish” (Jonah 1:3).[2]

Jonah may have run away from the mission call to Nineveh because one of Israel’s enemies, the Assyrians, lived there. The Assyrians were known to regularly torture and kill their captives, and then gruesomely desecrate their bodies.[3] While we do not know if Jonah was afraid of physical pain, we do know that he hated Assyrians and was afraid that they would repent and receive God’s mercy if he fulfilled his mission (see Jonah 4:2).

Rejecting God’s call, Jonah “paid the fare” (Jonah 1:3) for passage on a ship to Tarshish. One commentator notes that Jonah probably paid a considerable sum of money because the journey to Tarshish could take up to one year—“evidently because of the need to restock provisions frequently at ports along the way, wait for favorable winds, and trade the cargo.”[4] At one point Jonah slept soundly below deck while the ship’s crew thrashed through a storm (see Jonah 1:5). The storm was so brutal that the sailors expected the ship to sink, unless they prayed to their gods and tossed trade goods overboard to lighten the load (see Jonah 1:5). When the shipmaster found Jonah asleep, the captain woke him up and asked him to pray to God (see Jonah 1:6). When prayer did not lessen the intensity of the storm, the crew cast lots.

Proverbs 16:33 declares that “the lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof [the outcome] is of the Lord” (see also Proverbs 18:18). Casting lots was a trusted source of divine intervention during Old Testament times because it allowed the Lord to guide who was chosen—He could order the pieces so that a certain person was picked. Pieces of rock or wood were placed in a container, and, either by rolling all the pieces out of the container or inviting each participant to take a piece out of the container, led to the Lord’s decision (see Joshua 21:4–8; Nehemiah 10:34; 1 Nephi 3:11). In more recent times we might liken lot casting to drawing straws—whoever draws the shortest is the chosen one.[5]

When the sailors aboard the ship cast lots, “the lot fell upon Jonah” (Jonah 1:7). Despite his efforts to run from God’s call, the Lord is not giving up on the reluctant prophet. God continues to reach out toward Jonah through a storm and the lot. Jolted, Jonah confessed to the sailors that the storm was because he ran from God. Surprised, the crew questioned: “Why hast thou done this?” (Jonah 1:9). The sailors asked what could be done to still the storm. Fully realizing that his poor decision to run from the Lord was now affecting others, Jonah came to the following conclusion: “Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm unto you” (Jonah 1:12). The sailors initially refused to comply with his wish. Instead, they “rowed hard to bring [the ship] to the land,” but in the end, “they could not” (Jonah 1:13). Thus, the men “took up Jonah, and cast him forth into the sea: and the sea ceased from her raging” (Jonah 1:15).

When Jonah hit the water, he recalled, “billows and . . . waves passed over me. The weeds were wrapped about mine head [and] I went down to the bottoms” of the sea (Jonah 2:5–6). Fearing that this was the end, Jonah’s “soul fainted” but then he “remembered the Lord” through prayer (Jonah 2:7). It appears that the prayer brought the great fish—potentially some type of whale—and it swallowed the prophet. The scriptures reveal that this was no ordinary experience: “The Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah” (Jonah 1:17; emphasis added). To prepare this great fish for Jonah, the Lord knew when the great fish needed to be born, He knew the great fish’s habits, He knew that the great fish had to be in the vicinity when the men threw Jonah overboard, and He needed a creature big enough to complete the job. Such preparation for one frightened missionary begs the question, If the Lord will prepare a great fish, a game of lots, a storm, or a mission call for a rebellious disciple, what will He do for each of us?

After Jonah is swallowed by the great fish he continued to pray: “Out of the belly of hell cried I” (Jonah 2:2). Like Jonah, we may at times be headed in the wrong direction, but change is possible. The book of Jonah is an extremely detailed case of the Lord’s multiple maneuverings to save a single soul. Jonah acknowledged his own “lying vanities,” his selfishness, and “vowed” to be more faithful to the Lord’s will (Jonah 2:8–9). After three days and nights “the Lord spake unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land” (Jonah 2:10).[6] Once free from the fish “the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the second time, saying, Arise, go unto Nineveh. . . . So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh” (Jonah 3:1–3).

The prophet promptly enters the city and prophecies that in forty days “Nineveh shall be overthrown” (Jonah 3:4). The inhabitants of the city, including the king, listened to Jonah’s teachings and began to repent. The people fasted, wore sackcloth as a demonstration to God that they were humbly pleading for forgiveness, and the king issued a decree which encouraged the entire populace to repent (see Jonah 3:5–9). The measures proved successful because “God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way and repented; and God turned away the evil that he had said he would bring upon them” (JST Jonah 3:10).[7]

We expect Jonah to be doing back flips of joy, but the final chapter begins: “But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry” (Jonah 4:1). What displeased him? How can he be angry? Jonah prayed while upset and explained his reason: “When I was yet in my country . . . I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger and of great kindness” (Jonah 4:2). In other words: “Lord, when I was at home I knew of Thy goodness and patience toward even the most despicable of people. That is why I headed toward Tarshish and not Nineveh. I did not want Thee to forgive and bless the inhabitants of Nineveh.” Jonah vehemently hated the Ninevites—they were not part of covenant Israel and what is more they were Israel’s sworn enemies. Jonah did not want them to change and be blessed, he wanted them to sin and suffer. Jonah then concluded his prayer by asking the Lord to “take . . . my life from me; . . . for it is better for me to die than to live” (Jonah 4:3).

After Jonah’s audacious reply, the Lord, once again, shows Jonah mercy and patience—mercy and patience the Lord just demonstrated toward those of Nineveh, but which Jonah spurned. The Lord utters the simple question, “Doest thou well to be angry?” (Jonah 4:4). There is no harsh rebuke, no flash of lightning which sizzles Jonah’s flesh, no thunder from heaven to scare Jonah into a feeling of gratitude, but a simple question which may, if the prophet allows, work on his heart.

After the Lord asks Jonah if his anger is justifiable, the prophet refuses to respond. Was Jonah stung by the question or pierced by the Lord’s keen insight? The question seemed to infuriate Jonah so much that he gives the Lord the silent treatment. Like a teenager mad at his parents, or a husband after a tiff with his wife, Jonah turns and walks away from the situation, refusing to respond.

Jonah exited the city proper and headed east (see Jonah 4:5). Then he probably scaled part of the hills located in that direction and waited and watched Nineveh.[8] Jonah seems unconvinced that the repentant state of the people of Nineveh is permanent. He is waiting, hoping, for the city to “be overthrown” after “forty days” as he originally prophesied (Jonah 3:4). While he waited, he built himself a booth or hut to provide shade—perhaps fashioned of overlaid sticks and branches, as was done for a feast required by the Law of Moses (see Leviticus 23:42; Nehemiah 8:14–15). The booth or hut evidently provided some shade, but it was probably hastily constructed from errant sticks from the vicinity. If so, Jonah’s comfort level and shade was minimal—sunshine would have streamed through the sticks. Whatever its construction, the booth was probably intended to be a physical, non-verbal sign that the Lord was wrong, and Jonah was right. Jonah’s thoughts may have ventured into this line of reasoning: If I wait here long enough the Lord will see Nineveh destroyed. Despite the almost worthless hut and Jonah’s constant moodiness the Lord provided a miracle.

While the booth provided a minimal amount of shade from the blazing sun, the “Lord God prepared a gourd, and made it to come up over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. So Jonah was exceeding glad of the gourd” (Jonah 4:6). We do not know the specific type of plant[9] which grew overnight to such a mass that it shaded Jonah (see Jonah 4:10). Yet, as was the case with the call, the storm, the game of lots, and the great fish, this “gourd” was “prepared” for Jonah (Jonah 4:6). The Lord knew that Jonah would go up on the hill and pout, and so the seed of this plant was in the right place at the right time to provide physical comfort for the prophet. God really does know our moods and routines. Despite Jonah’s gladness for the shade—the only positive emotion Jonah shows in this book—the shadow would not last.

As was the case with the storm, the lot, the great fish, and the gourd, the Lord had “prepared” other things for Jonah (Jonah 4:7). A worm “smote the gourd that it withered” a day after its astonishing growth, and a “vehement east wind” probably knocked over the booth[10] and the “the sun [once again] beat upon [Jonah’s] head” (Jonah 4:7–8). While the “vehement east wind” seems to indicate the Lord’s displeasure with Jonah’s behavior,[11] God still does not give up on this angry, uncomfortable child. Ultimately, the quick growing leafy plant served as tangible evidence of the Lord’s mercy—His constant readiness to forgive Nineveh and Jonah—while the equally fast demise of the gourd and the blasts of hot air presented proofs that without God’s goodness ruin follows.

To underscore these eternal truths, the Lord pointed out the folly of Jonah’s anger toward the inhabitants of Nineveh by asking, “Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd?” The prophet retorted, “I do well to be angry” (Jonah 4:9). Patiently, the Lord connected the dots for Jonah: “Thou has had pity on the gourd…should not I spare Nineveh, that great city…?” (Jonah 4:10–11). In other words, “Your appreciation and love for the gourd is but a shadow of the care and love I have for you and the Assyrians of Nineveh.”

In short, every person is valuable to God. He simply will not give up or stop trying to save His children. From a city of Assyrians to a frustrated, bitter servant sitting next to a withered gourd, God cares for, watches over, and strives to bring everyone back home to heaven.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

[1] Nineveh was probably located in modern-day Iraq Pictoral Bible Dictionary, ed., Merrill C. Tenney (Nashville, Tennessee: The Soutwestern Company, 1976), s.v. “Nineveh.”

[2] It is likely that Tarshish was located in modern Spain and known for its successful trade industry (see Ezekiel 27:12); Pictoral Bible Dictionary, s.v. “Tarshish.”

[3] Erika Belibtreu, “Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 17 no. 1 (1991): 51–61, 75.

[4] Uriel Simon, The JPS Bible Commentary: Jonah (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1999), 6.

[5] For more information regarding casting lots see Joh. Lindblom Lund “Lot-Casting in the Old Testament,” Vestus Testamentum 12, facs. 2 (April 1962): 164–178.

[6] Where the great fish “vomited out” Jonah is a matter of debate. One tradition holds that the great fish deposited Jonah to a spot south of Jaffa—the port city where Jonah boarded the ship days earlier (see Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Atlas of the Crusades [New York: Facts on File, 1990], 43; see also John MacArthur, The MacArthur Bible Commenatry [Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 2005], 1011). Others suggest that the fish put Jonah in ancient Alexandretta—now İskenderun in modern-day Turkey (see The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: An Illustrated Encyclopedia, ed. George Arthur Buttrick, 5 vols. [Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon, 1962–1976] s.v. “Jonah, Book of,” 2:965). The ancient historian Josephus reported that Jonah was disgorged on the shore of the Euxine or Black Sea (see Josephus: Complete Works [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1960], 208).

[7] One commentator notes that the Hebrew text implies that the Assyrians only ritually repented. That is, they repented the only way that they knew how: through sackcloth and fasting. “Ritual response and ethical tidying up are precisely what one would expect from pagan Assyrians—and from every indication, they are still just that, despite the fact that they have taken a step in the right direction.” John H. Walton, “The Object Lesson of Jonah 4:5–7 and the Purpose of the Book of Jonah,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992): 53–54.

[8] See The Jewish Encyclopedia, ed., Ididore Singer, 12 vols. (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1901–1906), s.v. “Nineveh,” 12:311.

[9] The most likely was a type of giant castor bean or oil plant. Jules Janick and Harry S. Paris, “Jonah and the ‘Gourd,’ at Nineveh: Consequences of a Classic Mistranslation,” 349–357; paper presented at North Carolina State University’s Cucurbitaceae Conference September 17–21, 2006. See also Encyclopaedia Judaica, eds. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik, 2nd ed., 22 vols. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), s.v. “Castor-Oil Plant,” 4:516.

[10] See Jack M. Sasson, Jonah: A New Translation with Introduction, Commentary, and Interpretation, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1990), 304.

[11] Alonzo L. Gaskill, The Lost Language of Symbolism: An Essential Guide for Recognizing and Interpreting Symbols of the Gospel (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2003), 153–154.

Matt Crawford is a husband, father, teacher, and writer. He resides with his family in Layton, Utah.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 48 – Jonah; Micah appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

(submitted by Dennis B. Horne)

Editorial Note: In the below article, President Smith defines the label “Mormonism” very much as President Russell M. Nelson has. These prophets are one in their views on this matter. President Smith also expounds in some detail on many facets of church practice and doctrine, including the future. Most of the material is as true and relevant today as it was a hundred and twenty years ago—there is great consistency in church teachings and practice. One effect of his message is to make one proud to be a faithful member of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ. The original article is titled, The “Mormonism” of Today:

[Two and a half pages of explanatory material regarding plural marriage omitted.] Marriage is regarded by the Latter-day Saints as a sacrament. Under its higher ecclesiastical law it involves an everlasting covenant. That does not end with death. The marriage does not take place in the resurrection, but in time and in this world. It is of the nature of that marriage in the Garden of Eden between a man and a woman in whom then there was no death. It was a wedding of immortals. That which was lost through sin in the fall, was restored through obedience and the atonement of Christ in the regeneration, and the resurrection brings the parted pair together again as one, “no more twain but one flesh,” spiritual but tangible and eternal. That which is sealed on earth today by divinely revealed authority is sealed in heaven and remains in spite of death, immutable, and abides forever.

The family thus formed is the basis of an ever-increasing kingdom and dominion continuing in worlds without end.[1] Marriages are permitted for time only, as all persons are not fitted for the higher conditions and the pure and sacred obligations they impose. The secular law in all cases whether for time or eternity, is honored, and that requires a license and a ceremony to be recorded under the State statutes, which provide heavy penalties for their violation. Monogamic wedlock is thus established by law in Utah, and is really more rigidly observed than in any other part of the Union.

“Mormonism” inculcates chastity of life, self-restraint, temperance, abstinence from stimulants, order, peace, charity and fraternity. It teaches submission to law and promotes true patriotism. It recognizes the institutions of this country as established under Divine direction. It does not unite church and state. It supports each in its own sphere, but regards them as separate and distinct, and holds that neither should encroach upon the domain of the other. The “Mormon” Church does not dictate the politics of its members or direct citizens how they shall vote. The only restraint it claims to exercise as to political office is, that before any man who holds an ecclesiastical position which demands his entire services for the Church, becomes a candidate for a secular office which would take him from his Church duties, he shall obtain permission to do so from its presiding authorities. This is absolutely necessary to proper Church discipline, and is only reasonable and just. When that consent has been obtained, no man occupying a political office in this land is freer than he to perform his duty to his country, nor enjoys greater liberty as an American citizen. Notwithstanding all that is said and imagined as to the interference of the Church in political affairs, no citizen can truthfully assert that he has been deprived by the Church of his freedom, or that the Church has attempted to coerce or control conventions, elections, or legislatures.

“Mormonism” is a term coined by its adversaries. It cannot mean anything but that which was taught by Mormon. He was a prophet of God on this hemisphere about sixteen centuries ago. His doctrines can be learned from the book that bears his name. It was translated by Joseph Smith from metallic plates covered with ancient hieroglyphics and deposited by Mormon when his nation was about to perish, under the warlike race from which our present Indian tribes descended. Those doctrines are, simply, the gospel of Jesus Christ as he delivered it in person on this land, after His resurrection and ascension from Palestine. They are unmixed with the precepts of men. They are the principles of Salvation. They teach faith, hope and charity. They show the necessity of belief in God and obedience to His commands. They require repentance from sin, baptism by immersion in water by one having divine authority, for the remission of sins through Christ’s atonement, and they promise the gift of the Holy Ghost through the laying on of hands and all the gifts of that Spirt enjoyed of old. They explain the true order of the Church organization and make plain the religion of the Redeemer.

The Book of Mormon gives the history of this continent back to a remote period. It describes the customs and doings of the early inhabitants of the land and traces their origin. It gives the places of cities, temples, fortifications and buildings, the ruins of many of which have been discovered since the book was published. It treats of the wars, troubles, divisions of tribes, their religion, rebellion, travels, triumphs and tribulations, and forms a study for the archaeologist and the antiquarian.

“Mormonism,” then, is the pure gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ revealed anew in these latter times. Its advocates are not “Mormons” any more than they are Isaiahs or Ezekiels, Peters or Pauls, for they believe in the Old and the New Testaments as well as in the Book of Mormon. Their proper name is Latter-day Saints, in distinction from that of the former-day saints. They claim to have a mission to proclaim the “everlasting gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue and people,” and brought to earth by the angel predicted by John the Divine in the Apocalypse. They gather in places appointed of God and his elect, called from all quarters of the earth. They “seek first the kingdom of God;” that is, His spiritual kingdom set up on the earth for the last days and for the last time, in the “dispensation of the fulness of times,” in which all things in Christ are to be gathered in one. The elders of the Church go into the world for this purpose, without pay or support other than that which is voluntarily bestowed by their hearers. They travel “without purse or scrip.”[2] They are often despised and rejected. They are men of pure lives devoted to the welfare of humanity. They are constantly libeled and maligned. They bear their cross with patience.[3] Their reward comes from above. They invade no man’s family. They have no inducements to offer to converts except the blessings that come from obedience to the truth, and a witness from God to each soul that accepts the message of salvation. To these may be added the assurance of persecution and obloquy and in many instances mobocracy and violence.[4]

The “Mormons” or Latter-day Saints are baptized by one spirit into one body. They are striving to live together in love, and to observe the golden rule. They are organized into a compact ecclesiastical body, and are guided by apostles and prophets, pastors and teachers, and all the ministerial authorities had in the primitive Christian Church. These are inspired by divine revelation for the work of the ministry and the perfecting of the saints, and to give counsel and advice to them in all things pertaining to their welfare. But everything in the Church has to be done by common consent. The people prosper under the system. They are advised to own the land on which they live and the homes that shelter them. The home is held sacred by the saints as the beginning of their heaven. They rear their families in the fear of God. The song of praise and the voice of prayer are heard in their habitations. They are becoming a power in the earth because of the virtues and the strength of the religion that is intensely spiritual and also eminently practical.

“Mormonism” is for the body as well as for the spirit. It is a religion for today. By right living now, its votaries are prepared for the future. By laying a firm foundation in their world, they expect to be able to build upon it in the world to come. No one need fear the spread of “Mormonism,” for that means the spread of righteousness and order and peace. It is light in the midst of the darkness of this world. It contains the solution of every religious problem that has vexed and divided Christendom for centuries. It holds for future development the settlement of the conflict between capital and labor. It bears divine authority sent down from heaven in the nineteenth century, and it will not be taken from earth again. It will prepare the way for the coming of the King of kings, whose right it is to reign, and until then its people and their leaders are required to remain “in subjection to the powers that be,” and to live honoring kings, presidents, magistrates and municipalities and to upholding wholesome law wherever they reside.

“Mormonism” will be opposed and fought against, but it will not be overcome. It is of God and not of man. It is vital in every part. It puts down sin and vice and regards lust with abhorrence. It brings its devotees not only to the “unity of the faith,” but to concert of purpose and of action. It leads them to individual communion with Deity, and at the same time to perform their duties to one another on the earth. It promotes industry, thrift, education, progress, the fine arts as well as the common labors of life, and seeks for the acquirement of everything that is useful and beautiful in this world, and the securing of all the highest glories and exaltations in the world to come. “Mormonism” is God’s truth manifested to man, and it will endure and conquer and abide forever.

https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets/a8b335cc-080c-4c90-b72a-21d3add7f4ad/0/371

Note: This article was originally published on Truth Will Prevail.

[1] For further information about this concept, see: http://www.truthwillprevail.xyz/2022/04/getting-or-creating-planets.html

[2] This is no longer current practice, the Church having gradually moved away from that method of missionary service during the early part of the last century. Yet most missionaries still bear the expenses of their own missions today.

[3] For further explanation of this phrase, see Elder Jeffrey R. Holland’s October 2022 General Conference address here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2022/10/41holland?lang=eng

[4] Regarding the persecution most members experience, see Pres. Nelson’s article here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2020/04/the-future-of-the-church-preparing-the-world-for-the-saviors-second-coming?lang=eng

Dennis B. Horne grew up in south Davis County and he served in the Independence Missouri mission. He attended BYU and Weber State Universities, earning a degree in Communications. After working in television broadcasting for a number of years he became a technical writer for the LDS Church Material Management Department. He became an independent researcher/author because of his love of church history and doctrine. This pursuit led him to write a biography of Elder Bruce R. McConkie, an edited publication of the diaries of Abraham H. Cannon, and biographies of President Lorenzo Snow and Orson F. Whitney. He also wrote about callings to serve in the church, the doctrine of giving healing blessings, and a compilation of the teachings of prophets and apostles about how to determine doctrinal authority. He has twice presented at the BYU Church History Symposium. His articles occasionally appear at Truth Will Prevail, Interpreter, and FAIR.

The post President Joseph F. Smith Explains What “Mormonism” Really Is appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Amos and Prophets*by Daniel Ortner*

Amos is considered one of the “minor” prophets. But Amos 3:7 is a verse that is one of the more frequently cited in General Conference. According to the BYU Scripture Citation Index, it has been cited around 109 times. That’s more than any single psalm in the book of Psalms (not more than the whole book of Psalms). More than whole books of the Old Testament such as Judges, Ruth, and Esther. More than a lot of well known verses in the New Testament or Book of Mormon. And even about as frequently as 1 Nephi 3:7. It is a pretty big deal. Ultimately the popularity of this verse says a lot about our devotion to following the Lord’s prophet and apostles.

The context of Amos can enrich our appreciation for the Lord’s guarantee that “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” (Amos 3:7). In the first verse of the book, we read that his prophecy was received “two years before the earthquake.” (Amos 1:1). Scholars believe that this quake took place in around 750 B.C. and measured around an 8.2 on the richter scale, which is more intense than the great San Francisco Earthquake of 1906.

Amos’s words are filled with warnings of this massive destruction that the Lord would bring to Israel and to the neighboring nations, including allusions to quaking and shaking that seem eerily prophetic (Amos 9:1). Through his servant, God offers a desperate plea for repentance. But unfortunately we know that the people did not repent and that by the time these words were compiled into a book the warnings of Amos were fulfilled. God of course does not reveal every single tragedy or disaster to his prophets with this degree of specificity. Natural disasters, war, and disease occur without warning. And it isn’t clear whether Amos knew exactly what would happen and when it would occur. But if we listen to the words of our prophet and apostles, we will be prepared for the disasters that come our way and we will be able to stand firm.

Those principles apply with full force in our day. I absolutely adored a recent devotional at BYU-Hawaii by Sister Sheri Dew entitled “Prophets Can See Around Corners.” Her talk was a powerful declaration of how God speaks to his Prophets and Apostles to help warn us of danger.

Sister Dew pointed to countless examples of where prophetic inspiration was ultimately prophetic such as the effort to bring smartphones to missionaries which was executed just in time for the COVID-19 Pandemic or her decision to follow President Hinckley’s advice to get out of debt shortly before the 2008 financial crisis. The point isn’t that President Nelson or President Hinckley knew precisely about the COVID-19 pandemic or about the 2008 financial crisis anymore than that Amos necessarily knew the exact date and time of the earthquake that was coming. But God spoke through his servant and revealed what was around the corner. Those who followed their advice were blessed with protection and preparation. Those who didn’t were left unprepared and suffered the negative consequences.

As Sister Dew explained: “Prophets see things we cannot see because the Lord does ‘nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.’ This is why prophets make us smarter than any other leaders or influencers on earth. Prophets help us see dangers we cannot yet see and opportunities we can’t even imagine.”

Many of us have friends or family members who have expressed their concern that as Latter-day Saints we put too much trust in the prophet and apostles and that we are going to be led astray. But as Sister Dew explained, it is ultimately not President Nelson at the head of the Church but Jesus Christ who speaks through his servants the prophets and apostles:

Brothers and sisters, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, acting unitedly, will never send the Church in the wrong direction. And here is why: Because even THE prophet is not the head of this Church. Jesus Christ is, and He is perfect. Prophets take their instructions from Him who knows all, sees all, and understands all things. . . .

In this Church, we are never dependent solely upon mortal men, as inspired as they may be. When we follow the prophet, we are actually following and placing our trust in Jesus Christ. For He has promised that His words will all be fulfilled, ‘whether by [His] own voice or by the voice of [His] servants, it is the same.’

It is vital that each of us have an abiding testimony that we are being led by a living prophet and apostles. Our spiritual safety desperately depends on it.

Sister dew discussed several powerful principles that can help us gain confidence in the teachings of the prophets:

First, we can trust that prophets do not have their own personal agenda. Instead, “[t]heir agenda is the Lord’s. And yet, too often we listen to them last.”

Second, we can trust that prophets will teach divine truth even when it is unpopular:

Apostles are under divine mandate to teach truth, even when truth is unpopular. They are pressured to change the Lord’s doctrine to make it more palatable, but the doctrine doesn’t belong to them and is not theirs to change. They’re accused of being out of touch, but I know of no group who is more in touch with the realities and complexities of life.

I promise you that no leaders on earth are more honest with you than prophets are. And no leaders care more about you and your future.

Third, we can pay close attention to the powerful spirit that testifies to us when a prophet speaks:

The Holy Ghost is eager to bear witness of prophets, seers, and revelators and the priesthood keys they hold. It is the presence of the keys we feel so profoundly when a prophet enters the room. But you don’t have to be in the presence of a prophet to gain a spiritual witness of his divine mantle.

If you want to know if fifteen prophets walk the earth today, pray to know. Ask humbly and sincerely, and the Holy Ghost will bear witness to you. I promise you that.

Prophets, seers, and revelators are, very simply, one of God’s greatest gifts to His children.

Fourth, we can try to implement the principles that the Prophet teaches us. We can take it seriously and experience the positive dividends of following his counsel.

Fifth, we need not be surprised if prophets and apostles are unpopular or rejected: “When prophets refuse to embrace the disintegration of morals championed by a rabidly secular society, that does not mean prophets are wrong. Sustaining prophets in today’s world takes faith—but not faith in them, faith in Jesus Christ, who called them.”

We likewise must not “be deceived by activists who believe their passion for a cause gives them permission to censure prophets. Don’t turn your back on those who have all priesthood keys and who can help you see around corners.”

Finally, we must let prophetic teachings be our spiritual anchor. If we do so the promises are powerful and profound:

Your greatest spiritual safety will come by following the prophet. My dear friends, there may be times when you find yourself wrestling with teachings from prophets. But this isn’t rocket science. I can promise you two things: First, you will question your testimony all your life if you do two things: break your covenants and turn your back on prophets. But the reverse is also true: You will enjoy a growing testimony all of your life if you keep your covenants and follow the prophet. That is a promise.

I personally have a strong testimony that we are led by a living Prophet and that God reveals to President Nelson and other Apostles everything that is needed for our spiritual peace and safety in these latter-days. Nothing is being withheld that is needful for us to be able to stay faithful on the covenant path. I have tragically seen too many people I care about wander off that path by first beginning to question and turn their back on prophets and then eventually beginning to break their covenants. I hope that Amos’s prophetic promise and Sheri Dew’s inspired words will help us recommit to following the Lord’s anointed as they help to illuminate the way back to the Savior.

More Come, Follow Me resources here.

Daniel Ortner is a public interest lawyer who focuses on the First Amendment. He joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as an undergraduate from a Jewish background.

The post Come, Follow Me Week 47 – Amos; Obadiah appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Why is Obedience Greater than Sacrifice? Meditations on Hosea 6:6 by Benjamin Pacini My children know that the rule on Sunday is that they can only watch “church videos.” They’ve gotten to know them so well that when I began playing one of my favorites, it was two seconds in before my son shouted from […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 44 – Hosea 1–6; 10–14; Joel (additional post) appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

(submitted by Dennis B. Horne) Joseph F. Smith letter to Edith E. Smith, undated (but written later than 1901): My darling daughter Edith, You asked me if I had ever received a Revelation since I have been the President of the Church. For me to answer you specifically and in detail would require much time […]

The post President Joseph F. Smith Speaks of His Revelations and of Testimony vs. Doubt appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

True Prophets Call Us to Repentance by Daniel Ortner Ezekiel’s Prophetic Call to Cry Repentance Chapters 1 and 2 of the Book of Ezekiel feature Ezekiel’s prophetic call. Just like the prophet Isaiah and Ezekiel’s contemporaries Isaiah and Jeremiah, Ezekiel is called as part of a vision where he sees the throne of God and […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 42 – Ezekiel 1–3; 33–34; 36–37; 47 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Dennis B. Horne In late 1973, only two months before he passed away, President Harold B. Lee visited Rick’s College (now BYU-Idaho), where he attended a luncheon and then gave the college devotional address. As President of Rick’s at that time, Henry B. Eyring was present with President Lee and described the events in […]

The post President Harold B. Lee Testifies about Revelation in Book of Mormon Translation appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

General Conference is now just 2 days away! It will be held October 1-2, and will have morning and afternoon sessions on Saturday and Sunday, along with an evening session for everyone on Saturday. More information is available here. In preparation, we are doing a daily countdown with posts from different people explaining how they […]

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 2 Days! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Seven years ago, a FAIR conference presentation identified a harmful ideology among some members of the Church of Jesus Christ. It claims that God gives revelations, visits, and special priesthood ordinations to individuals outside of church leadership, and that faithful church members should follow and obey those individuals, and believe the truth of their purported […]

The post Evaluating Claims that Contradict the Prophets appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

General Conference is coming up in 4 days! It will be held October 1-2, and will have morning and afternoon sessions on Saturday and Sunday, along with an evening session for everyone on Saturday. More information is available here. In preparation, we are doing a daily countdown with posts from different people explaining how they […]

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 4 Days! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

General Conference is coming up in 5 days! It will be held October 1-2, and will have morning and afternoon sessions on Saturday and Sunday, along with an evening session for everyone on Saturday. More information is available here. In preparation, we are doing a daily countdown with posts from different people explaining how they […]

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 5 Days! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Scriptural Mormonism Podcast Episode 14, cross-posted with permission. Robert Boylan interviews Brian Hales and Craig Foster about Mormon Fundamentalism and the Netflix show “Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey,” and specifically comparing FLDS to LDS, and Warren Jeffs to Joseph Smith. Also join us at the 2022 FAIR Conference where Craig Foster will speak on “Under […]

The post Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey – Mormon Fundamentalism with Brian Hales and Craig Foster appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

We are pleased to announce that Michael R. Ash’s book, Bamboozled by the “CES Letter”, is now available in audiobook format from Audible and iTunes! We’d especially like to thank Derrick Duncan for volunteering his time and talent to narrate it. The e-book version is still available from the FAIR Bookstore and Amazon.

The post “Bamboozled by the ‘CES Letter'” by Michael R. Ash now available on audiobook! appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What Should We Make of the Story of Elisha and the Bears and What Is the Significance of the Unusual Symbolism in Elisha’s Healings? by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw (Originally published August 8, 2018 and August 10, 2018) Question: One of the most disturbing and incomprehensible accounts in the Old Testament concerns Elisha and the bears […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 27 – 2 Kings 2–7 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Matt Crawford The widow of Zarephath is one of my favorite stories from the Old Testament. Perhaps the greatest reason that this story resonates with me is because the widow is an outsider. She is not a member of the house of Israel—a fact the Savior confirms (see Luke 4:24–30)—and she meets Elijah at […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 27 – 1 Kings 17–19 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

[We have more information about Under the Banner of Heaven here.] “God is greater than the United States, and when the Government conflicts with heaven, we will be ranged under the banner of heaven against the Government.” This sentence, supposedly spoken by John Taylor, has been made famous by Jon Krakauer. He used it […]

The post Under the Banner of Misattribution appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by BJ Spurlock When reading the scriptures, especially as one reads through the Old Testament, it is always helpful to ask the following questions: Where is Jesus Christ in the text? Where do we see gospel doctrines & principles that Jesus Christ taught? Where do we see gospel doctrines & principles that living Prophets […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 24 – Ruth; 1 Samuel 1–3 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Seek the Lord Jesus Christ By Elder Kim B. Clark (An address given at the 2020 FAIR Conference) I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today. I am not only grateful to be with you, but I am grateful for all of you who seek to help people strengthen, or recover, or […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 23 – Judges 2–4; 6–8; 13–16 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Trying to Serve the Lord Without Offending the Devil By Nick Galieti (Originally published on February 11, 2015 as part of our “Rise Up” podcast for youth) When it comes to living our lives, we have a lot of choices placed before us. We have our choice of schools to attend after high school, or even […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 22 – Joshua 1–8; 23–24 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“Beware Lest Thou Forget the Lord” by Dr. Jan J. Martin Deuteronomy. It is the last book of the Jewish “Torah.” The word Deuteronomy itself may be enough to intimidate all but the most determined and dedicated students of the scriptures. In Hebrew, “eleh ha-devarim,” means “these are the words.”[1] In ancient Greek, “Deuteronómion” means […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 21 – Deuteronomy 6-8; 15; 18; 29-30; 34 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Rejecting the Living Prophets by Following Future Prophets by J. Max Wilson (Adapted from his post at Sixteen Small Stones) One of the key doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that we have living prophets and apostles today who are authorized by God to receive revelations for the Church and […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 20 – Numbers 11-14; 20-24 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Friends, Today a new television series has been released titled Under the Banner of Heaven. It is based on a best-selling book by that same name, published in 2003, written by Jon Krakauer. The book, and now the television series, talks about the 1984 horrific murders of Brenda Lafferty, and her 15-month-old daughter Erica, by Dan […]

The post Under the Banner of Heaven: Fact vs Fiction appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Becoming Free by Amber Rothamer I’ve always treasured the account of Israel’s miraculous exodus out of bondage in Egypt and the recorded events and miracles that followed. It is a portion of ancient history that has always fascinated and humbled me. There are numerous parallels between this account and that of the one found in […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 17 – Exodus 18-20 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Scott Gordon This week, with Easter, we celebrate the resurrection of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Currently, 63% of Americans identify as Christian. This is down from 75% just 10 years ago. Those who are religiously unaffiliated, sometimes referred to as “nones,” has risen to almost 30% of the US population. This is […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 16 – Easter appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“Even as Moses Did”: The Use of the Exodus Narrative in Mosiah 11-18 by Sara Riley (This is from a presentation given at the 2018 FAIR Conference) In this presentation I hope to answer the following questions: How is the Exodus narrative used in Mosiah, both structurally and thematically? And by that I mean, how […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 15 – Exodus 14–17 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

for FAIR Newsletter 7 2022 by Steve Densley Over time, I have come to look forward to General Conference more and more. It seems that now, more than ever, we need the wisdom and guidance that comes from those who have been set apart by God to instruct us. Of course, I do not always […]

The post “Was that a revelation?” General Conference and Agents of the Divine appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Robert Hill Every six months, dating back to 1840, Latter-day Saints gather as a worldwide congregation to worship, sing and learn at the feet of leaders we consider living prophets. It’s a wonderful time full of the Spirit of God. But recently, I can’t help feeling I miss the way General Conference used to be. […]

The post Come Listen to a Prophet’s Voice appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference. If you would like to watch all the presentations from that conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Derek Sainsbury, “We mean to elect him”: Electioneer Experiences during Joseph Smith’s 1844 presidential campaign Derek’s book, Storming the Nation: The Unknown […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #79 – Derek Sainsbury, “We mean to elect him”: Electioneer Experiences during Joseph Smith’s 1844 presidential campaign appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Burning Bush and a Pillar of Light: God Remembers His Children by Ugo A. Perego Many years ago, when I was a young student at Brigham Young University, I had the unique opportunity to register for and attend the Summer Semester at the BYU Jerusalem Center. To this day, it has been one of […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 13 – Exodus 1-6 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference. If you would like to watch all the presentations from that conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Kirk Magleby, Unforgettable Hugh Nibley Hugh Nibley Observed is available from the FAIR Bookstore. Kirk Alder Magleby is the Executive Director […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #78 – Kirk Magleby, “Unforgettable Hugh Nibley” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“The Lord Was with Joseph”: A Scriptural Case Study in Why the Lord Allows Bad Things to Happen to Good People by Matthew L. Bowen Bad things happen to good people, of course. What’s more, sometimes terrible things happen to the best people even when they are striving with the utmost diligence to do what […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 11 – Genesis 37–41 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Becoming Israel: Learning How to Prevail with God Through Covenants By Steve Densley The stories we find in Genesis 28-33 are rich with covenant imagery, from Isaac’s blessing that Jacob would receive the promises of the Abrahamic covenant in the first verses of chapter 28, to Jacob’s building of an altar in the last verse […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 10 – Genesis 28–33 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

for FAIR Newsletter – Black History Month Edition 4 2022 I am a white male. Well, I really have more of a ruddy complexion that looks red most of the time, but that still counts as “white.” I have found no one in my family history who owned slaves. One family line came from Scotland after […]

The post Answers to a Few Questions for Black History Month appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Polygamy as an Abrahamic Sacrifice by V.H. Cassler (From a presentation originally titled “A Reconciliation of Polygamy,” given at the 2011 FAIR Conference; edited here for clarity and length) Today we are going to talk about polygamy but probably in a different way than you have heard about it before. That is, we are going […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 8 – Genesis 18–23 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Can the Book of Mormon be the Word of God and inspired fiction? Did Joseph Smith’s cultural worldview influence the way he understood the relationship between New World people and the 10 Lost Tribes? How might have Joseph’s worldview influenced his understanding of both the Nephite Interpreters and his own seer stone? What did the […]

The post FREE BOOK CHAPTER: “‘Translating’ Restoration Scripture” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Abrahamic Covenant, Its Influence on Scriptures, and What that Has to Do with Us by Kerry Muhlestein, author of God Will Prevail: Ancient Covenants, Modern Blessings, and the Gathering of Israel The Abrahamic covenant is a central theme of the Old Testament, and really of all scripture. Every prophetic writer, whether in the Old […]

The post Come, Follow Me Thoughts to Keep in Mind – The Covenant appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference. If you would like to watch all the presentations from that conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Jennifer Ann Mackley, Discovering Church History: The Wilford Woodruff Papers Project Jennifer’s book is available from the FAIR Bookstore. Jennifer Ann […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #77 – Jennifer Ann Mackley, “Discovering Church History: The Wilford Woodruff Papers Project” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

[Reprinted with permission from The Interpreter Foundation] by Taylor Halverson “Noah built an ark; and…the Lord smiled upon it.” (Moses 7:43) Introduction The great cataclysmic[1] flood wherein “Noah…prepared an ark to the saving of his house” is one of the most well known stories in the Judeo-Christian world. It is story that most of us can remember […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 6 – Genesis 6–11; Moses 8 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch all the presentations from the conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Jeff Bradshaw, Since Hugh Nibley: Remarkable New Findings on Enoch and the Gathering of Zion Jeff’s books are for […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #76 – Jeff Bradshaw, “Since Hugh Nibley: Remarkable New Findings on Enoch and the Gathering of Zion” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Faith and Evidence in the Witness of Ancient Texts for the Book of Moses Enoch Story by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw When I first saw the photo that accompanied the New Year’s message and invitation for 2022 from President Nelson,[3] I could not help but think of the following verses from the Joseph Smith Translation of […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 5 – Moses 7 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Craig L. Foster Recently a movie titled, “Who Killed Joseph Smith?” premiered promising “never seen before ballistic testing, research & reenactments exposing an extremely controversial theory concerning who may actually have murdered the American prophet, Joseph Smith, and his loyal brother Hyrum.” This never before seen information includes the assertion that Joseph Smith was […]

The post What weapon was Joseph Smith using to shoot John Taylor? – Review of the recent film, “Who Killed Joseph Smith?” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch all the presentations from the conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. John Gee, Lessons on Doing Apologetics John Gee’s books are for sale in the FAIR bookstore. John Gee is […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #75 – John Gee, “Lessons on Doing Apologetics” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Taught in All the Ways of God: Teaching as the Theme of Moses 6 by Matthew L. Bowen Moses 5 records that an angel taught Adam and Eve the meaning of the sacrifices God had commanded them to make upon their departure from Eden (see Moses 5:5-12). Adam and Eve, in turn, taught their sons […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 4 – Genesis 5; Moses 6 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch all the presentations from the conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Ben Spackman, Through a Glass, Less Darkly: The 20th Century History of Genesis and Evolution Ben Spackman is a […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #73 – Ben Spackman, “Through a Glass, Less Darkly: The 20th Century History of Genesis and Evolution” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

How did we get the books of Moses and Abraham? The Come, Follow Me manual poses this question and gives links to articles on the Church’s website about the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible and the Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham. For further information, the following resources are available from FAIR […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 1 – Moses 1; Abraham 3 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Michael R. Ash Those who have read any of my writings in the past several decades will know that I’ve been a volunteer for FAIR for more than twenty years. I’m an active Latter-day Saint who accepts prophets as the divinely called and authorized agents of Christ’s church on earth. And, like many other believing […]

The post Rethinking Revelation and the Human Element in Scripture appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Proclamation Is a Light Against Sophistry by Cassandra Hedelius In September 1995, President Hinckley used a big word. “With so much of sophistry that is passed off as truth, with so much of deception concerning standards and values, with so much of allurement and enticement to take on the slow stain of the world, […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 51 – The Family: A Proclamation to the World appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This biography of Dallin H. Oaks was written by Richard E. Turley, Jr., who has been associated with Oaks throughout most of his (Turley’s) professional life. Turley has served as the Director of the Church History Department (originally selected to work for the department by Oaks), Assistant Church Historian, and Director of Public Affairs. He […]

The post Book Review: “In the Hands of the Lord: The Life of Dallin H. Oaks” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Michael R. Ash for FAIR Newsletter 2021 1211 Inspiration and Intellect are two sides of the same coin in how Latter-day Saints believe that God communicates with His children. We know that the Spirit testifies to eternal truths, but we often forget (or neglect) the role that intellect plays in uncovering truth. The late Apostle […]

The post Inspiration, Intellect, and Rethinking Revelation appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

We Believe All that God Has Revealed by Cassandra Hedelius On social media and other discussions, it’s very common for LGBT activists/allies to invoke the ninth Article of Faith. They take for granted that the church’s teachings on marriage and sexuality are wrong, and assert that God will soon change them. After all, “we believe […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 50 – Articles of Faith and Official Declarations 1 & 2 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Heirs of the Celestial Kingdom of God by David W. Smith Many people today misunderstand the nature and blessings of God’s love. “God loves me just as I am, so I don’t need to change,” they might say, or “Because God loves me, He will accept me as I am into heaven.” To use a […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 49 – Doctrine and Covenants 137-138 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch all the presentations from the conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Brittany Chapman Nash, Let’s Talk About Polygamy The video of this presentation can be watched on our YouTube […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #67 – Brittany Chapman Nash, “Let’s Talk About Polygamy” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

By René Krywult This week’s Come, Follow Me lesson starts with the following words: The afternoon of June 27, 1844, found Joseph and Hyrum Smith in jail once again, accompanied by John Taylor and Willard Richards. They believed they were innocent of any crime, but they submitted to arrest, hoping to prevent violence against the Saints […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 48 – Doctrine and Covenants 135-136 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch the presentations from the conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Mike Ash, Rethinking Revelation and the Human Element in Scripture: The Prophet’s Role as Creative Co-Author Mike’s book is […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #66 – Mike Ash, “Rethinking Revelation and the Human Element in Scripture: The Prophet’s Role as Creative Co-Author” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

By Cassandra Hedelius It’s difficult to write this post, because the subject is baptism for the dead, and my grandpa is dying, and I love him, and he’s never accepted the gospel. His death from old age isn’t tragic, but it would be if we didn’t have so much revelation from God about His plan. […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 45 – Doctrine and Covenants 125-128 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This podcast series features past FAIR Conference presentations. This presentation is from our 2021 conference held in August. If you would like to watch the presentations from our 2021 conference, you can still purchase the video streaming. Jeffrey Thayne, Worldview Apologetics: Revealing the Waters in Which We Swim A transcript is available here. Jeffrey’s book, […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #64 – Jeffrey Thayne, “Worldview Apologetics: Revealing the Waters in Which We Swim” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

By Cassandra Hedelius In 1840, John C. Bennett was baptized a member of the Church of Jesus Christ. His wife and children didn’t come with him to Nauvoo, and it’s not clear what his original motive was for posing as a bachelor instead of being truthful about his family status. His eventual motive was extremely […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 44 – Doctrine and Covenants 124 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Finances and Faith in the Kirtland Crisis of 1837 by Elizabeth Kuehn (This is from a presentation given at the 2017 FairMormon Conference) While I will cover nineteenth-century economics and the Kirtland bank briefly in my presentation today, I also want to focus on the period of spiritual crisis in Kirtland in 1837 and ways […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 41 – Doctrine and Covenants 111-114 appeared first on FAIR.

Prophets Archives - FAIR: Recent Episodes

FAIR