Revelation Archives - FAIR

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.

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 – 1 Kings 12–13; 17–22 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

What Would You “Wish” For?by Autumn Dickson

Solomon, David’s son, has become king. Very early on in his reign, Solomon has a dream in which the Lord appears to him.

1 Kings 3:5 In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I shall give thee.

This is a really incredible experience as Solomon is stepping into his kingship; the Lord appears and offers to grant a prayer to Solomon. Solomon asks for wisdom and discernment in judging his people. The Lord is pleased with what Solomon asked for especially since Solomon could have asked for more selfish things such as riches, long life, or the defeat of his enemies. Solomon does none of this; he wants wisdom.

For a moment, I asked myself what I would ask for. It turned into quite the exercise as I pondered what I really wanted. Going through this experience taught me a couple of principles.

Principle one: No dream required.

I began thinking of all the things that would bless my life the most. I thought of a grateful heart, seeing people clearly, or or to see His hand moving in my life. I thought of spiritual protection for my kids. I tried to think of which spiritual gift would be the most effective for my own life.

It suddenly occurred to me that I didn’t have to wait for a dream from the Lord in order to ask for things, and I didn’t have to pick just one gift. I could ask for all of them. That’s my first principle. The Lord answers prayers regardless of whether He came to us in a dream and agreed to answer a prayer. What would you ask for? What do you ask for? What will you ask for now?

Ironically, I haven’t prayed for any of those things in a long time. I don’t think my prayers have been bad by any means, but I thought so hard about what I really wanted from the Lord and realized that those values had gotten buried by the day-to-day.

Principle two. It is powerful to have your heart reflected back to you.

The normal pathway for prayers and answers goes like this: We are encouraged by prophets and scripture to pray to the Lord, and He answers according to His wisdom.

The pathway for Solomon in this specific experience: The Lord appears directly to Solomon and essentially offers a wish.

So here are the differences:

The Lord appears directly instead of going through a prophet.

He basically offers a wish which is highly unusual (at least in my experience).

The experience that Solomon had was very different than normal. Why? The Lord is intentional so why did He make this particular choice with Solomon? Both of these differences combined to make a special thing happen. Whether this was the Lord’s intentional purpose is a question that only He can answer. However, one of the side effects was that Solomon had his heart reflected back to him. Let’s talk about both differences.

Difference 1: He appeared directly.

The Lord does not often appear when we have sufficient for what we need. For example, He doesn’t always answer “yes” to everything we ask Him about; sometimes He simply refrains from saying “no.” In my experience, He directly interferes only as necessary. Obviously, He is very involved in our lives and manipulates the details in our favor. I’m talking about when His actions would affect our faith. So the Lord is taking care of me behind the scenes and influencing things to help me out, but He’s not appearing in a manner where I can have a very clear conversation with Him.

And there are reasons for this.

Later in life, Solomon turns towards worshiping other gods, influenced by his many foreign wives. I wonder how much more intense Solomon’s betrayal was because Solomon had this dream from the Lord directly. The Lord is very involved in our life, but He also keeps direct interference to a minimum in order to protect our faith.

And yet, despite the fact that the Lord could have allowed Solomon to simply pray without receiving a dream, the Lord chose to come to Solomon to ask and offer. This extremely direct experience opened up Solomon’s heart in a way that normal prayer doesn’t always achieve. Perhaps ideally, normal prayer would achieve this, but I’m not sure that it often does.

If the Lord came to you, I have a feeling you would be much more intentional in comparison to praying in faith. As least, I would be more intentional…and because it forces intention, you get to see what really matters to you. It reflects your heart back to you.

Difference 2: He offers a wish.

If you knew you had the opportunity to ask the Lord for something that He had offered to grant, it changes how you approach what you’re asking. The Lord has already offered to answer prayers, but this is different. He offers to directly answer one prayer. It’s almost like He offered to give Solomon a wish.

When I approach normal prayer, I am very open and talk through things and ask for little things. I’m not always perfectly focused. I ask for a lot of things. When I was thinking about what my request would have been, I suddenly got extremely intentional and this wasn’t even my experience! This didn’t even happen to me, but all of a sudden I was way more concerned about what I was asking for. It gave me an opportunity to reflect on what really mattered to me. What are my values? What do I really want?

It’s interesting because the Lord already knows our hearts. While mankind looks on the outside, the Lord looketh on the heart. So this wasn’t about the Lord trying to figure out Solomon’s heart. One of the effects was that Solomon was able to take a good look at his heart as he ascended the throne where he would have power and responsibility. Not only do we pray more intentionally, it also pushes us to live more intentionally.

How did Solomon feel when he approached that throne to govern his people? How did this experience change how he approached that throne?

I have not stepped onto a throne recently. I have not received a dream or a wish, but even my less-intense experience of pondering what I would ask for has changed my prayers. And in turn, as I pray for help with specific gifts, I’m more intentional as I approach experiences that call upon those gifts.

I testify that the Lord is intentional. I testify that He already knows our hearts. I testify that He is very involved in our lives and acts with purpose. If we can learn to act with purpose as He does, we start to change more readily. Our lives become much more available to Him.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – 2 Samuel 11–12; 1 Kings 3; 6–9; 11 – 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 – 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

The Power of a Spiritual Recordby Autumn Dickson

I’ve given this message before, and I’ll probably give this message again someday. This message has been repeated so frequently throughout scripture so I figure it’s not the end of the world if I repeat it too. It is something that has been taught by modern day prophets. It has changed my life profoundly.

If someone were just beginning their family, what advice would you give them? What would you focus on? If you could give them advice that they were supposed to read over and over and over throughout their lives, what would you emphasize? If you were trying to teach a group of people how to build a society, which principles do you think would be some of the most valuable to learn?

Over the past couple weeks, we have been reading about the beginning of one of God’s projects. It includes the building of a world. It includes the building of God’s family, and the building of a new society upon the earth. There was a father and mother and a whole lineage of people. I have so many questions about how some of these things came to pass. How did they build their society? How did it change? Did they even consider the idea that they were setting up the foundation of a society?

I’m not sure.

But out of every message that the Lord could have sent us, one of the messages that He gave us was this.

Moses 6:5 And a book of remembrance was kept, in the which was recorded, in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the spirit of inspiration;

A book of remembrance was kept. It was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the spirit of inspiration. Was this one of the pieces of advice you would have chosen to give to this new society you were directing? Because it was one of the pieces of advice that God thought was important.

Do you call upon God? If you do, here is the bible teaching us that you’ve been called upon to write by the spirit of inspiration.

Please stay with me for a moment if you don’t feel like you’re ready for this message. If you hate writing and reading, if it’s not something that you particularly enjoy, stick with me. A book of remembrance doesn’t have to look like what you’re picturing.

I almost feel bad sharing this message because writing is something that comes naturally to me. Even if I wouldn’t classify myself as overly talented, I love writing. I’ve written regularly in a journal since I was 14 years old (and boy do I wish I could burn those journals).

My journals were not always written according to inspiration. For a lot of my life, my journals were where I angrily wrote about my angel parents that I didn’t appreciate, about boys, about friendships at a time in my life when I didn’t know how to be a good friend. It wasn’t until later that my journals became filled with true, uplifting purpose.

Writing in a journal has blessed my life. I have gone back to read what I used to care about. I have been able to observe the growth I had and watch how the Lord guided my life, page by page. It’s actually pretty fun. Not to mention, I record all the absolutely ridiculous things my children say and that is one of the best blessings of my life.

But the commandment we find in this verse is not necessarily what you think. It’s not about writing what you did every day or even every month; I love writing, and I think that would bore me to death. My life isn’t exciting enough for that.

We need to rethink what it means to keep a journal. When God gives a commandment, it’s to draw us closer to Him so let’s look at our book of remembrance through that lens. And as a matter of fact, let’s look at another phrase from the verse that we read from Moses.

Write by the spirit of inspiration. If that sounds intimidating, let me try and ease your worries. Let’s look at what it means to receive inspiration.

Inspiration is when God gives you thoughts and feelings to propel you in a specific direction. He gives it to you.

When someone gives something to you, are you the one who is supposed to be stressing about how the gift makes its way into your lap? No! That’s not your job. You just have to make yourself available to receive it.

Hence the writing. Make yourself available and trust the Lord to give you what you need. He knows how to give.

I have one practical piece of advice for starting your book of remembrance. It’s just one piece of advice to start things out so that God could push you in the correct direction that will fit your personality and circumstances.

Open a journal when you’re praying, open a note on your phone, or open your computer to type. Just open it and make it available once a day for one week. When you’re praying. That’s my tip.

You don’t have to write your prayers like I do. I just do that because it helps me focus when the last seven years of my life have been interrupted approximately every three minutes. Don’t do it before bed; I never write my prayers before bed because I’m not in the proper mindset to write by inspiration. I’m too tired. The Spirit can whisper through a lot of things but apparently not my exhaustion (or maybe I’m just bad at listening through my exhaustion?). It doesn’t have to be a long prayer. It doesn’t have to be an impressive prayer. Open it, and simply start talking. He may not say anything immediately because He usually only talks when He needs to. You may start to feel like you should pick up your pen. Trust the feeling and do it. Even if you don’t know what you’re going to write, just start and open yourself up and He will speak.

It’s remarkable. You will feel so close to God.

Just as the verse taught, if you have called upon the name of God, you have been called to write by inspiration. He wants to talk to you too.

I testify that God loves you and knows how to give you inspiration. I testify that it’s not your job to figure out how to receive a gift; it’s just your job to try and make yourself available to receive it. I testify that writing by the inspiration of God will change your life as it has changed mine.

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

View Details

Revelation, Submission, Sacrificeby Autumn Dickson

For this week, we get to read more about Adam and Eve and their posterity. While reading about this posterity, we find a really beautiful summary of how to live. It is so simple and yet so profound.

Moses 6:3 And God revealed himself unto Seth, and he rebelled not, but offered an acceptable sacrifice, like unto his brother Abel. And to him also was born a son, and he called his name Enos.

I want to take it one phrase at a time. God revealed Himself to Seth. Seth didn’t rebel. Seth offered an acceptable sacrifice like his brother did. Though this is about the personal life of Seth, there is a pattern that all of us can follow.

First, God revealed Himself.

It is not enough to try and interpret the bible perfectly. You can’t. It’s not possible for man to interpret it correctly even if it had been translated perfectly. God has to reveal Himself and the truth concerning why we are here and how we get back. You can’t go to school and have other people teach you about God because they have studied a ton. No matter how hard you think or how long you ponder, it is insufficient unless God chooses to reveal Himself.

He does this through a variety of ways. He reveals Himself through His prophets. He teaches us as we’re reading the bible. He teaches us as we listen to other people, but we have to remember that He is the one who gives us the information.

Then comes the next part. We decide what to do with it. Seth rebelled not.

Honestly, it reminds me of something that I read about the Tower of Babel. One of the reasons that God was so frustrated with the people in relation to the Tower of Babel was because He had told them how to reach Him. These people were descendants of Noah’s sons after the flood. Noah walked with God, and so it’s easy to assume that these descendants had been given a knowledge of how to form a relationship with God.

We do not know exactly what this looked like. We know that after Moses, there were more extensive ordinances contained in the Law of Moses that helped the people reach for God. In our day, we likewise make covenants and perform ordinances in order to reach Him and develop a relationship with Him.

I’m not sure what it looked like in Noah’s day, but these people had a prophet and it was likely that they had oral traditions to lead them along.

Unfortunately, they rebelled. They didn’t want to reach God in that way. They wanted to do it how they wanted to do it, and they ended up with chaos and confusion.

Through modern-day prophets, God has revealed how we can draw closer to Him. These avenues are not exclusive; they’re available to everyone who wants them. Some have had incredible experiences with the gospel but have chosen to only accept some avenues of closeness. Some believe they don’t need these extra things in order to draw closer to Christ rather than gratefully receiving any options He gives us to think of Him and follow Him.

I think of Cain and Abel. Cain was mad that God didn’t accept his crops even though God had asked him for a lamb originally. Cain only wanted to give what Cain wanted to give. And when God didn’t accept it, he was angry. Interestingly enough, God didn’t ask for a lamb for fun. It was very specific and meant to help Cain understand Christ. Cain missed the memo.

If you’ve had good experiences with the gospel, I can promise that accepting all of the gospel will only bring more goodness. Don’t rebel against it. Give it a chance, soften your own heart and see if God doesn’t bless you.

Then there is the last portion of this pattern that we’ll talk about today.

Seth offered an acceptable sacrifice like his brother. I love this part. We can offer acceptable sacrifices like our Brother.

There is much to be said of sacrifice, but I want to focus on one specific principle here.

The Lord asks for specific sacrifices. There are general ways that we draw closer to Christ through ordinances and covenants, but there will also be very personalized sacrifices that the Lord asks us to make. Christ had a very tailored sacrifice to give. It was perfectly picked just for Him.

There are very tailored sacrifices we will be asked to make. They are tailored in two ways: how we can give and how they can bless us.

Some of them are because God gave us gifts and expects us to use them to bless others. In ancient times, the oldest brothers received an extra portion in order to take care of the mother and sisters. Each of us have received some kind of specific extra portion, spiritual gifts that are not given to everyone. We are expected to take care of those who don’t have what we have. It is completely fair for Heavenly Father to ask us to give when He has given us more precisely for that purpose.

We have also been given a responsibility to make specific sacrifices because of how they will bless us. They will mold us to be more like the Savior in the exact ways that we need. Just like the lamb wasn’t random, our sacrifices don’t need to feel random. They can refine us.

I got pregnant 3 months after having a baby. My fifth child was born when my oldest was just six years old. I despise being pregnant. I’m grateful for it. My children are my greatest blessing, but I can’t begin to describe just how much I lose myself when I’m pregnant. Conner was out on the east coast every other week for work. I was overwhelmed and sick. My body was destroyed, and I still had a tiny baby that needed me so much. I had three other kids who also needed me, and I still felt the Lord telling me that I needed to keep sharing my testimony of Christ.

There were a million lessons learned through this specific trial given to me. The Lord needed me to change in specific ways in order to step into the life I wanted for myself and my family. I let go and let my kids step up in ways that were powerful for them, a beautiful blessing that I would have never voluntarily given over. I miraculously finished my work and still got a desperately needed nap almost every day. Both of these specific lessons have set me up in exactly what I want for my life. Most importantly, I learned that God really is on my side.

When I first found out I was pregnant again, I felt utterly betrayed. Believe it or not, we had taken some pretty intense measures to prevent pregnancy. This wasn’t a mistake on our part. It was a definitive choice for the Lord. I had told Him that I wanted to wait a bit. There have been numerous times in my life that the Lord has chosen different for me than I chose for myself. I grumbled and fought it just like anyone else. Getting pregnant again and losing myself for 18 months instead of 9 months felt like more than I could bear. For the first time, I felt truly betrayed by God. I felt like He had completely ignored everything I had wanted for myself. I felt like He had ignored what I needed, that He didn’t care what I needed. He was going to choose what He was going to choose. I knew logically that wasn’t the case. I had experiences with God and knew He loved me, and maybe that’s why it had been so painful. I had trusted Him, and this felt too far.

It took some time, but I learned the tailored lesson He sent me. I turned my heart around and accepted the sacrifice that had been asked of me and just like with any sacrifice, it was for me. He was trying to bless me, and He did. I thought I trusted Him before. It multiplied after this last baby. The Lord tailors our sacrifices for us, and in the end, we make them acceptable by putting our heart into it.

I testify that the patterns of the Lord are simple. I testify that He can guide our individual details in the midst of those grand patterns. I testify of a Lord who made an ultimate sacrifice and set an example for how we can draw closer to God. I testify that the scriptures can teach us of these patterns, and if we choose to accept them, He blesses us more than we can imagine.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Genesis 5; Moses 6 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Jennifer and guest Sarah Allen discuss the books of Moses and Abraham.

Sarah Allen is a Senior Researcher with FAIR, a former member of Scripture Central’s research team, and the 2022 recipient of the John Taylor: Defender of the Faith Award. 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 the 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.

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 1; Abraham 3 – Jennifer Roach Lees 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

Nine Years: Why God Lets Good People Wait for Answersby Autumn Dickson

This is a message for anyone who feels that they have found God and love Him, but also carry around a doctrine or policy that doesn’t make sense to them; this is for anyone who is having a difficult time reconciling the idea of a loving God (with whom they’ve had good experiences) with doctrines that don’t seem loving to them.

For this week, we are studying Section 137 and 138. It’s important to understand that Section 137 is not in chronological order. It was placed next to Section 138 because doctrinally, they fit together really well. It’s actually really important to understand that Section 137 is out of chronological order for a number of reasons. In order to understand what I want to talk about today, let’s talk about the chronological order of a few more things.

When Joseph was young, he struggled with which church to join. His mother was Methodist, and his father aligned more closely with the ideas of a unitarian. His father didn’t believe that God would send someone to hell because they hadn’t been baptized into a particular church. Joseph received the First Vision and over time, he learned more and more of what it meant to have the restored church of Jesus Christ.

Alvin died in 1823, a few years after the First Vision, before the authority to baptize had been restored. I wonder if Joseph was leaning towards his father’s views that Alvin wouldn’t go to hell just because he hadn’t been baptized. After all, Joseph was taught that the true church was not upon the earth. Maybe Alvin wasn’t in hell.

In 1829, Joseph received the authority to baptize. Joseph learned that baptism was essential, and it hadn’t been done with the right authority for a long time.

Think, for just a moment, about what this means to Joseph. He rejoiced in the restored church. In fact, he was overwhelmed with joy after baptizing his father.

But I also want you to think about the perspectives that Joseph was operating under at this period in time. He knew that authority to baptize was essential. He knew that his brother wasn’t baptized at all, let alone by any needed authority. For a long time, I believe that Joseph still thought Alvin had gone to hell.

It wasn’t until 1832 that Joseph learned there were different kingdoms in heaven. Can you imagine the relief that Joseph felt knowing that Alvin wasn’t burning up in eternal flame? But can you also imagine the pain that Joseph still felt when he believed he had still lost Alvin? There were some conflicting emotions there; Alvin wasn’t in hell, but were they still going to be separated?

Joseph received a vision of Alvin in the Celestial Kingdom in 1836. Here is part of that vision.

Doctrine and Covenants 137:5-6

5 I saw Father Adam and Abraham; and my father and my mother; my brother Alvin, that has long since slept;

6 And marveled how it was that he had obtained an inheritance in that kingdom, seeing that he had departed this life before the Lord had set his hand to gather Israel the second time, and had not been baptized for the remission of sins.

Joseph marveled to see Alvin in the Celestial Kingdom; he was surprised. This is part of the reason for my assumptions. For three years (not including the time before the priesthood was restored), Joseph believed Alvin was still burning up in hell. For four years, Joseph carried around the wound from his beliefs that he would be separated from Alvin.

There is an important implication from this timeline.

Joseph loved God. More than most, Joseph knew that God was real and that there was truth and that you had to be baptized and that there was specific authority. He knew this. Joseph had good experiences with God, but Joseph also carried around this painful wound that something felt tragically unfair.

Despite his knowledge of God, I wonder if Joseph ever still struggled with questions. How could a loving God do this? How could required baptism and authority be congruent with a fair God who loves all of His children? How could God have let Alvin die before the church was restored? What about all the other people who suddenly don’t qualify because the authority wasn’t on the earth?

And perhaps the question most of us have related to at one point or another in our lifetime, “If God is truly so loving, how is this His perfect plan?”

It doesn’t make sense. Joseph knew that God is perfect and just and fair and loving, but for a long time, Joseph was also operating under the assumption that God was going to let those who were unbaptized just suffer. How did Joseph reconcile this? Did he ever reconcile this or did he just hold on anyway?

Do you carry around anything that doesn’t seem congruent with a God who is perfect and just and fair and loving? Have you also had experiences with God and you have felt that He loves you and is leading you along here? Are you having a difficult time reconciling these two facts: that God is good but He also allows “xyz?”

I promise you two things. There is an answer, and there is also Christ’s atonement. Joseph was a prophet who received plenty of revelation, but God chose not to give that particular revelation for a while. Despite Joseph’s close relationship with God and despite his near constant influx of restored information, it took nine years for Joseph to learn that Alvin wasn’t going to be punished for dying before Joseph received the proper authority to baptize.

Take a page out of Joseph’s book. We don’t know everything yet. Is it really so implausible that God knows what He’s doing, that He has a plan that will take care of everything that you’re worried about? This isn’t said to negate any pain that you’re feeling trying to deal with this. Rather, it’s meant to give you hope in the midst of it. There is an answer and beyond that, there is the atonement of Jesus Christ. I don’t know why Joseph had to wait 9 years to learn about Alvin. You would think that Christ could have slipped that in at some point, but Joseph waited.

And Joseph was blessed. God is perfect and is handling everything beautifully. Beyond just a perfect answer, Christ suffered deeply so that He can carry us through the pain while we wait for those answers.

There are answers. If you hold on and rely upon the atonement of Jesus Christ and all of His adjacent promises, you will find answers and you will find joy. Not to mention, everything you’re experienced shall be for your good. The difficulty you’re wading through will transform you into exactly what you were meant to become.

I testify that God has a perfect plan. I testify that He truly is loving and perfect and fair and just. I testify that He is good and is handling everything beautifully. You don’t have to carry this. He’s got this. I also testify that beyond having a perfect plan, Christ paid for the plan and suffered what you suffer so He can run to you and comfort you.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Joseph Smith’s Vision of the Celestial Kingdom; Joseph F. Smith’s Vision of the Spirit World (D&C 137–138)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

Joseph Smith, Journal, 21 January 1836 (pp. 136–37); recorded by Warren Parrish. Read the original entry in Joseph’s journal that was canonized in 1976 and became Doctrine and Covenants Section 137 in 1981.
Joseph F. Smith, “Status of Children in the Resurrection,” Improvement Era 21, no. 7 (May 1918): 567–74. In this address given in the Salt Lake Temple—given only eight months before his vision that is now section 138—President Smith taught about the status of the spirits of children who die and how they will be resurrected.
George S. Tate, “‘The Great World of the Spirits of the Dead’: Death, the Great War, and the 1918 Influenza Pandemic as Context for Doctrine and Covenants 138,” BYU Studies 46, no. 1 (2007): 4–40. Tate gives the historical background and context in which Joseph F. Smith received his vision of the redemption of the dead.
Mary Jane Woodger, “From Obscurity to Scripture: Joseph F. Smith’s Vision of the Redemption of the Dead,” in You Shall Have My Word: Exploring the Text of the Doctrine and Covenants, ed. Scott C. Esplin, Richard O. Cowan, and Rachel Cope (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center at Brigham Young University / Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2012), 234–54.

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 137–138 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Spirit World is Already Hereby Autumn Dickson

We have the opportunity to read two revelations this week. Despite the different times in which they were given, the two revelations were placed together in the Doctrine and Covenants, and they hold more power in that manner. The first recorded vision was received by Joseph Smith, and the second recorded vision was given to Joseph F. Smith. I want to share a couple of verses from the section given to Joseph F. Smith regarding the spirit world.

Doctrine and Covenants 138:22-24

22 Where these (the wicked, unrepentant, rebellious) were, darkness reigned, but among the righteous there was peace;

23 And the saints rejoiced in their redemption, and bowed the knee and acknowledged the Son of God as their Redeemer and Deliverer from death and the chains of hell.

24 Their countenances shone, and the radiance from the presence of the Lord rested upon them, and they sang praises unto his holy name.

These verses talk about the spirit world on the other side of the veil. It gives us a glimpse into what life holds depending on how you chose to live your life and how those choices affected who you became. Taking the time to imagine what it will be like is powerful, especially when you’ve lost someone you love.

But rather than read it from the perspective of the spirit world, I want you to read it again as if it’s speaking about where we dwell now. Despite its insight into the spirit world, it can also be a very accurate description of the mortal life we’re living in.

In the fallen mortality where we dwell, there are people who want nothing to do with the Savior and His gospel. There are many who want the exact opposite of what He stands for and believe the Savior to be oppressive. In those specific places and hearts, darkness reigns. God doesn’t necessarily send darkness or make their world terrible; it’s what they’ve invited into their lives.

Important tangent here. This gets slightly tricky because I don’t believe all non-Christians are dark people. Rather, I believe that at any given moment, we are inviting or shunning darkness. There are a lot of people who accept so much of Christ’s gospel even if they do not yet accept Him personally. They have invited portions of light into their lives by living their lives in a Christlike manner. So not immediately accepting Christ doesn’t mean you live in utter darkness and allow it to reign over you. I do believe they’re missing out on light, but that doesn’t mean I assume they are voluntarily inviting darkness to rule their lives.

Let’s keep going on with reading the description of the spirit world and mortality..

So there are people who don’t want Christ and voluntarily shun Him. They want the darkness. They like it. They don’t see any reason to change.

In other places, sometimes very nearby, there are Saints who are living in the same space but find themselves rejoicing in their redemption. They love the Savior and trust Him. They acknowledge Him and worship Him.

Then, of course, there is a whole spectrum between these groups of people. Even on that spectrum, we’re finding ourselves moving back and forth depending on what we’re inviting and focusing on.

Despite the fact that we can find people all along that spectrum, I want to bring your attention to one other grouping: there are Saints who are trying to live the gospel but still have not found the reason to rejoice. They don’t always feel hope or peace. They don’t feel the radiance of the Lord shining down on them.

We believe in Christ and the gospel, but have we found salvation?

We read this in Alma.

Alma 34:31

Yea, I would that ye would come forth and harden not your hearts any longer; for behold, now is the time and the day of your salvation; and therefore, if ye will repent and harden not your hearts, immediately shall the great plan of redemption be brought about unto you.

Immediately. Not just in the spirit world. Immediately. If you truly find Christ, the plan of redemption is brought immediately. Today can be the day of your salvation if you repent and don’t harden your heart.

Immediately, you can find yourself in the same state as those dwelling in spirit paradise. You can rejoice in the Redeemer who freed you from hell and any aspects of it that you may still be clinging to. The radiance of the presence of the Lord can shine upon you.

If you do not yet feel these aspects of salvation, I have a small warning for you. Dying and going to the other side does not immediately bring about those feelings. Dying has very little to do with it. Experiencing spiritual paradise stems from your relationship with Christ. Dying happens somewhere along the way for good reason, but experiencing salvation doesn’t necessarily wait for death. It’s just waiting for you.

When was the last time you let yourself rejoice in Christ? When was the last time you chose to trust Him so deeply that it swallowed up your pain and carried it for a while? When was the last time you chose gratitude for His promises even if you couldn’t choose gratitude for what was directly going on in your life?

Spiritual paradise is a choice, not just a destination on the other side. What happens there is just a continuation of what happens here. You don’t change on the other side unless you go through the same process of changing that you have to experience on this side.

I love the verse from Alma 34 because it doesn’t say, “Follow the Law of Moses perfectly and then you will experience salvation immediately.” It says, “Repent and soften your heart and then you will experience salvation immediately.” Change! Soften! Trust! He loves you and is mighty to save. When you find it within yourself to say, “I’m going to try putting weight on these promises,” you’ll find solid ground. Even if everything comes to disaster in mortality, there is solid ground in Christ.

I testify that trusting Christ and taking Him at His word was one of the most joyful decisions I ever made. Though I obviously fluctuate in that trust as I move about life, continually spending time with Him every day has made that trust more consistent. Spending time with Him every day has forced me to remember His promises. As I’ve moved about my daily life and run into new challenges and all of the pitfalls of mortality, I have found rejoicing alongside my pain. It didn’t come from living the gospel more perfectly; it came from trusting Him more perfectly.

I testify that spirit paradise or allowing darkness to reign are choices we make on a daily basis; they’re not just destinations in the spirit world. I testify that the day of your salvation, the day you find rejoicing in Christ, can be today, and you don’t even have to die in order to find it. You just have to trust.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 – Part 1 – 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

An Underrated Section: How to Become Zion…and Heavenby Autumn Dickson

With Joseph and Hyrum martyred, Brigham Young was now the prophet. After the Saints were expelled from Nauvoo, Brigham was in charge of finding them a permanent home in the mountains of the west. Though the westward movement of the Saints was among the most impressive immigrations of Americans, it did not start out that way.

The Saints were starving and freezing along the trail. Muddy quagmires kept the Saints from reaching their goal to plant crops ahead of everyone coming. Brigham described feeling like he was dragging around a 25 ton weight. He felt like he had a large family with no way of taking care of them. At Winter Quarters in Nebraska, he turned to the Lord for guidance.

The Lord told Brigham how to organize the company, but He taught Brigham much more important things that would turn the tide for the Saints’ ability to make it to their destination.

Here is the verse that introduces the important concept that turned things around.

Doctrine and Covenants 136:2

Let all the people of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and those who journey with them, be organized into companies, with a covenant and promise to keep all the commandments and statutes of the Lord our God.

The Saints were to be organized into companies that would stick together, and they entered into those companies by making covenants to keep the commandments and statutes of the Lord.

There were two major principles at work here that changed the game.

Principle one. When people normally made their way across towards the west (Saints and non-Saints alike), it was done very loosely with every man vying for his own family. They often travelled together for safety, but companies broke apart and came together with different members more than once. That is the first principle: Brigham Young organized them into companies with leadership at different levels, and each company was expected to stick together throughout the entire journey. If one made it, they were all going to make it.

The second principle was to focus on spirituality again. Not only were they to focus on the eternal nature of their work, but they were to focus on the fact that they believed in the same God who helped many groups of people travel to new destinations, the God of Israel.

This becomes even more significant when you recognize what the Lord was preparing Brigham for.

In 1877, Brigham Young organized the priesthood structure of the church. After travelling around Utah, he found that there were many people scattered and not enrolled in wards. There were overlapping authorities where spiritual jurisdictions were confusing, and it was unclear who would have the responsibility of showing their stewardship to the Lord. There were bishops who had never been ordained, and this was setting the stage for people to become more vulnerable as they were travelling the covenant path.

The Saints had now grown large enough that they needed to be organized or two things would happen: losing people and losing the doctrine that had been restored with such difficulty.

So that’s what Brigham did. Under the direction of the apostles, Saints scattered across Utah were better organized into stakes and wards. Bishops were set apart. Every member found themselves in a ward with a leader who would watch over them. Priesthood roles were clarified so that everyone understood what they were in charge of. This would lessen the gaps in which people could fall through with no one to watch over them, and it would also serve to help the Lord speak to His entire church when He revealed something rather than sending word out and hoping everyone was able to receive it.

It’s hard to overstate the unglamorous importance of what Brigham did.

Let’s tie it back to what we talked about in the beginning, and let’s talk about it from the perspective of an imaginary Saint who could have lived it

A widow is trying to get her kids across the plains to gather with the Saints. Her oldest child is 10 years old and he helps, but he is still only 10. She started out with one company as she began her journey across the plains only to have fallen behind and found herself in a new company. As she tries to nurse her sick baby back to health, they fall behind again as the 10 year old can only get the wagon going so far. She finds herself in a new company once again. At this point, she is simply hoping that she gets to their destination before she reaches the end of the line of companies.

Organizing the Saints into companies that cared for each other changed the game. No one got left behind. This is powerful for the widow, but it’s also powerful for the ones who are watching out for the widow. It’s powerful for the entire company who works together, mourns together, lifts one another. If you can cry with someone, you are very likely to rejoice with each other as well. Everything changes when you’re not alone.

The widow cries as she holds her baby and a 16 year old from another family has stepped up to drive her wagon along. Her 10 year old looks up at the 16 year old with something akin to hero-worship. This is the beginning of hope. The widow finds renewed faith in her ability to make it, and the 16 year old is changed too.

This doesn’t even mention the fact that all of this hope and change invites the Lord to rain down manna on the heads of the Saints.

Now let’s fast forward. The Saints are in the valley, and it is now 1877. There is a young family whose father has broken his leg in a wagon accident. Mother and teenage daughter are doing everything they can to keep the farm and home running, but it’s not going well. What will winter look like if they can’t finish the work?

But then a man shows up and knocks on their door. He sees the ragged family and introduces himself as their bishop. Over the course of the next few weeks, there are rotations of brethren coming in to harvest the family’s crop. There are young women who come in and help mother prepare the crop to last through the winter.

This is all good and beautiful and inspiring, but I want to fast-forward again.

We are accustomed to living in wards and stakes with leadership that enables lightning fast communication from our beloved prophet to each member. If there is a change wanted by the Lord, it is implemented overnight if that’s what He wants. We are organized, and we enter into a covenant in order to become part of the organization.

It changes the game when this kind of organization is used effectively. It didn’t do much good if the companies that were travelling the plains stayed in the same geographical area but still found themselves laboring alone.

When was the last time you looked around your ward and saw a family? When was the last time you made a valiant attempt to make it a ward family? When was the last time you ministered to make sure no one was lost out on the plains, physically or spiritually? When it comes to the Lord’s work, it’s not just about the widow who is being served. It’s about how we change when we forget our own problems, and we all work together towards common purposes.

Picture the vast difference between the beginning of the Saints journey towards Utah and the end of it. That’s the difference we will find in our own lives if we recognize what the Lord has given us in His organization of the church.

I testify that wards and stakes and leadership and priesthood organization are gifts from the Lord. I don’t believe we recognize the full power of what we’ve been given. I worry that we won’t recognize the full power until we’re ready to bring everyone along the covenant path together. Zion is available everywhere; we do not have to wait. The Lord wants us to experience those blessings today, but He can’t force us to find them. He can simply offer the opportunity and wait for us to step into those blessings. I testify that He loves us and gave us organizations to protect us and lift us.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 135–136 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

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

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.

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

View Details

The Second Coming: Is the World Righteous Enough?by Autumn Dickson

In the readings for this week, Joseph Smith helps us glimpse into eternity so we can see a portion of what it looks like. Understanding what eternity looks like can help us more fully take advantage of what the Lord has given us with this mortal experience. He covers a variety of topics. Here is one of the things that Joseph Smith taught.

Doctrine and Covenants 130:14-15

14 I 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:

15 Joseph, 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.

Before I went to bed last night, I had a very clear thought pop into my head. I knew it was revelation, and so I rolled over and wrote it in my phone quickly before rolling back over and falling asleep. When I woke up in the morning, I couldn’t remember what the Lord had whispered to me until I opened my phone to reread it. It said this.

“The Lord is not waiting for the world to become wicked enough in order to come again. He is waiting for us to be righteous enough. We seem to be waiting on the world to grow wicked enough rather than ardently focusing on becoming righteous enough.”

The scriptures often speak about how the world will grow more and more wicked and scary in the last days, and yet, I don’t think that’s a product of the Lord’s minimum level of wickedness before He’s willing to come. I think it’s merely a prophecy about the state of the world when we finally become prepared to receive Him.

The Second Coming is not a waiting game for us. The Lord is waiting, but we should not be. We should be building.

I studied Elementary Education in college, and one of the courses you take is how to design assessments for your students. When you’re trying to build a foundation of knowledge for your students, it’s important to understand where they’re at. If you skip steps in the foundation, there will be shakiness as you continue to build. If you keep trying to pour the same layer, you’re going to be wasting time. It is essential to understand where your students are at so you can take them where they need to go.

I actually loved this class for a lot of reasons and one of those reasons included the fact that my idea of what assessment truly looked like was immensely expanded. When we think of assessing our student’s knowledge, we often picture traditional multiple-choice questions. This class taught me that the most powerful way of assessing a student’s knowledge and skill was to design an assessment that put them as closely as possible to a real-life scenario.

Isn’t that what we’re trying to prepare them for as teachers? We’re trying to prepare them for life. Maybe they can use a formula that you repeated over and over and over, but if they run into a problem in real life, will they know to use that formula and how to plug the right information into that formula?

That is the ideal kind of assessment. If your goal is to prepare your student to function in real life, then designing an assessment that is close to real life is your best shot at understanding whether you succeeded and how far you have to go.

So what is God’s goal? To bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

Immortality? Check. Thank you resurrection of Christ.

Eternal life? Well, let’s read a verse from this week’s reading.

Doctrine and Covenants 130:2 And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.

Society will be similar to what we experience here except there will also be glory. It’s almost like God took the same class that I did.

This life is our assessment. Eternal life is the goal.

There are a lot of directions I could take this idea. I could talk about the importance of relationships. I could talk about how we seek righteousness and change, but ultimately, glory is added later by the power of Jesus Christ. So many directions, but I’m going to choose to pursue what the Lord whispered to me last night.

We often picture this life as an individual assessment, and ultimately, it will be an individual assessment. How those around you act will not influence your judgment other than context. The Lord will be looking at you, what you produced with what you were given, and whether you’re prepared to live how He lives.

So yes, this life is an individual assessment. However, there are other parts of this assessment that we should be aware of.

I want you to picture the idea that we’re all part of a group project. Our goal? To make a society that is righteous enough to welcome the Savior back to earth, to create Zion.

This is so powerful because that’s what we’ll be doing on the other side. Heaven is where you go to be amongst others who actively choose to love and serve and give. That’s Heavenly Father’s goal. Perhaps He is waiting for us to create that here as our group project.

Down here, it’s a little bit different. We are surrounded by people who have different perspectives even within the church. Down here, we are all plagued by mistakes and flaws and blindness. If our goal is to eventually live in heaven where these won’t be a problem, why didn’t the Lord create a mortality that was more closely aligned with heaven?

Because we will still need to be prepared to work with and love future generations that still have lessons to learn.

We have to start truly loving our neighbor. This isn’t about being polite but secretly just tolerating. This isn’t about being nice and smiling at someone we disagree with but wishing they would just go away. This is about changing deeply within our core to love and offer dignity to everyone around us.

And so we practice and build it here. We show the Lord that we are prepared to survive and thrive in our next life. Most importantly, we become the kind of people who are prepared to survive and thrive in our next life. And as we build Zion, as we build heaven (or as closely as we can considering we dwell in a fallen world), we create a society in which the Savior can come again.

I testify that the Lord is waiting, and we should not be. I testify that creating Zion around you will be one of the most important and rewarding projects you step into. I testify that as we strive to be prepared to live in our next life, the Lord will take care of the rest (cleansing and adding glory). I’m grateful that changing and becoming are the tasks that were delegated to me. I’m grateful that despite my flaws, the Lord felt I was worth investing in. I’m grateful that He paid and paved the way for me.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 129–132 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Doctrinal Developments in Nauvooby Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

This week’s lesson notes include a comparison of the sources used to compile section 130. (See notes, pp. 15–32.)
Joseph Smith’s teachings about the Holy Ghost in D&C 130:22 were emended in 1854 under the direction of Brigham Young. For an explanation of what happened and why, see Ronald E. Bartholomew, “The Textual Development of D&C 130:22 and the Embodiment of the Holy Ghost,” BYU Studies Quarterly 52, no. 3 (2013): 4–24.
Stan Larson, “The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text,” BYU Studies 18, no. 2 (Winter 1978): 193–208. Joseph’s 7 April 1844 sermon, delivered at the funeral of his friend, Elder King Follett, is arguably the most important of his published discourses. In it, Joseph explained his understanding of the nature of God, including the doctrine that God the Father is an exalted Man who once had a mortal existence. Four different individuals took notes during Joseph’s sermon. Their accounts were synthesized into a single text in 1855 by Church scribe Jonathan Grimshaw; Grimshaw’s version was published by B. H. Roberts in his seven-volume History of the Church (6:302–17) and in many other Church publications. Stan Larson’s 1978 amalgamated text attempted to remove Grimshaw’s textual emendations and provide proper weight and balance to the various accounts.
On 16 June 1844, only eleven days before his death, Joseph gave his “Sermon in the Grove” that expanded on the nature of God and other ideas he had presented in the King Follett Discourse. The most complete account of his sermon was made by Thomas Bullock; you can read his handwritten notes on the website of the Joseph Smith Papers or a parallel comparison of his and two other accounts on the archived website of the Book of Abraham Project.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 129–131 – 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

Establishment of Nauvoo; Baptism for the Dead & the Endowmentby Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

T. Edgar Lyon, “Doctrinal Development of the Church During the Nauvoo Sojourn, 1839–1846,” BYU Studies 15, no. 4 (Summer 1975): 435–46. Lyon gives a brief overview of the new doctrines and interpretations Joseph Smith introduced in Nauvoo concerning the Godhead, the priesthood, the temple, and salvation.
Minutes of the Female Relief Society of Nauvoo, 17 March 1842. The Relief Society’s minutes record the counsel given by the Prophet Joseph Smith and by Society President Emma Smith on the date of its founding and the discussion over its name and goals.
FAIR has information on the Kinderhook Plates with links to several other resources.
The Nauvoo Temple: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is an eight-part documentary miniseries that explores the history and legacy of the temple that Latter-day Saints constructed in Nauvoo, Illinois, in the 1840s. The episodes consider what the Nauvoo Temple meant to the men and women who constructed it and the role in played in their religious devotion and worship. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 124–128 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The “Mormon War” of 1838; Joseph Smith’s letter from Liberty Jailby Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

FAIR has an article on The Danites with links to several other resources.
R. Scott Lloyd, “Hawn’s Mill Massacre: ‘New Insights and Interpretations’,” Church News, 9 November 2013. Recent research indicates that the name of the Mormon settlement was spelled Hawn’s Mill, rather than Haun’s, and that the Saints there were not aware of Joseph Smith’s counsel to move closer to Far West to avoid violence.
Transcript and photograph of Governor Lilburn W. Boggs’ “Extermination Order,” Missouri Executive Order 44, issued 27 October 1838.
Emma Smith’s letter to Joseph Smith, Jr. in Liberty Jail, 7 March 1839. In her letter, Emma updated her incarcerated husband on her status and the the welfare of their children: “Was it not for conscious innocence, and the direct interposition of divine mercy, I am very sure I never should have been able to have endured the scenes of suffering that I have passed through…but I still live and am yet willing to suffer more if it is the will of kind Heaven, that I should for your sake.”
Sections 121, 122, and 123 of the Doctrine and Covenants are extracts from a letter written by Joseph Smith and other Church leaders from Liberty Jail on 20 and (c.) 22 March 1839. Images of the original letter, along with an uncorrected transcript, are available on the Joseph Smith Papers website: Part 1 (20 March 1839); Part 2 (ca. 22 March 1839).
Kent P. Jackson and Robert D. Hunt, “Reprove, Betimes, and Sharpness in the Vocabulary of Joseph Smith,” The Religious Educator 6, no. 2 (2005): 97–104. Jackson and Hunt explain what these words meant in 1839 and the context in which they were used in D&C 121:43.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Three Truths to Transform Your Prayersby Autumn Dickson

Context.

Joseph stayed in a frigid prison with some of his companions for four months. It was one of the coldest winters on record in Missouri. They didn’t have sufficient clothing to keep them warm; the food was scarce and rotten. On at least four occasions, the food was poisoned. They couldn’t stand up straight because the prison was too short. There was no trial because of insufficient evidence, and witnesses were intimidated from testifying on behalf of Joseph and his companions.

This suffering was compounded by what was happening to their loved ones. They were separated from family and friends who were also suffering tremendously. Joseph’s band of followers had been expelled from Missouri through an extermination order and found themselves camped on the side of a river in winter time. As the men froze in the horrible prison, their people froze on the banks of a river. Joseph and his friends listened to their captors tell stories of the assault and murder of their friends and family back in Missouri, specifically the recounting of Haun’s Mill.

Dark times.

I have experienced some level of darkness and even if mine is comparatively lesser to Joseph and the Saints, I still believe that what we read in these sections can uplift us, carry us, and help us see more clearly. There are three principles that we’re going to talk about in relation to prayer that have the power to bring light back into our life.

Doctrine and Covenants 121 is a revelation that occurred during this time period, and it is unique in the sense that it is one of very few sections that include words spoken by man and not just the voice of the Lord. I want to talk about the specific verses coming from Joseph’s own voice. Though it was Joseph speaking and not the Lord, we can learn something profound.

If you want a good example of how to pray in faith, look no further than Joseph in Liberty Jail. Instead of reading consecutive verses, I’m going to read phrases from different verses to emphasize my point. Here are some of the words we read from Joseph.

Doctrine and Covenants 121:1-6

O God, where art thou? How long shall thy…pure eye, behold the wrongs of thy people…? O Lord God Almighty, maker of heaven, earth, and seas, and of all things that in them are…Remember thy suffering saints, O our God; and thy servants will rejoice in thy name forever.

Are we able to rejoice in the Lord under all circumstances? Even in the midst of tragedy, do we acknowledge His presence, purity, and power? In the midst of despair, are we able to still recognize ourselves as His?

Let’s talk about three ways Joseph shows his faith.

First, Joseph acknowledges Him. Perhaps we have not received manifestations to the extent that Joseph did, but we have had manifestations. Though the Lord wasn’t providing solutions or softening hearts or providing ways of escape, Joseph reached for the Lord.

Second, he acknowledges the perfect characteristics of God. Despite the less than perfect circumstances, despite the seemingly juxtaposed concepts of God’s goodness and God’s willingness to allow the current despair, Joseph calls His Lord good.

Third, Joseph acknowledges the sacred relationship between him and his God. It’s easy to be tempted to believe that God is angry or disappointed with us when things get sticky. If I had been in Joseph’s circumstances, I surely would have felt like I had done something wrong. I would have assumed that if I had been better or wiser or more righteous, I could have circumvented this terrible halt in the Lord’s plans. Not Joseph. More than once, Joseph describes the Saints with adjectives that imply ownership. Joseph and the other Saints belong to Christ. At least within this prayer, Joseph doesn’t waver in that.

Joseph’s prayer is filled with faith. It is fascinating to me how each of these three principles of faith are almost like stepping stones in our progression of faith that eventually becomes powerful enough to move mountains. As we apply that faith in prayer, we find the salvation we’re looking for. Here are the three principles of faith put into concise terms.

1) I believe that God is there.

2) I believe that God is good and powerful.

3) I belive that I am God’s child, and He loves me.

After it became a habit to write my prayers, I found myself inadvertently going through these three principles when I found myself in trouble. I didn’t even realize I was doing it (thank you Spirit) until the Lord guided me to write this. As I acknowledge the pattern this Lord has helped me establish, I realize that it has changed the course of my prayers, and therefore, my life.

If you are in a place of darkness, there is a lot of benefit in taking your troubles to the Lord. I’m sure there were plenty of times when Joseph talked to the Lord about all the things that he and the Saints were experiencing. I have found a lot of goodness in this strategy, and I employ it often.

And yet, some of my most powerful prayers have not come when I’ve poured out my heart about what’s going on and pleaded for some specific form of deliverance. My most powerful prayers are those drenched in those three principles of faith: I believe God is there, I believe He is good and powerful, and I believe that I am a child of God and He loves me.

When I take the time to acknowledge those three beliefs (in the same way that Joseph did), I find myself healing and comforted before I’ve ever gotten direction or deliverance. My problems and danger feel much smaller, the rewards greater. It makes everything I’m going through more manageable because I have remembered to compare it against some of the most powerful facts in existence. My problems don’t stand a chance against that.

I think it’s important to acknowledge that Joseph wasn’t immediately delivered from his prison after showing faith. Faith can move mountains, but the most important thing that faith can do is change us in the face of those mountains. Being changed at the end of this mortal experience is infinitely more important than being delivered from a jail cell. There’s no comparison.

I testify of God. I testify that He is there, that He is powerful and good, and I testify that He loves you because you are His child. I testify that those facts are true, and yet, they don’t hold much power in our life if we don’t believe them. God cannot prove Himself, His goodness, His power, or His love any more than He already is. We have to be the ones who change if we want to find those pieces of salvation He keeps handing out.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 121–123 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson 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

Building the Kingdom in Diapers and Day Jobsby Autumn Dickson

The Saints have built the Kirtland temple. This week we read about the dedication event, including the revealed prayer from the Lord, and we read about the Lord restoring priesthood keys within the temple. Here is one of the verses from the prayer that was revealed to Joseph Smith.

Doctrine and Covenants 109:9 That your incomings may be in the name of the Lord, that your outgoings may be in the name of the Lord, that all your salutations may be in the name of the Lord, with uplifted hand unto the Most High–

This verse is talking about temple worship. When you come into the temple, your heart should be turned towards the Lord. When you leave the temple, that state of heart should follow you into the world. During temple worship, all of your salutations (or, in other words, your interpersonal communications) should reflect the Lord and His holiness.

There is a lot of power in focusing on Christ in the temple. Temple worship reflects the antiquity of the gospel, and it can feel very different than how we normally worship. When we use every part of the temple to reflect on Christ and look at every symbol through a lens of Christ, the worship experience becomes more meaningful.

However, I want to take this beyond the walls of the temple.

When I was a teenager, I remember attending EFY camps, fireside, Sunday youth classes, and all sorts of youth activities. Oftentimes, we would be invited to spend more time with the Savior. Being the perfectionist that I was, I often took this goal beyond what my leaders had likely intended. I would make goals about reading my scriptures, praying, and doing other spiritual activities that went beyond the bounds of what was balanced or even appropriate.

As an adult, I recall the Spirit whispering a very important truth to me. Spending time with the Savior is not just about going and doing traditionally spiritual things; it’s also about inviting the Savior into the rest of your life. Our incomings, outgoings, and salutations can be in the name of the Lord regardless of whether they are directly about the Lord.

Rather than constantly immersing myself in scripture study, I can take my learning to a new level as I bring Christ into the rest of my life. This has many outcomes, but let’s talk about a couple of them.

The first effect is that it transforms my life.

I can listen to secular music, read my favorite romance novels, go out to dinner with my husband, and hang out with my girl friends with the Savior as my companion. I remember driving to go buy a dress for a Christmas party. The sun was shining, and my Apple Playlist was giving me all of the best songs. The Spirit whispered to me that I should remember Christ, and I did. I thanked Him for moments like that, and it made it all the sweeter. I knew He was happy for me and that He was enjoying my happiness and gratitude.

Eternal life isn’t all work. I don’t know what the Savior does for fun, but I believe that fun is an important part of a healthy and balanced spiritual life. The Savior wants to be included in those moments too.

As a stay-at-home mom, my life can also get a bit repetitive meeting the needs of my kids. Helping the kids with their tasks that I’m trying to teach, making bottles, changing diapers, wiping the counter, picking up things so that I don’t trip over it, and refereeing can take its toll sometimes. The daily tasks can feel so mundane sometimes until you place them in the context of eternity. But then I bring the Savior into it. Eternity isn’t about learning some huge new lesson every few weeks. It’s not about giant, transformational experiences. It’s about daily habits that make us who we are.

When I invite the Savior to walk with me in my experience, it reminds me that I’m building discipleship into the rapidly developing brains of my children. Showing up for them over and over and over and over and over sets the stage for them to understand their Savior. He gives power and purpose to the mundane parts of my life. And though I speak of my personal experience as a stay-at-home mom, these principles extend beyond that. You can find power and purpose in the mundane parts of your life.

So we’re working on letting our incomings, outgoings, and salutations be in the name of the Lord. The first effect is that it transforms our lives. It makes sweet moments sweeter. It fills the mundane parts of life with purpose. And I didn’t talk about it, but it also soothes the hard moments.

The second effect is that it makes your work more powerful.

When you do something in the name of the Lord, it adds power. Acting in His name means that we are standing in for Him as if He were here. We are His representative. We are doing what He would do in our situation. Christ left His carpentry job to be a full-time missionary for 3 years, but that’s not our mission. He made premortal promises, and He fulfilled them. We also made premortal promises, but ours are not the same as His.

You don’t abandon your day job. You transform your day job. It’s “Bring the Savior to work day.” This has a couple of outcomes.

It quickens your ability to do your job. I watch my husband receive revelation all the time in his engineering designs. I pray all the time for his inspiration. The Saints were building the Kirtland temple, and I’m sure they learned a lot of spiritual lessons. They also developed some major construction skills. Maybe that doesn’t seem like an important skill until you realize that the Lord is preparing us to create like He did. Invite Him to join you, and do all things in His name. It can add purpose, and it can make you more capable.

When you do your day job in the name of the Lord, you also find ways to build the kingdom in creative ways. Sometimes we think building the kingdom means we go to church and do our calling, but building the kingdom can happen everywhere around you. Can you imagine how quickly our ability to build the kingdom would collapse if all the farmers left their jobs to be full-time missionaries? Jobs that are not traditionally thought of as spiritual can be done in the name of the Lord, and they can help build the kingdom.

Let all your salutations, incomings, and outgoings be done in the name of the Lord. That doesn’t mean you immediately need to preach to your coworker. It can also mean finding purpose, power, and fulfillment in the work that you are a part of. It doesn’t mean abandoning your day job to knock doors; it means bringing the Savior with you everywhere you go.

I testify that doing so transforms your life and your work. The Savior is the best companion on this unofficial mission we’ve been called to do. He knows the importance of daily tasks and can help us remember how our small contributions matter. He knows how to have fun. He finds great joy in your joy. He can expand your capacities and help you creatively utilize them for good.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 109-110 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson 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

Your Body as a Temple: Surprising Lessons from the Kirtland Templeby Autumn Dickson

We have been asked to liken the scriptures unto ourselves. Oftentimes, I look at this from the perspective of studying the people who lived at the time of the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. As I study the events surrounding the revelations, I am able to learn so much more about what the Lord is trying to teach. I am able to relate, if not in situation than in feeling, to these Saints and the Lord’s words answer me just as it answered them.

Though I often go through this process in relation to people, there is another way to liken the scriptures to us this week.

The Lord declares that our body is a temple. When He declares this, He implies many things. Our bodies are tabernacles through which we experience mortal life and the (hopefully) resulting spiritual growth. Our bodies can house the Spirit. We treat our bodies as a gift from the Lord.

What can we learn from Section 110 that teaches us even more about our bodies that were given to us by the Lord? I want to pull out a couple of phrases and ideas.

The first idea is that the Kirtland temple was unique amongst temples in this dispensation.

Traditionally, a temple in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a place where we go to receive further instruction and power by entering into covenants with the Lord. Interestingly enough, temples looked very different before the Lord came to fulfill His mortal ministry. Even in this dispensation, we have the Kirtland Temple. Within the Kirtland Temple, there was no baptismal font or rooms for sealings. There was no endowment. It looked like a church. There was a place for the congregants to sit, worship, learn, and sing. There was a pulpit.

This uniqueness holds many implications for our own bodies. The first implication I can think of is the progression of the gospel, or the idea of a living church. We believe that the church does change. The doctrine doesn’t change, but we grow closer and closer and closer to the truth. The Kirtland Temple was not completely ready to start performing additional ordinances en masse. Neither were the people ready en masse to receive that ordinance. It was a step in the right direction as the Lord continued to give further light and knowledge. We grow and progress and sacrifice and learn before we also receive further ordinances.

There were also three keys that were restored in the Kirtland temple. Moses came and gave the keys of the gathering of Israel. Elias came with the gospel of Abraham, and Elijah came to restore the sealing power. A grand majority of us will never hold those keys, male and female alike. However, those keys unlocked power for everyone there. One of those purposes of the Kirtland Temple was to create a place and a people who were prepared to receive these keys, and it worked. The Saints sacrificed and toiled, and it prepared their hearts to utilize the power that was unlocked from those keys.

And so we work and sacrifice and prepare ourselves to receive the power of those keys to the same extent that the Saints felt the power of those keys. Priesthood keys unlock power. The Lord wants these restored keys to unlock power in each of our lives. He wants us to experience the power of the Gathering of Israel. He wants us to understand what it means to be part of the family of Abraham. He wants us to be sealed together as part of His eternal family.

There are more phrases and implications, but I want to discuss one more verse.

Doctrine and Covenants 110:7 For behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.

In verse 7, the Lord accepts His house and places His name upon it. He also promises to manifest Himself there. We looked to eventually be accepted of the Lord as we build and refine ourselves. We carry His name upon us. And then there is also the matter of the manifestation of the Lord.

The Lord visited the Kirtland temple as a fulfilment of the promise He made that He would enter into His house if the Saints would allow no unclean thing to enter therein. I believe the Lord is willing to reveal as much as we are willing to bear, including the manifestation of Himself, and so we utilize His atonement to be cleansed and we work on ourselves to be prepared to hold that responsibility.

I believe this has another implication. The Lord will manifest Himself to His people. Sometimes a manifestation of the Lord is not always the act of standing in His presence. Honestly, looking at a sunset is a manifestation of Him if we’re looking through spiritual eyes. I believe that we can manifest the Savior to others. He can visit His people through us as we work to lift where we stand. When I strengthen my husband, kiss my children, and love my friends, they are receiving miniscule doses of the Savior. We can be walking temples that house the Spirit and bring the Savior closer to everyone on this earth.

I testify that there are many reasons that the Lord described our bodies as temples. I testify that one of those reasons is because we can parallel temples in many regards. We can look to temples to better understand what the Lord has in store for us. We can look to temples to better understand what the Lord expects of us. I testify that He can sanctify our sacrifices and efforts and make us clean as we work to become a type of the House of the Lord.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 109-110 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson 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

Did the Lord Fail?by Autumn Dickson

To give a bit of content for what we’re reading about this week, the Saints have been driven from their homes in Missouri, and Joseph Smith received a revelation that talked about gathering a group of Saints to go and win back their homes. After marching towards Jackson County, the camp was actually disbanded.

Doctrine and Covenants 105:13 Therefore it is expedient in me that mine elders should wait for a little season, for the redemption of Zion.

The Lord called off what the Saints believed to be the original purpose of the Zion’s camp: redeeming the Saints’ lands in Missouri. Here is a bit of what the Lord said about His true purpose.

Doctrine and Covenants 105:19 …and it is expedient in me that they should be brought thus far for a trial of their faith.

There are two ways that the Saints could have their faith built during this experience. The first way is how to stick around when the going gets tough.

Being a part of Zion’s Camp was not an easy thing. It was hot and muggy. Food and water could be scarce. There was disease, and members of Zion’s camp even died of cholera on this expedition that did not provide the results that many Saints looked for.

One of the characteristics the Lord is trying to instill and test us in is the idea that we will follow Him. Truly follow Him, not just rewards.

In the New Testament, many followers left when they realized that He wasn’t going to keep miraculously giving out bread. Interestingly enough, the bread was a distraction from the most important, life-changing aspects of following Christ. They couldn’t see the miracle of who Christ was because they were too distracted by their want of bread. Never mind that Christ had performed an incredible miracle and dispersed an immense amount of food. The people in the New Testament were too distracted by the fact that their bread stopped to remember that He had done something powerful in their lives. They were too distraught by the lack of bread to stick around and wonder if there was something more powerful at work.

The Lord doesn’t want obedient dogs. He didn’t keep giving out bread just to keep people coming back. He wants the loyalty and love of His people through anything. He doesn’t want to give us a treat every time we show up. He wants us to truly follow Him through thick and thin. He wants us to trust Him when the treat doesn’t immediately appear. He wants us to choose to love Him and follow Him through difficulty just as He followed us through difficulty. The only way that He can instill and test this aspect of faith is to allow us to face incredible obstacles and choose Him.

Trials can try the faith. When you’re trying to fulfill the Lord’s commands and there are obstacles, it can lead you to wonder whether you’re truly fulfilling the Lord’s commands. Understanding the purpose of mortal life can help us understand the irreplaceable effect of trials. The Lord needed to try us or we would never be able to grow into what we needed to become. Trials are not just a punishment; trials are also to help the righteous grow. We cannot afford to see them as proof that the Lord is not with us otherwise it completely prevents us from accessing a level of growth that is completely necessary.

But this experience wasn’t just about trials. There was a second way that this experience could make or break the faith of the Saints.

This faith-shaking experience was not just about a difficult trip; it was about the fact that the trip seemed unsuccessful. This could easily call Joseph’s prophetic call into question, and it did. This experience caused many to wonder, and yet, it did the exact opposite for others. In the Come Follow Me manual we read, “Faithful members of Zion’s Camp, many of whom later became leaders of the Church, testified that the experience deepened their faith in God’s power, in Joseph Smith’s divine call, and in Zion—not just Zion the place but Zion the people of God.”

It deepened their faith in God’s power and Joseph Smith’s divine calling as prophet. From the world’s perspective, this is ridiculous. Why would you believe more in the God that is being preached to you when He couldn’t deliver on His promises? Why would you believe more in Joseph’s calling at the end of this? The idea that the Lord was trying to create a Zion-like people may feel like a thinly-veiled excuse for bailing after the governor rescinded his promise to send a militia to aid the Saints. Why on earth should we believe and continue to follow?

Exploring this concept is important because there are plenty of aspects in the church that don’t make sense from a worldly perspective. There are revelations that seem like sad excuses. For example, the Lord rescinded His command for polygamy when the United States threatened to take away everything that was beloved by the church and Saints. If the Lord is so powerful and if He is truly leading His Saints along through a prophet, why did He bail on Zion’s Camp? Why did He continue to enforce polygamy until the going got too tough?

When it comes to the gospel, it is IMPOSSIBLE to make things make sense from a worldly perspective. Faith precedes understanding. It is impossible to convince someone of Joseph’s prophetic call. If you try to explain that the Lord was trying to build a Zion-people rather than being concerned about the land, they will laugh in your face.

When it comes to the gospel, your testimony cannot form from the idea that it has to make sense before you choose to believe. Sooner or later, you are going to come across something that doesn’t come together in your mind. You are going to come across principles, policies, or history that feel like they create cognitive dissonance in your mind.

It would seem like the Lord would try to avoid these faith-shaking experiences altogether. He’s trying to build our faith. Why would He allow it to be shaken after this manner?

Interestingly enough, the only way to build a truly strong faith is to let it be shaken. Faith is not knowing everything. Faith is choosing to trust when we don’t know.

The Lord wants to take our testimony from, “I know the Lord leads His church today because He made this miracle happen,” to, “I know the Lord leads His church today, and I will follow Him through hell if He calls me to do so.” When we can unlock that second level of faith, we become powerful disciples. We find a new level of salvation when we find that trust and relinquish our need to control and understand everything.

How do we make that jump in faith? How did the members of the Zion’s Camp come out of this experience with stronger faith rather than weaker faith?

I’m sure there are many answers, but I can only truly share my own.

I talk to God, and He answers. For me, that is the single largest portion of my testimony.

I have had experiences where I have looked back in awe at how the Lord made everything come together for me. I was amazed when I saw how He manipulated details from the years before to help everything stitch together and help me come out on top. Those are faith-building experiences. They helped me grow in my faith.

But they no longer define my faith. I am immensely grateful for those experiences. I cannot begin to describe how grateful I am to look back and see how the Lord saved me because He has indeed saved me. I am grateful, but they do not define my faith.

My faith has shifted. I talk to Him on a regular basis, and He answers, and I will not deny it. When things don’t go as planned, when I feel confused, when something new comes along that makes me wonder if I’m on the right track, I talk to Him and He answers. Regardless of whether He chooses to give me a new perspective or help me understand something, I have talked with Him enough that I trust Him. He is my Friend. He has shown me His power enough, and I will follow Him.

I have had enough experiences with Him to hold on, and I am happier since I have let go and chosen to trust Him through anything. I testify that when you choose to keep at it and continue to follow this path that has been presented to you, you will find the same results. In fact, you will be grateful that He allowed you the experience of questioning and finding Him again and again.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 102-105 – 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

The Kirtland Templeby Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Elwin C. Robison, The First Mormon Temple: Design, Construction, and Historic Context of the Kirtland Temple (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1997). For this book, Robison thoroughly investigated the temple architecture and structure, integrating that information with historic photographs and documents.
“The Father and the Son: A Doctrinal Exposition by The First Presidency and The Twelve,” Improvement Era 19, no. 10 (August 1916): 934–42. This official declaration firmly rooted the identification of Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, with Jesus Christ. Prior to this, the name-title Jehovah was used by Latter-day Saints to indicate either the Father or the Son (as seen in section 109).
These two articles explore the identity of the figure of Elias who appeared in the Kirtland Temple on 3 April 1836 (D&C 110:12): Kevin Barney, “Who was the Elias of D&C 110?,” By Common Consent, 2 March 2006; Samuel Brown, “The Prophet Elias Puzzle,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 39, no. 3 (Fall 2006): 1–17.
Trever Anderson, “Doctrine and Covenants Section 110: From Vision to Canonization,” master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, July 2010. Anderson explores how the account of the appearances of Christ, Moses, Elias, and Elijah was recorded, taught, and eventually canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 2, 94–97, 109–110 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“What I Learned about Life, the Church, and the Cosmos from Hugh Nibley” by Boyd Petersen at the 2005 FAIR ConferenceFebruary 24, 2005 was one of those beautiful false-spring days when we all leave our coats at home and venture out in shirt sleeves, despite the fact that we all know that winter will have one final gasp before yielding to spring. The snow had all melted from the valley floor, but the mountains were covered with a brilliant white snow pack that contrasted sharply against the deep blue sky. The temperatures were making their first climb into the seventies, and everyone wanted to be outside. My students and I were all restless as I plodded through another lecture on formatting research papers. Between classes, I stopped by my office to check my e-mail when I got a call from my wife. “He’s gone,” she practically whispered. I immediately knew. Hugh Nibley was no longer with us. We believe that, like the rest of us, Hugh had simply longed to be outside, to leave the hospital bed that had been his home for almost two years and enjoy the beautiful day.

CONTINUED HERE

The post Classic FAIR – “What I Learned about Life, the Church, and the Cosmos from Hugh Nibley” – Boyd Petersen, 2005 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

“The Olive Leaf”; the divine natures of God and man (D&C sections 88, 93)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Diana L. Mahony and Marla D. Corson, “Light-Mindedness versus Lightheartedness: Conflicting Conceptions of Laughter among Latter-day Saints,” BYU Studies 42, no. 2 (2003): 115–29.
Kenneth W. Godfrey, “The History of Intelligence in Latter-day Saint Thought,” in The Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God, ed. H. Donl Peterson and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center at Brigham Young University, 1989), 213–36.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants sections 88, 93 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Prophecy of war; expulsion from Independence; Zion’s Camp (D&C sections 87, 90, 100–101, 103, 105)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Elder Graham W. Doxey, “Missouri Myths,” Ensign, April 1979, pp. 64–66. Brother Doxey, who had been president of the Missouri Independence Mission (1973–1976), explored some of the “urban legends” about Missouri that persist among Latter-day Saints.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 87, 90, 100–101, 103, 105 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The priesthood & its quorums (D&C sections 84, 107; Official Declaration 2)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Ronald K. Esplin and Sharon E. Nielsen, “The Record of the Twelve, 1835: The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles’ Call and the 1835 Mission,” BYU Studies 51, no. 1 (2012): 4–52. This document, made available through the Joseph Smith Papers Project, is the earliest extant record of the activities of the modern Quorum of the Twelve.
Elder L. Aldin Porter, “A History of the Latter-day Seventy,” Ensign, August 2000, 15–20. Elder Porter reviews the organization and growth of the modern office of the Seventy.
“Race and the Priesthood,” Gospel Topics Essays. This scholarly article on the Church’s website explores the origins of the ban on ordaining men of African descent to the priesthood.
Edward L. Kimball, “Spencer W. Kimball and the Revelation on Priesthood,” BYU Studies 47, no. 2 (Spring 2008): 4–78. Edward L. Kimball discusses the chain of events that led his father, President Spencer W. Kimball, to seek revelation regarding changing the Church’s ban on ordaining black men to the priesthood. The article describes how President Kimball went about obtaining the revelation, how the revelation was spiritually confirmed to other leaders, and members’ reactions when the change was announced.
Lester E. Bush Jr., “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973): 11–68. This seminal article—which appeared before the 1978 revelation that reversed the Church’s ban on ordaining men of African descent to the priesthood—examines when the policy began and developed, and what scriptures were employed to explain it.
Elder Bruce R. McConkie, “All Are Alike unto God,” address in the Second Annual CES Symposium, 18 August 1978. Elder McConkie’s address came just two months after the 1978 revelation that extended the priesthood to men of African descent.
The Priesthood Restored: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is a six-part miniseries that explores the events and circumstances that played a role in the restoration of the priesthood. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – D&C sections 84, 107; Official Declaration 2 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Legitimate Questionby Autumn Dickson

When I was growing up, I remember being worried about receiving revelation. How could I differentiate between His voice and my own internal voice? I know I wasn’t the only one who asked this question and as I’ve become an adult and occasional leader over the youth, I have heard that same question frequently.

I am not perfect at it, but I have learned to recognize a distinct feeling in my head when the Lord is trying to say something to me. When I start to receive that subtle, distinct feeling, I turn to my journal, start to write, and the Lord will often teach me something.

Elder Bednar once taught that it doesn’t matter whether it’s coming from the Lord or not. If something good pops into your head, you should follow it regardless of whether it’s an official prompting. I agree with him. If a thought pops into your head about serving someone or doing something uplifting, it doesn’t really matter whether the Lord is asking you to do it. Do it anyway.

But there are some cases when it is necessary to be able to discern between your own voice and the Lord’s.

For example, when Joseph Smith asked the Saints to pack up and leave their comfortable homes in New York for the rugged frontier in Ohio, it was probably pretty important that Joseph knew whether it was a commandment from the Lord or whether it was just something that popped into his head. I’m sure Joseph Smith could discern the Lord’s voice. I’m merely pointing out a situation in which it was pretty important to have that ability to discern.

There is a verse found in Section 84 that reminds me of one of the most powerful admonitions I have heard from President Nelson. The admonition is to hear Him. The verse is as follows.

Doctrine and Covenants 84:52 And whoso receiveth not my voice is not acquainted with my voice, and is not of me.

The definition of “acquainted” is to “make someone aware or familiar.” Are you aware of the Lord’s voice? Is it familiar to you?

How do we become aware of His voice? How do we become familiar with it? How do we become acquainted with how the Lord speaks to us?

Develop an awareness

There is a difference between an awareness that He is speaking to you and a familiarity of His voice. Developing an awareness that He is speaking to you is a matter of developing faith. It’s a matter of purposefully choosing to believe that He wants to talk to you. If you don’t believe the Lord would ever deign to talk to you, then you’re cutting off your ability to hear. You have to develop faith that He has something to say or you’re not going to listen and become aware.

Sometimes this faith is most easy to develop when you are seeking His voice on behalf of someone else. A grand majority of the revelation I receive from the Lord is when I’m seeking it on behalf of someone else. I’m studying a question that was posed to me. I’m studying it for my blog. I’m seeking answers for how to help my family or friends. The Lord has often spoken to me for my personal life, but it is usually in conjunction with the fact that I’m seeking it on behalf of someone I love. When I am seeking revelation to serve someone, it puts me in an uplifting mindset where I’m more sensitive to the Spirit, and it also helps my faith that the Lord would choose to speak to me. Maybe the Lord doesn’t have anything to say to me, but I know He’s going to be willing to help me help someone else.

So first develop an awareness of His voice. Believe that He is willing to speak to us. You have to believe that He is willing to speak if you’re ever going to become familiar with His voice. Once you believe that He’s willing to speak, awareness of His voice is a matter of checking in consistently.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 84 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A Recycled Revelationby Autumn Dickson

This week I’m talking a lot about context rather than any specific verses which is not usually my norm. However, I think that delving into the context of these sections is really important and can make the scriptures feel more rich. Just as we learn from the stories in our other books of scripture, we can learn more about the revelations from the Lord by studying when they were given. So here is some context for what we read this week.

Section 81 was originally given to a man named Jesse Gause who was called to serve as Joseph Smith’s counselor in the forerunner of what would eventually evolve into the First Presidency. When Gause was excommunicated, he was replaced by Frederick G. Williams. Gause’s name was also replaced by Williams’ name in the revelation that was given.

I wonder if it slightly bothered Frederick G. Williams when he didn’t get his own revelation upon being called. Please note that I’m not saying it should bother him; I just wonder if it did.

Imagine being in a ward where the bishop gets called and then moves six months later. A new bishop comes in, and the stake president is just like, “Here. We recorded the blessing for the last bishop. We’ll set you apart, but this blessing is just going to be yours now.”

Imagine going in to receive your patriarchal blessing and the patriarch recycles an old blessing he gave and inserts your name in it. Would you feel a little shafted? These are supposed to be individualized, right?

Now, I’m not sure that it bothered Williams at all. Maybe he didn’t think twice about it, but it can’t hurt to explore the concept and dig deeper.

Joseph Smith was receiving a lot of revelation during this time period. He probably could have easily received something just for Williams, but he didn’t. Have you ever felt skipped over at church? Have you ever felt like everyone else was receiving something special but you weren’t? Maybe it was a calling or a special experience. It could have been anything.

I have. I used to feel that way all the time. I remember having experiences where parents told me about how special the patriarchal blessings of their kids were. They talked about how it felt so powerful and singular, and I remember feeling very un-special.

I’m going to tell you a little secret that changed my life. When we seek to be set apart from others, to be singular, to receive something that no one else has received, we usually end up having the opposite experience. Trying to be more than others is an insatiable desire; you can temporarily please it but you can’t quench it. Maybe we don’t think we’re trying to be more; I certainly didn’t recognize it at the time, but I was. There was a comparison, and you can’t win with comparisons. No matter how things play out, you lose.

In my own life, those deep and unrelenting desires to be special were coming from a place of insecurity about my Heavenly Father’s love for me. Unfortunately, I wasn’t just trying to feel loved. I wanted to be more loved, probably in some mistaken belief that it would drive away the insecurity.

Luckily, the Lord is smarter than giving me what I want sometimes.

He could have given me something special. He could have given me some experience that no one else got to have to make sure that I knew that He knew me and that I was important to Him. He could have looked at me and worried about the insecurities and worried about the fact that I didn’t have a testimony of His love.

But He didn’t want to do that for a couple of good reasons. He didn’t communicate that I was more special because I’m not more special. It would be silly to tell me an untruth. He also didn’t give some overt, flamboyant sign of His love because it would have actually just fed the insecurity. You would think that I’d be able to take these huge signs of love and accept them. But in my experience, it simply doesn’t work. Think about it from a mortal perspective. You can make huge overtures of your love to someone, but until they’re ready to believe it, the signs you choose to give don’t change their insecurity.

Rather, He continued to feed me a healthy, quiet kind of love and left me to accept it. He never caved when I felt unloved, insecure, and assumed He was so angry with me. He just kept feeding me that unrelenting, reverent love and waited for me to finally accept it.

Drawing this back to Frederick G. Williams, I would have felt distraught over getting a recycled blessing that had originally been given to someone else. At the time that I was still seeking that unhealthy form of love, I would have let that circumstance speak to me, and it would have said, “You don’t really matter. You don’t even get your own blessing.”

I’ve learned a few things since my angsty teen years. The Lord does love me. I’m so important to Him even if that’s illogical. Nowadays, if I were to receive a recycled blessing, I would be able to quietly read it in gratitude. That gratitude would have enabled me to see the quiet, personalized messages He was sending. The recycled blessing would have been as personalized as I allowed. The help of the Spirit, love from our Heavenly Father, and my own belief in that love would have given me what I was seeking – a reassurance of His love for me.

The most interesting part about this experience is the fact that once I let go of comparison, once I let go of desperately seeking some inarguable sign that I was valuable, I was able to start seeing the small tokens of His love. If I had received a “recycled” blessing and chosen to let go of any whispers of insecurity, the experience of receiving this revelation would have been a sacred and treasured experience. Letting go of the need to have my own, I would have been able to read this blessing in a state of mind where the Spirit could whisper the personalized messages I needed to do my work to serve others.

Isn’t that ironic? Once I let go of trying to receive some ostentatious sign that I was special, I was able to see and receive those smaller, special messages that were meant for me at a specific time period in my life. And once I began appreciating and accepting those small, special messages, I have become convinced that I’m special to my Heavenly Father.

I testify that the Lord loves you. He recycles the same values, words, and lessons that He teaches everybody because He loves all of us. You’re not going to receive anything “new,” but I promise that you can receive something better, something that fills you up more.The need for something singular can be sinister. It can prevent you from receiving the healthy kind of love that sticks with you and fills in all of the cracks. I testify that the Savior loves you with a deep and abiding love and that His love is enough to fill you up, even if it’s not more than the love He gives to others.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 81–83 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The office of high priest; the United Firm (D&C sections 78, 80–83, 85, 92, 104)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Max H. Parkin, “Joseph Smith and the United Firm: The Growth and Decline of the Church’s First Master Plan of Business and Finance, Ohio and Missouri, 1832–1834,” BYU Studies 46, no. 3 (2007): 5–66. Parkin sheds light on how the United Firm was organized and operated and the role it played in early Church history.
David J. Whittaker, “Substituted Names in the Published Revelations of Joseph Smith,” BYU Studies 23, no. 1 (Winter 1983): 103–12. Whittaker explains Joseph Smith’s use of code names when he published the revelations related to the United Firm.
D. Michael Quinn, “Jesse Gause: Joseph Smith’s Little-Known Counselor,” BYU Studies 23, no. 4 (Fall 1983): 487–93.
Joseph Smith’s 27 November 1832 letter to William W. Phelps, an extract of which was canonized in 1876 as section 85.
Bill Shepard, “‘To Set in Order the House of God’: The Search for the Elusive ‘One Mighty and Strong’,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 39, no. 3 (Fall 2006): 18–45. Shepard traces the various interpretations of and claimants to the “one mighty and strong” mentioned in D&C 85:7.
First Presidency statement on the “One Mighty and Strong,” Improvement Era 10, no. 12 (October 1907): 929–43. This statement—written and signed by Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund—suggests two possible interpretations of D&C 85:7.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 78, 80–83, 85, 92, 104 – Mike Parker 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

Compiled by Dennis B. Horne

Elder Harold B. Lee told a close friend (who decades later told me) that, “Twenty years ago, the most electrifying and most interesting man in the Quorum of the Twelve was Melvin J. Ballard. People used to travel miles just to go and hear him at a stake conference. People just flocked to hear him. Hardly anyone knows who he is now.” Elder Lee told the Ballard family that of all the men he knew, he most wanted to be like Elder Melvin J. Ballard.

Elder Melvin J. Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve (Pres. M. Russell Ballard’s grandfather):

Excerpts from his famous address, “The Three Degrees of Glory”:

The greatest revelation the Lord, Jesus Christ, has ever given to man, so far as a record is made, was given to the Prophet Joseph Smith on the 16th of April, 1832, known as the 76th section of the book of Doctrine & Covenants, commonly called for years and still known as “The Vision.” This to my mind is the climax of all wonderful revelations that have come from the Lord from the days of Father Adam until the present moment. . . .

Your minds and hearts are set upon knowing what you must do to obtain the greatest thing the Lord has offered. I want to talk about that more than anything else because I do not discover many of you who would be satisfied with second-hand things, and you are not contented or happy by having second best or third best. So we will begin by reading a description of the terms and conditions that we must comply with to obtain the celestial glory. I think it will be worth every sacrifice required and a hundred times more if need be. Personally, I would give it to attain that which God has offered to men and women who enter into the celestial glory.

CONTINUED HERE

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 Doctrine & Covenants 76; the Vision of the Degrees of Glory appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Becoming Holy Through Charity and Virtue

Have you ever felt that eternal life is meant for people holier than you—people more spiritual, more disciplined, more sure of themselves in God’s presence?

In his final remarks at the April 2025 General Conference, President Russell M. Nelson offers a bold and empowering invitation: We can prepare for celestial glory now—by becoming the kind of person who feels confident standing in the presence of God.

But how do we become that kind of person?

President Nelson doesn’t point us to outward signs of worthiness or visible achievement. He draws from Doctrine and Covenants 121, where the Lord declares that “confidence shall wax strong in the presence of God” when virtue and charity guide our lives. These terms are often misunderstood—but President Nelson reclaims them with divine clarity:

Charity is not just a nice gesture. It is the essence of who the Savior is. And it is what He expects us to become.

This talk reframes charity as the divine love that transforms, and virtue as the spiritual power to become holy. These are not distant ideals—they are the pathway to exaltation. Through consistent choices to live with compassion, moral strength, and devotion to Christ, we become more than improved humans. We become celestial beings.

As we study Doctrine and Covenants 76, President Nelson’s message echoes the vision of glory Joseph and Sidney saw—a vision not of hierarchy, but of transformation. What if confidence in our relationship with God is not earned, but grown—through one act of charity and virtue at a time?

Apologetic Issues: What Does It Mean to Be “Worthy” to Enter God’s Presence?Misconception: “Your church teaches that only the perfect—or obsessively obedient—can enter heaven.”
Response: President Nelson teaches that confidence in the presence of God is not the reward of perfection—but the fruit of charity, virtue, humility, and covenantal living. These are not standards of exclusion; they are processes of transformation.
Doctrine and Covenants 76 affirms that those who are “valiant in the testimony of Jesus” receive of His fullness and glory (D&C 76:79). The standard is not flawlessness, but valiant discipleship—a willing alignment with divine truth.

He echoes Webster’s 1828 definition of virtue as “voluntary obedience to truth,” reinforcing that virtue is not repression—it is power. The kind of moral courage that fuels sanctification.

“Charity towards all men is essential to our progress. Charity is the foundation of a godly character.” —President Russell M. Nelson

Common Fallacy: False Dilemma – A False Dilemma presents only two options when more exist.This issue commits the False Dilemma Fallacy—assuming only two extremes: either we are perfect, or we are damned.
Solution: Scripture and modern prophets reject this binary. Exaltation is not pass/fail—it is grow and become. Charity and virtue are not checklists; they are qualities we cultivate in relationship with Christ.

Social Issue: Is “Virtue” Just a Polite Code Word for Shame?Criticism: “The Church’s focus on virtue, especially for women, seems outdated and shame-based.”
Response: That interpretation reflects modern misunderstanding, not scriptural intent. President Nelson reframes virtue as spiritual strength and personal sanctity, not social compliance. He testifies that it is essential for becoming confident before God.

Joseph Smith and early Restoration teachings often used “virtue” to mean spiritual force —something empowering and divine, not restrictive. When applied as moral courage and obedience to eternal truth, virtue becomes not a burden, but a shield (D&C 121:45–46).

Common Fallacy: PresentismThis critique relies on Presentism—judging ancient or eternal principles by modern cultural norms.
Correction: When we study scriptural definitions in their original context—like Webster’s 1828—virtue becomes liberating, not limiting. It is not about controlling people—it’s about freeing them to live aligned with divine truth.

Apologetic Application: Charity Isn’t Just Kindness—It’s Covenant Power

President Nelson’s message brings us back to a divine truth:

Charity is not just an emotion. It is a sanctifying force.

At the heart of exaltation lies charity—not merely good behavior, but a sacred transformation of the soul through Christ. Scripture declares:

“Charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever” (Moroni 7:47).
And D&C 121:45–46 promises that if virtue and charity adorn our thoughts, we will have confidence before God.

Webster’s 1828 definition of charity is “Supreme love to God, and universal goodwill to men.” President Nelson’s remarks support this definition, reminding us that charity is a doctrinal cornerstone, not social sentiment.

Defending Core Beliefs1⃣ Charity just means giving to the poor or helping people in need.In modern usage, charity often refers to acts of generosity—donating money, volunteering, or offering aid to the less fortunate. While these are good and important, they are outward expressions, not the essence of scriptural charity.

In scripture, charity is “the pure love of Christ” (Moroni 7:47)—a divine attribute that transforms hearts and relationships. It’s not just doing good but becoming good—becoming like Jesus Christ in how we see and treat others.

President Nelson teaches that charity is what empowers us to become peacemakers in a divided world:

As charity becomes part of our nature, we will lose the impulse to demean others. We will stop judging others. We will have charity for those from all walks of life. Charity towards all men is essential to our progress. Charity is the foundation of a godly character.

While charity often includes generosity toward the suffering, it goes much further. It leads us to forgive enemies, abandon tribalism, and seek the healing unity of Zion.

Doctrine and Covenants 121:45 links charity to spiritual strength and divine confidence:
“Let thy bowels also be full of charity… and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God.”

2⃣ Virtue and charity are lofty ideals, not actionable traits.Some feel that virtue and charity are abstract (and therefore unattainable) ideals. To them, these qualities seem like ethereal goals that can’t be lived in real, daily life.

President Nelson directly counters this notion. He teaches that charity and virtue are not just qualities to admire—they are powers to cultivate. In fact, he promises that as we intentionally cultivate charity and virtue, our joy and faith will increase.

As we diligently seek to have charity and virtue fill our lives, our confidence in approaching God will increase. I invite you to take intentional steps to grow in your confidence before the Lord. Then, as we go to our Heavenly Father with increasing confidence, we will be filled with more joy, and your faith in Jesus Christ will increase. We will begin to experience spiritual power that exceeds our greatest hopes.

These traits are not passive states—they are choices, repeated over time. Each time we forgive, speak truth with love, curb a cruel impulse, or honor our covenants, we are acting in virtue. Each time we offer mercy, hold back judgment, sacrifice for another, or try to see others as Christ sees them, we are practicing charity.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsWhen Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon received the vision recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 76, it astonished early Latter-day Saints—not because it was harsh, but because it was too merciful.

Rather than a binary heaven-or-hell judgment, the Lord revealed a spectrum of glory—a plan in which almost all of God’s children would inherit some degree of salvation. To some, this felt threatening. It challenged entrenched notions of exclusivity and punishment. But it also testified of a God who is more gracious, loving, and just than anyone had imagined.

D&C 76:5 begins with a striking reassurance:

I, the Lord, am merciful and gracious unto those who fear me, and delight to honor those who serve me in righteousness and in truth unto the end.

This vision offered not just a theology of rescue, but of refinement. The Celestial Kingdom is promised to those who are “valiant in the testimony of Jesus” (D&C 76:79)—not because of flawless behavior, but because of covenantal transformation through Christ. This is echoed in President Nelson’s bold assertion that charity and virtue are the key to becoming more like Him—that confidence before God is not earned, but cultivated through Christ’s grace and our willingness to be changed.

This week’s Come, Follow Me block (D&C 76) directly supports this doctrine of holy becoming. While D&C 76 unveils the glorious outcomes of those who follow Christ with full purpose of heart, D&C 76:69–70 makes the process clear:

These are they who are just men made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood.

This doesn’t mean being perfect—it means being “made perfect in Christ” (Moroni 10:32), a process fueled by virtue (moral strength and purity) and charity (the pure love of Christ). Both attributes lead us to peacemaking, humility, and trust in divine mercy.

By restoring the fuller picture of God’s justice and mercy, The Vision connects ancient prophetic patterns to modern revelation. From Isaiah’s messianic hope to John’s heavenly visions, to Joseph Smith’s revelatory insight, we see the same eternal pattern: God’s plan is one of restoration, not rejection. And His end goal is not mere salvation—it’s transformation, through Christ.

Living Apologetics: How to Apply This Today How can we explain that confidence before God isn’t arrogance, but a spiritual gift available to all who walk the path of discipleship?

President Nelson’s message turns a common narrative on its head. Rather than portraying divine confidence as something earned only by the ultra-faithful, he teaches that confidence is cultivated as we grow in virtue (moral integrity) and charity (Christlike love).
This is apologetically powerful—especially in a world where religion is often seen as shame-inducing or exclusionary. The gospel of Jesus Christ invites us to be transformed, not tormented. When we follow Him with sincerity, the fruits of that journey include peace, confidence, and assurance in our standing with God—right now, not just after death.

Principle in Practice: Two Ways to Apply Apologetic Principles1⃣ Reframe Misconceptions About Worthiness When someone says, “Your Church makes people feel like they’re never good enough,” try responding:
→ “Actually, we believe worthiness isn’t about being flawless—it’s about being willing. Confidence before God comes from striving with real intent, not checking boxes.” Then add President Nelson’s insight: “Charity and virtue will qualify us for the Holy Ghost and assure us that we will be prepared to stand confidently before God.”

2⃣ Define Charity Beyond Generosity If someone thinks “charity” just means giving to the poor, gently clarify:
→ “Charity isn’t just what we do—it’s what we become. The pure love of Christ turns us into people who bring peace, forgive quickly, and walk with humility. That’s why it leads to confidence—it shapes us into someone ready to see God face to face.”

Top Apologetic Facts 1. Charity isn’t just kindness—it’s transformation. (Doctrinal Insight)Many assume charity means giving to the needy, but in scripture, it means becoming like Christ. As Moroni 7 teaches, “charity is the pure love of Christ”—a divine attribute, not just an action. President Nelson affirms that cultivating charity changes who we are, empowering us to stand confidently before God.

2. Confidence before God is a spiritual gift, not a personality trait. (Practical Application)Some believe confidence in God’s presence is presumptuous or reserved for prophets. But D&C 121:45–46 and President Nelson’s talk teach that confidence grows from virtue and charity. This doctrine reframes worthiness as progress, not perfection.

3. Doctrine and Covenants 76 connects transformation with celestial glory. (Historical Context)Revealed in 1832, D&C 76 emphasizes that those who inherit celestial glory are “just men made perfect through Jesus.” President Nelson echoes this eternal pattern: through Christ, ordinary disciples can become holy—not just later, but now.

Conclusion: Reclaiming Sacred Language and PowerPresident Nelson’s prophetic message redefines confidence—not as pride or entitlement, but as the fruit of charity and virtue, cultivated in covenant living. When we grow in the pure love of Christ, we begin to see ourselves as God sees us: not as impostors or pretenders, but as becoming holy through His power.

This week’s Come, Follow Me lesson in Doctrine and Covenants 76 expands that vision. It reveals a God who glorifies the faithful, not for their perfection, but for their willingness to be made perfect through Christ. The traits we often reduce to vague ideals—charity, virtue, holiness—are actually sacred tools for transformation. When lived intentionally, they prepare us for celestial glory and give us peace in God’s presence now.

Let’s reclaim this sacred language. Let’s teach our children, our friends, and ourselves that these are not passive virtues—they are actionable ways to become more Christ-like..
You can become holy. You can live in truth and love. You can stand confidently in the presence of God.

“The great opportunity before us is to become the people God needs us to be.” —President Russell M. Nelson

What would your life look like if you intentionally chose virtue and charity?

The post Confidence in the Presence of God appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Hear Himby Autumn Dickson

In Section 76, we receive an immense amount of information that had been lost over time. If you grew up with the Plan of Salvation, it may not feel that way but this was all very new. Though it was hard for some Saints to accept it at the time, we rejoice in this doctrine that the Lord restored. I am so grateful to know it.

And though we received this immense amount of information from the Lord, we also read this at the end of the vision.

Doctrine and Covenants 76

115 Which he commanded us we should not write while we were yet in the Spirit, and are not lawful for man to utter;

116 Neither is man capable to make them known, for they are only to be seen and understood by the power of the Holy Spirit, which God bestows on those who love him, and purify themselves before him;

117 To whom he grants this privilege of seeing and knowing for themselves;

118 That through the power and manifestation of the Spirit, while in the flesh, they may be able to bear his presence in the world of glory.

We did not receive everything that Joseph and Sidney received in this vision. It reminds me of 2 Nephi 32:7. The Spirit stops Nephi from saying more.

The Lord wants to give more. He has more to give. Our eventual goal is to be reunited with Him, and that goal doesn’t have to wait until the next life. There are a myriad of quotes and scriptures that seemingly plead with us to actively seek Him so that He can give more than we’ve received. The scriptures can only give so much. There are things we have to receive directly from the Lord through the Spirit, and the Lord wants us to receive it as soon as we are able.

When I was younger, I remember very distinctly praying for a vision. I did it periodically as I was growing up. I wanted the Lord to just give me a dream or something. Some of my intentions were pure. I did want to be with the Lord again, but there was also some pride involved. Regardless of my intentions and spiritual readiness, I would pray very sincerely for this type of revelation. I figured if the Lord wanted to give more, I wanted to receive it. Luckily, He is wise enough to do what’s best for us and not just give us everything we ask for.

I have stopped asking for visions because I have learned that the Lord doesn’t often work that way. Doctrine and Covenants 76 holds a record of one of the most significant restorations of truth in the early church, possibly in the whole history of the latter-day church. It is significant to consciously recognize how Joseph and Sidney received this vision.

Doctrine and Covenants 76:15, 18-19

15 For while we were doing the work of translation, which the Lord had appointed unto us, we came to the twenty-ninth verse of the fifth chapter of John…

18 Now this caused us to marvel, for it was given unto us of the Spirit.

19 And while we meditated upon these things, the Lord touched the eyes of our understandings and they were opened, and the glory of the Lord shone round about.

Joseph and Sidney did not ask for a vision. They just asked for clarification regarding scripture. This is truly significant because it gives us a path to follow. The Lord has so much to give you, but it has to be built. You have to be prepared. He doesn’t just hand it out as soon as you recognize the fact that He has more and wants to give it to you. It requires seeking and study and learning His voice and character. It requires work. Otherwise, we get to remain in the dark.

These verses that we just read, specifically 18-19, can give us a clue about how to start building and preparing for what the Lord wishes to give. The verse in John caused them to marvel because it was given to them by the Spirit. I recognize this pattern now. When I’m seeking what the Lord wants me to share in my weekly messages, the Spirit “gives” me something. I’m reading and a phrase jumps out to me. The feeling is extremely subtle, but if I pause and start to write about it, it expands and expands and expands and I receive so much more than I would have otherwise.

I have noticed that it has expanded beyond just the scriptures. I can be having a conversation or walking by some people and overhear a phrase, and that subtle feeling comes over me again. It’s as if the Lord stamps it softly into my head and if I take the time to pause, or if I hold onto it until I have time to think about it, the Lord often gives more.

President Nelson has asked us to learn how to “Hear Him.” I echo President Nelson’s request. Learn to hear Him. Seek Him. He has more to give. It does not start out with visions, and receiving everything He wants to give starts with preparation. So prepare. It’s worth it.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 76 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson 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

The Church in Ohio, August–November 1831 (D&C sections 63–69)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

President J. Reuben Clark Jr., “When Are the Writings and Sermons of Church Leaders Entitled to the Claim of Scripture?,” address to Seminary and Institute personnel at BYU, 7 July 1954.
Kirtland, City of Revelation: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is an eight-part documentary miniseries that explores the way men and women flocked to Kirtland in the 1830s to hear the voice of God through the prophet Joseph Smith. The episodes consider Kirtland as a site of abundant revelation and the place where church leaders organized much of the church. The episodes also illuminate how Joseph Smith was intent on teaching church members in Kirtland how to hear the voice of God themselves. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 63–69 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Faith and Signsby Autumn Dickson

Ezra Booth was a Methodist preacher who joined the church after witnessing Joseph Smith heal Alice Johnson’s arm. He later left the church and published material that was particularly antagonistic. Despite witnessing a miracle, Ezra didn’t hold on to his faith.

We see this time and time and time again throughout the scriptures. Signs are insufficient conversion tools. I’ve spoken about signs before, but I want to talk about it on a more individual level today. Let’s cover the basics and then bring it into our personal lives. Here is some of what the Lord has to say about seeking signs.

Doctrine and Covenants 63:7, 9

7 And he that seeketh signs shall see signs, but not unto salvation.

9 But, behold, faith cometh not by signs, but signs follow those that believe.

Let’s break these down just a bit.

Verse 7. He that looks for signs will receive them, but it won’t bring salvation. In my mind, the Lord is saying, “The signs are already there, and I’ll send you signs, but it won’t do you any good because you don’t believe.” The same people will look at the complexity of the earth and see completely different origins. There are signs, but they’re not going to change you or bring you the full extent of happiness if you don’t believe there is a Creator behind it.

Verse 9. You don’t receive faith from signs. You see the signs when you have faith. Faith is a conscious choice that you make of your own accord, and then you start to see. Here is a quote from one of my all-time favorite BYU speeches given by Lawrence E. Corbridge.

“I don’t know if pigs will ever sprout wings and fly, but if they do, flying pigs will never be nearly as amazing as the ordinary pig in the first place.”

If you have faith, the pig is the miracle. Everything the Lord has already given us is a miracle and a “sign.”

Faith comes first.

Now, many of us have already made the conscious choice to believe in the restored gospel. We go to church every week and we attend the temple and pray and follow the commandments. We profess that we believe, so what do these verses mean for us? Let’s look at a few different ways that they could apply to someone who already believes in God.

Revelation

Interestingly enough, there’s another verse from this week that can get tied into the message I’m trying to cover today.

A revelation was given on the banks of the Missouri river. The Lord said a few things in this revelation, but one of the things that He taught these elders was that they could choose to travel how they wanted.

Doctrine and Covenants 62:8 These things remain with you to do according to judgment and the directions of the Spirit.

Revelation can feel tricky, but it’s an enormously powerful tool that is life-changing. I had the fortunate experience of being raised in a home where I was taught to seek revelation, but unfortunately, I occasionally took it to the extreme. I had such a hard time moving forward unless the Lord had told me to do so. I did seek signs for everything, and you can imagine that might cause problems.

Sometimes I would “find” signs that I believed He had sent when it was actually in my own mind. I had a hard time accepting the idea that He was choosing to be silent so that I could make decisions for myself. Other times, I would come to the conclusion that He was mad at me or that I wasn’t being good enough to receive revelation. Other times, I would just panic and stay confused rather than making a decision that sounded good to me.

I often found signs, but they were not unto salvation.

The Lord wants you to make decisions because you’re training to be like Him. He’s not trying to keep you from making mistakes; He is trying to help you gain the wisdom you’ll need to do what He does. There is no other way to do that except for making your own decisions sometimes.

Sometimes we’re worried about jumping in. We’re either scared that we’ll make a mistake, take a route He doesn’t want us to follow, or we’ll somehow shoot ourselves in the foot. In reality, the Lord wants us to have faith. He wants us to trust Him to speak as necessary, course-correct when it matters, and rescue us when we paint ourselves into a corner.

As we move forward with faith in His ability to save, the signs follow! If we take the time to look back prayerfully, we’ll find that He was leading us along the whole time.

Maybe we’re not asking for signs before we’re willing to believe in God, but I do believe that sometimes we ask for signs before we’re willing to believe in Him enough that we can move forward with rejoicing. If we choose to have faith, the signs will follow after.

Feeling love or forgiveness

Here is another potential example of seeking signs because we don’t quite believe in the Savior enough.

I know far too many people who don’t quite feel the love of their Savior. Logically, they can kinda get behind it because it comes along with having a testimony of the restoration. Unfortunately, despite this general testimony of the gospel, it’s still hard for them to dive in and bask in that love and acceptance towards their own person.

This extends to other feelings such as forgiveness. When we’ve made a mistake or when we’re falling prey to a particular flaw, it can be difficult to accept that the Lord has moved on. We want a sign that we really are forgiven. We want some indisputable evidence that we’re okay, and He’s not mad anymore.

Interestingly enough, even when He does give little signs of His forgiveness, we often don’t accept the signs and we cling to those mistakes and flaws.

Trusting that the Savior loves you and forgives you is a conscious act of faith, and the faith comes first! When you have truly chosen that faith, then you have finally reached the point where you’re able to accept the signs.

This circumstance doesn’t translate perfectly, but I want to utilize it anyway because I feel like it makes it more concrete.

Conner and I have been married for eight years. That’s not long, relatively speaking, but I have learned a few lessons along the way. One of those lessons is to trust Conner and his love for me. When we argue, I have learned to find peace in the fact that I know things are going to be just fine. Arguing doesn’t mean we’re going to get divorced. It doesn’t mean that we’re going to be stuck in an unhappy marriage forever. Conner has showed up for me time and time again, and it has taught me that we’re going to come back from whatever we’ve fallen into. I don’t spiral anymore when things aren’t perfect in our marriage.

Conner’s love for me was there anyway. There are plenty of ways that he shows up for me and gives me signs of his love. However, I don’t find peace and “salvation” in that love if I don’t have faith and consequently find all the signs of his love.

Like I said, it doesn’t translate perfectly, but you get the idea. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ love you even more than Conner loves me. The love is there. All the signs are there, but you can’t see them (or in the very least, you can’t trust them) without faith. Faith has to come first. You have to choose to look at your situation and believe that He loves you. You have to believe that He loves you enough to send challenges but also a Savior to pull you through it. As you choose to look at each situation as a manifestation of His love, I promise that the signs follow. You’ll see them everywhere once you start to choose faith in His love and willingness to forgive.

I testify of a Savior who loves. I testify that He is constantly showing His love. I testify that He is constantly reaching out with that love, but you have to turn on your end of the receiver. Believe and the signs will follow. That extends towards revelation as well. As you trust in Him, you’ll be able to move forward and make decisions. As you keep moving forward, you’ll be able to look back and see the signs that He’s been guiding you all along.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 60–63 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Align With Himby Autumn Dickson

Trials. There is always something more to say about trials, and that’s what I want to talk about this week. I specifically want to talk about one aspect of trials and how we can sometimes make things harder on ourselves.

Some of the Saints have made it to Missouri this week, and they are disappointed about what they arrived to find. They were looking for Zion and were surprised to find that it had not been built yet. They had just travelled hundreds of miles away from their comfortable homes in New York. Their original destination had been changed when they were kicked off of what was supposed to be their home. As they arrived in Missouri, they didn’t find homes. They found that their journey was just beginning.

The Lord gave Section 58 as a response, and here is one of the things the Lord says.

Doctrine and Covenants 58:3 Ye cannot behold with your natural eyes, for the present time, the design of your God concerning those things which shall come hereafter, and the glory which shall follow after much tribulation.

As the Saints originally looked around at the undeveloped land, they were probably met with some aches and pains as they remembered what they had back in New York. All they likely saw was a bunch of work they had yet to do. I imagine them receiving these words from the Lord, and I imagine them trying to look at the land with new eyes. They probably tried picturing an industrious, protective community where they could raise their families and build the church. Though they missed their homes, they likely found great comfort in the hope that the Lord had significant plans.

Interestingly enough, they would not live to see the end result of the Lord’s plans for Missouri. We have not yet lived to His plans for Missouri, and so this might seem a bit confusing. They went to build Zion, but it kinda seems like Zion never happened for them. Let’s explore that idea and then apply it to our own lives.

What was the Lord talking about?

I want to bring your attention to the first verse of Section 58 so we can get a better feel for what the Lord is truly talking about.

Doctrine and Covenants 58:1 Hearken, O ye elders of my church, and give ear to my word, and learn of me what I will concerning you, and also concerning this land unto which I have sent you.

The people had the land sitting in front of them, and that was in the forefront of their minds. They had just travelled and travelled and travelled in order to arrive at this specific land, so that’s what they were listening for. They were asking themselves, “What would the Lord have us do with the land?” However, look at what the Lord said first. He said, “Listen to what I want concerning YOU, and then we can talk about the land I sent you to.”

Zion is so much more than some land in Missouri. While the Saints were preoccupied with the land, the Lord was preoccupied with His people. It’s always about His people. The Lord designated the physical place of Zion to be in Missouri but acquiring a “Zion people” is the much harder and far more important work of the Lord. It doesn’t matter if you’re in Missouri if you can’t be kind and compassionate and loving to your neighbor. If you are not a Zion-like person, Zion will never exist even if you’re in the right location.

Yes, the Lord speaks about the physical land of Missouri, but try to look at the section with new eyes. Read the section from the Lord’s perspective of trying to build Zion within His people first rather than trying to build cabins, farms, and shops. Utilize this perspective as we look at this next verse in which the Lord describes His purpose for sending His Saints to Missouri specifically.

Doctrine and Covenants 58:7 And also that you might be honored in laying the foundation, and in bearing record of the land upon which the Zion of God shall stand;

There is a lot we can talk about, but I want to draw attention to one particular phrase, “…that you might be honored in laying the foundation…”

He sent them to Missouri so that they could be honored in laying the foundation of Zion. Maybe they weren’t able to lay the foundation of the temple while they were in Missouri, but they laid a much greater foundation for the rest of us; they did some of the hardest groundwork to prepare for Zion. I don’t think any of us can fully comprehend just how blessed we are to build upon the moral and social foundations that were set down by those who came before us. They did start to build Zion, and they did it in a much more important way than tilling the land and building cabins and infrastructure.

Building you

So how does that translate to us?

My first thought is that we can learn about the differences between the Lord’s focus and what human minds tend to gravitate towards. I suppose I could be wrong, but I would imagine that when the Saints received this revelation, they were gung-ho about physically building up Independence, Missouri. In actuality, the Lord was looking to build His people. And when I say build, I mean that He was going to let them go through really hard things.

We all have to go through trials. They were an absolutely necessary, completely irreplaceable portion of the Plan of Salvation. But interestingly enough, we make those trials much harder when our goals are different from the Lord’s goals.

When you have it in your mind that the Lord wants you to build a cabin, you’re going to get very confused, disheartened, and disillusioned when the cabin doesn’t turn out (or turn up) at all. The Lord doesn’t care about the cabin; He wants to build you. The Lord can rearrange the elements, soften hearts, and add zeros to a bank account. What He refuses to do is take away your agency. Because of this personally imposed stipulation, it is much more difficult for Him to build you. And if He just lets you build the cabin with no obstacles, then it becomes impossible for your character to get built.

So when you run into issues and trials, He isn’t trying to impede your service. He hasn’t abandoned you. He isn’t hiding or uninvolved. It’s not a sign that this isn’t His work or that you’re destined to be a failure. He is doing exactly what He set out to do; He is building you. When you realize that you are His priority, the seeming obstacles pushing back against your goals become stepping stones towards your exaltation.

Because of the trials

Recap thus far. The Lord wanted to build Zion. The people thought He meant that they needed to build infrastructure in Independence, Missouri. That is an eventual goal of His, but more importantly, He wanted to build a Zion-people. You can’t actually build Zion when the people aren’t ready. Any disappointment on the part of the Saints likely stemmed from their inaccurate assumptions about the Lord’s purposes.

As I was reading through this, I thought of my husband. And since he doesn’t read or listen to my stuff, I’m going to talk about him.

My husband is an entrepreneur. Being an entrepreneur can come with a lot of awesome perks, but there are also plenty of downsides. He has met plenty of people who have told him that he couldn’t do what he wanted to do. He has gotten plenty of negative reviews on what he’s trying to accomplish. He has hit obstacle after obstacle after obstacle.

And after a while, those things add up and start to affect him. He has expressed the sentiment that he feels like a failure, and he has expressed it hundreds of times.

We’ve always had what we needed even when things got rocky, but the combined weight of negative opinions tends to pull his focus away from the ways he’s been absolutely successful.

When he says, “I’m a failure,” it’s because he is looking in the mirror and saying, “I haven’t reached the goals I had for this point in my life. I’m not providing the kind of life that I wanted for my family, etc., etc.”

When I look at our life together, I’ve seen anything but failure. However, let’s imagine for a second that he has failed as an entrepreneur. It sucks. It’s not fun. It hurts when you have goals that don’t come together in the way that you want them to, and that disappointment can come back to bite you frequently.

Do you know what helps that specific kind of trial? Realigning your goals with the goals of the Lord. He’s not specifically looking for successful businessmen, perfect homemakers, or anything else you could possibly have a goal about. He’s looking to build you into someone who can build heaven.

Doctrine and Covenants 58:3 Ye cannot behold with your natural eyes, for the present time, the design of your God concerning those things which shall come hereafter, and the glory which shall follow after much tribulation.

All of those obstacles that my husband has faced combined with all of the times that he has stood back up counts for something. And it counts for something incredibly important. Even if we were to lose everything, the effort he has put into his goals aren’t wasted. Rather, if he can switch his mindset to align with the Lord’s, my husband will find plenty of successful moments.

And interestingly enough, if Conner had never met some of those business “failures” he would have never been able to find those spiritual successes.

I testify that you can’t lose when you’re aligned with the Lord. Every mistake, failure, flaw, and obstacle can transform into the desperately needed stepping stones towards exaltation when you take advantage of the atonement of Jesus Christ. That doesn’t mean there won’t be disappointment, but even disappointment turns into glory when you stay close to the Lord. I testify that we do not yet have eyes to see everything that the Lord wants to create within us, but I do know that it’s better than we can imagine.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 58–59 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“‘Believest thou…?’: Faith, Cognitive Dissonance, and the Psychology of Religious Experience” by Wendy Ulrich at the 2005 FAIR ConferenceIt’s an old and frequent spiritual question, and it shows up in many forms. It is the question Jesus asks the disciples who hear his troubling and offending discourse on being someone whose flesh must be eaten and whose blood drunk by those who would have eternal life. The discourse confuses many, who turn back and follow him no more, and then, to those who remain Jesus asks the question, “Will ye also go away?” To the man who seeks out Jesus to heal his deeply troubled son, the question is implied, “If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.” To Nephi, approached by an angel after he is carried away to the top of a high mountain, the question is more direct: “Believest thou that thy father saw the tree of which he hath spoken?” And to the brother of Jared, who asks to see the premortal Jesus after hearing his voice and seeing his hand, the question is perhaps most clearly stated, “Believest thou the words which I shall speak?”

Believest thou? I am increasingly impressed by the implications of this simple question, and by how often it is at the heart of my mortal dilemmas. Do I believe God’s commandments and teachings, or do I find other explanations of reality more credible for getting what I want or keeping me safe? Do I trust him to tell me the truth, even when it includes improbable and invisible things? Do I trust him to have the love, the will, and the power to save me despite the ways I am not worthy? Do I trust him to keep his promises? Do I believe?

CONTINUED HERE

The post Classic FAIR – Faith and Cognitive Dissonance – Wendy Ulrich, 2005 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

Avoiding Confusionby Autumn Dickson

Leman Copely was a convert to the church who wanted the gospel preached to his former congregants – the Shakers. The Shakers held some beliefs that were different from our’s. Here is some of what the Lord said regarding that:

Doctrine and Covenants 49:1-4

1 Hearken unto my word, my servants Sidney, and Parley, and Leman; for behold, verily I say unto you, that I give unto you a commandment that you shall go and preach my gospel which ye have received, even as ye have received it, unto the Shakers.

2 Behold, I say unto you, that they desire to know the truth in part, but not all, for they are not right before me and must needs repent.

3 Wherefore, I send you, my servants Sidney and Parley, to preach the gospel unto them.

4 And my servant Leman shall be ordained unto this work, that he may reason with them, not according to that which he has received of them, but according to that which shall be taught him by you my servants; and by so doing I will bless him, otherwise he shall not prosper.

The Lord calls Sidney, Parley, and Leman to go preach the gospel as they have received it. The Shakers want the truth in part, but they don’t want the whole truth. Sidney and Parley have been called, and so has Leman. However, it’s important to note that Leman has been called to teach the Shakers according to what he has received from the restored gospel and not what he has received from the Shakers.

I’m not 100% sure what the Lord was saying when He told Leman to teach the Shakers from the perspective of a believer of the restored gospel, but it definitely stuck out to me. When I write these posts, sometimes I get immensely wrapped up in defending the gospel to those who have left. Those are the people that I’m thinking of, and I try to approach the gospel by looking through their lens. I think there is merit to this. It’s definitely helped me to examine my beliefs more closely, but I believe that there are some topics that simply can’t operate from that direction. Some topics have to be taught unapologetically and while it may not reach the audience that I believe needs it most, there is no other way to truly teach it. Sometimes, you have to teach the truth and people are simply going to have to choose whether they believe it.

Part of the truth

From my perspective this week, this is one of those topics. The Shakers only wanted part of the truth. There are two perspectives I want to cover specifically about this idea of “part of the truth.”

First perspective. I once came across a post on social media. It was either posted right before General Conference or right after. The lady recommended listening to conference and taking the parts that spoke to you. If there was something that hurt you or caused problems in your mind, she recommended leaving those parts and simply holding to the parts you could connect to.

As you can imagine, there were wildly different reactions to this post. Some were thanking her profusely for making them feel heard. Others were condemning her and quoting General Authorities about not cherry-picking the gospel.

I found myself somewhere in the middle. I believe in the entirety of the gospel. The more I study it, the more I find myself saying, “Dang…God knew what He was doing. This is so perfect, and I’m so grateful that He continues to work with us. All of this makes so much sense.” I believe that eventually, we will have to accept the entirety of the gospel in order to receive the entirety of happiness that is available.

On the same note, I rather have people accept as much of the truth (since from my perspective, this IS the truth) as possible. Perhaps they can’t bring themselves to hold to everything taught over the pulpit. Though I believe that accepting the entirety of the gospel is eventually going to be required of all of us in order to be prepared for exaltation, I also believe that it’s better to listen to conference and take as much as you can in comparison to not listening at all.

So that’s my first perspective. The gospel is true. The Savior leads this church and eventually, all of His choices are going to make sense. In order for us to find our way and become the kind of people He wants us to become, we will eventually need to accept every portion of the gospel.

But in the meantime, I rather you accept at least part of the truth if you’re not ready to accept all of it.

Accepting all of the gospel

But here’s my unapologetic part and the second perspective I want to teach today.

When Christ declares that these people only wanted part of the truth, I don’t picture Him condemning them. I don’t believe the Lord was trying to tell the Saints that the Shakers were bad people. I believe that the Lord was trying to tell them that accepting only part of the truth brings only part of the blessings.

When we’re operating on false beliefs, we’re going to make more mistakes, get hurt, or miss out.

This is an absolutely ridiculous example, but it teaches the gist of what I’m trying to say.

If you are super convinced that gravity isn’t real, then you might make some poor choices. You’re not a morally bad person for not believing in gravity, and having a good heart and righteous intent can go a long way. But you can still get hurt if you decide to try and live your life as if there is no gravity.

Let’s look at it from a religious perspective.

The Shakers believed in celibacy over marriage. I believe that marriage, intimacy, and having children have brought me closer to God than anything else. I have learned more about the character of God. I have learned more about joy. I have experienced small glimpses of heaven as I sit in bed with my five kids and hold an extremely chaotic Come Follow Me lesson before church on Sundays.

The Shakers were missing out. In fact, I believe they were missing out on some of the most beautiful parts of life. I’m sure they were very good people, but operating as if there is no gravity can cause problems. It can prevent you from receiving blessings that might otherwise be yours.

Modern-day equivalents

I think there are a couple of different ways that this can manifest in our day, and I want to talk about two.

This wasn’t the modern-day equivalent I was thinking of when I first began this post, but the Spirit had other ideas. The modern-day equivalent that I feel led to talk about is when we try to downplay eternal truths in the name of sensitivity.

I originally shied away from using the particular belief of marriage and celibacy as an example because I know there are a lot of members who ache for what I have. I have family and friends who have yearned for happy marriages and children and so hearing that they’re missing out on these blessings can be painful. I don’t believe it’s immoral to step back for a minute and focus on other parts of the gospel when the disappointment of unfulfilled blessings feels too great. I believe there are times when the rest of us can be more sensitive; there are ways that we can make sure that we’re that everyone feels included even if they’re not married.

But I also believe that we wouldn’t be doing anyone any favors by ignoring or downplaying this powerful, eternal truth. Marriage and parenthood are incredible blessings, and everyone who is righteous will receive that crowning blessing eventually. It may feel painful sometimes to hear about it too much, but it would be even more painful to reject those beliefs because you have yet to see their fulfillment. It would bring even more pain and sorrow to not teach this eternal truth: marriage and parenthood are divine. The Shakers were missing out.

Embrace your God-given desires for companionship and children, and simultaneously embrace the promises of the Savior to fulfill those desires. There is so much goodness coming.

The second modern-day equivalent actually seems like the opposite of what I just taught, but it’s actually just an extension of what I just taught.

If you’re watching Come Follow Me videos, chances are, you believe in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. So how does this apply to you?

What truths are you not accepting? What partial truths or traditions are you clinging to? This can manifest in a million different ways.

Sometimes we’re taught the truth but still cling to our original interpretations of the truth. For example, I used to cling desperately to the idea that God was mad at me whenever I made a mistake. I’m not sure if this was self-sabotage or a weird motivational factor I tried to cling to, but either way, it was holding me back from some of the most incredible blessings I’ve ever experienced, namely the grace of Jesus Christ.

What partial truths do you refuse to give up and what do these partial truths take away from you?

I testify of a Savior who disperses truth as many places as He can. If you’re not ready to accept Him as a Savior, He is going to try and teach you about the character of God as much as possible. If you’re not ready to accept the reality of God, He is going to try and teach you Christlike principles about loving your neighbor and choosing gratitude as much as you allow Him. I testify of a Savior who is actively pushing truth in any form that we are willing to accept because He wants us to experience as much heaven as is available in our day. I also testify that clinging to and operating on partial truths, whether inside the church or out, can lead to more pain than is necessary and less happiness than is available.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 49–50 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Welcoming the Spirit, Discerning the Gifts, and Embracing Every SeekerHave you ever wondered what truly draws people to the restored Church of Jesus Christ—not just doctrinally, but spiritually?

In his Christ-centered address, By This All Will Know That You Are My Disciples, Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf reminds us that the most powerful witness we offer the world is how we treat each other. As he shares a personal story of a nonmember friend discerning the Spirit in a humble sacrament meeting, he bears testimony that spiritual gifts are real, that discernment matters, and that the Lord’s Church must be a place of belonging for all who seek Him.

In a time when critics question the sincerity of spiritual experience or the openness of our worship, Elder Uchtdorf invites us to see through the eyes of faith—to recognize God’s hand in simple gatherings, imperfect people, and heartfelt love. How can we become better at discerning the true gifts of the Spirit? And how can we ensure that all of God’s children feel at home among His disciples?

Apologetic Issues: Spiritual Gifts and the Boundaries of BelongingMisconception: People should be fully prepared—doctrinally and culturally—before they attend or participate in our worship.Response:The Lord’s standard is clear: all sincere seekers are welcome. In Doctrine and Covenants 46:5–6, He commands the Saints not to cast out anyone earnestly seeking the kingdom, even if they are not yet members. Elder Uchtdorf reinforces this doctrine, stating:

If you love God, if you want to know Him better by following His Son, then you belong here.

While many congregations do a beautiful job of welcoming visitors and converts, challenges can still arise—especially when someone’s background, race, lifestyle, or unfamiliarity with “Church culture” sets them apart. Some members may quietly question whether that person is “ready” for Church participation or fitting in “appropriately.” But such assumptions risk imposing our comfort in place of God’s invitation.

The Lord sees differently. He looks not on outward appearance or cultural alignment, but on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). Creating spiritual belonging is not about people earning a place—it’s about disciples creating space.

Common Fallacy: Gatekeeping FallacyThis concern reflects the Gatekeeping Fallacy, where individuals wrongly assume authority to decide who truly belongs in a space meant to be open. It often confuses readiness for ordinances (which do have standards) with worthiness to worship, which the Lord extends to all who seek Him.

Solution: While ordinances are sacred and require preparation, worship is an open door. When we build walls where the Lord has commanded a welcome, we unintentionally resist His will. Inclusion is not an indulgence—it is obedience.

Misconception: Are ‘spiritual gifts’ just emotional experiences?Response:Spiritual gifts are not vague feelings; they are scripturally grounded manifestations of the Holy Ghost. Elder Uchtdorf illustrates this in recounting how a visiting friend discerned divine love in a humble branch meeting—not through performance, but through the Spirit.

Doctrine and Covenants 46:13–26 identifies specific gifts, including wisdom, knowledge, discernment, faith, healing, and the ability to recognize truth. The Lord also warns against deception (vv. 7–8), underscoring the need to seek the Spirit in humility and avoid counterfeit emotionalism.

Common Fallacy: ReductionismThis concern reflects the Reductionist Fallacy, which oversimplifies spiritual experiences as mere emotion. In doing so, it dismisses the divine dimension of the gifts of the Spirit.

Solution: Not all emotions are spiritual—but spiritual experiences often involve the heart. The Lord teaches that He communicates through both the mind and the heart (D&C 8:2). Discipleship invites us to engage intellectually and spiritually, discerning true gifts from passing sentiment.

Apologetic Application: Spiritual Gifts and the Power of Divine Discernment Core Doctrine: spiritual gifts are real, divinely given, and meant to benefit all sincere seekersElder Dieter F. Uchtdorf’s talk, By This All Will Know That You Are My Disciples, puts that principle into action. Rather than listing gifts, he shows how they function: through quiet spiritual discernment, sincere love, and the unifying power of the Spirit.

Defending Core Beliefs1⃣ Spiritual Gifts Are Recognized Through the Spirit, Not PerformanceD&C 46:13–14 teaches that to some it is given to know Christ is the Son of God, and to others, to believe on their words. It goes on to describe the gift of discernment (v. 23)—the capacity to spiritually perceive truth even when it’s not outwardly obvious.

Elder Uchtdorf recounts taking a nonmember friend to a sacrament meeting that was, in his words, awkward and imperfect. Yet she said afterward:

“That was beautiful… I’m so impressed with how people treat each other in your church. … This is what I imagine Christ wanted His Church to be like.”

Though unfamiliar with our doctrines, she discerned the Spirit. This affirms the truth of D&C 46:9: “They are given for the benefit of those who love me and keep all my commandments, and him that seeketh so to do.” Her seeking was enough to receive a spiritual witness.

2⃣ Disciples Are Commanded to Seek and Discern Gifts—and to Make Room for Them in OthersD&C 46:7–8 warns that not all spiritual manifestations are from God—and teaches us to “seek ye earnestly the best gifts” and remember why they are given. Elder Uchtdorf models this discernment when he recognizes that his own judgment was clouded by superficial expectations—and his friend’s clarity came through spiritual insight.

“I had wanted picture-perfect meetings… But what the members of this branch had achieved was a heart-perfect spirit of love.”

This teaches that spiritual gifts may appear in humble, even unexpected, settings—and that belonging and discernment are themselves gifts that must be both recognized and cultivated.

Clarifying Misunderstandings & Strengthening Faith Spiritual gifts are not reserved for seasoned Saints—they are available to all who seek the Savior, even visitors and newcomers. * Discernment does not require dramatic revelation; it often manifests as quiet spiritual perception, as Elder Uchtdorf’s friend experienced. * Inclusivity is doctrinal.* The Lord commands us in D&C 46:5–6 not to cast out any who are “earnestly seeking the kingdom”—regardless of background, race, doctrinal fluency, or cultural fit.

Historical and Doctrinal Connections Contextual Background:In early 1831, just months after the Saints had begun gathering in Kirtland, spiritual confusion was growing. Newly baptized converts—many from revivalist backgrounds—were introducing chaotic practices into worship meetings. Some claimed dramatic visions, speaking in tongues, or ecstatic trances. Joseph Smith inquired of the Lord, and Doctrine and Covenants 46 was the answer.

Rather than forbidding spiritual experience, the Lord affirmed the reality of spiritual gifts, while teaching the Saints how to discern what was of God and what was not. Importantly, He also gave a bold command: do not cast out sincere seekers from your meetings. This directive pushed against social instincts to exclude or control and instead emphasized trust in divine guidance and spiritual openness.

Elder Uchtdorf’s talk echoes this moment perfectly. In a modern setting, he demonstrates how even humble worship, guided by love and sincerity, is a place where spiritual gifts are manifest and seekers are welcomed.

Doctrinal Connections: Doctrine and Covenants 46:5–6: “Ye shall not cast any out of your sacrament meetings who are earnestly seeking the kingdom…”* Elder Uchtdorf reinforces this scriptural command with Christlike warmth:

“If you love God, if you want to know Him better by following His Son, then you belong here.” * Doctrine and Covenants 46:13–26: This list of spiritual gifts includes wisdom, knowledge, discernment, healing, and faith—all meant “that all may be profited thereby.” Elder Uchtdorf’s friend, though not a member, exemplified the gift of discernment by recognizing divine love and belonging in an imperfect congregation. * Doctrine and Covenants 46:8: “Seek ye earnestly the best gifts…” Elder Uchtdorf challenges modern disciples to recognize that the real miracle is love in action—a spiritual gift too often overlooked because it isn’t dramatic.

Through these connections, we see prophetic continuity: just as the Lord guided early Saints to balance spiritual openness with discernment, He continues to do so through His apostles today.

Living Apologetics: How to Apply This TodayHow can we help others see that spiritual gifts are real and that everyone—regardless of background—belongs in the Savior’s Church?

1⃣ Affirm the reality of spiritual gifts—even when they look ordinary.

Elder Uchtdorf shows that a sincere visitor discerned the Spirit not through flawless music or eloquent talks, but through the gift of love in action.
Real-life application: When someone questions whether they’ve “felt the Spirit,” invite them to describe moments of clarity, peace, or connection—they may already be experiencing spiritual gifts without labeling them as such.

2⃣ Help others see that belonging doesn’t require perfection—or sameness.

D&C 46:5–6 and Elder Uchtdorf both insist: those earnestly seeking the kingdom should never be turned away.
Real-life application: In gospel discussions or missionary efforts, gently correct the idea that people need to fit into an arbitrary ‘mold’ before attending Church or worshiping with the saints. Share your own story of growing while belonging.

Top Apologetic Facts Historical Insight: D&C 46 was revealed to address confusion over spiritual manifestations in early Kirtland. It confirmed the legitimacy of spiritual gifts while setting doctrinal boundaries for their use.

Doctrinal Insight: Spiritual gifts like discernment, faith, love, and belief are just as real and vital as more dramatic manifestations—and are given to profit all (D&C 46:9, 26).

Practical Application: True inclusion means removing cultural gatekeeping, not just tolerating difference. Belonging is a spiritual principle, not a social achievement.

Conclusion: Welcoming the Spirit, Welcoming Each OtherElder Dieter F. Uchtdorf’s message is a gentle yet bold reminder that belonging is not a side effect of discipleship—it’s part of the invitation. As we study Doctrine and Covenants 46–48, we learn that spiritual gifts are given to all who seek Christ, and that one of the most powerful among them is the ability to help others feel seen, safe, and spiritually at home.

When we focus less on “guarding the gate” and more on “setting a place at the table,” we begin to reflect the Savior’s love more clearly. The sacrament meeting Elder Uchtdorf described wasn’t perfect—but it was Spirit-filled because it was filled with people who loved God and loved each other.

Who in your life might be waiting for a place to belong—and how might you help them feel the Spirit through you?

Our love for God and His children is a powerful testimony to the world that this is truly the Savior’s Church.

The post By This All Will Know That You Are My Disciples appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Spiritual gifts; corrections to Shaker beliefs (D&C sections 46, 49–50, 52–56)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Jonathan A. Stapley and Kristine Wright, “Female Ritual Healing in Mormonism,” Journal of Mormon History 37, no. 1 (Winter 2011): 1–85. Stapley and Wright examine the history of anointing and laying on of hands of the sick by early Latter-day Saint women.

On the sanctity of animal life:

On 26 May 1834, Joseph Smith taught about the sanctity of animal life during the Zion’s Camp march: “[After] we crossed the Embarros River…in pitching my tent we found three Massasaugers or Prairie Rattle Snakes which the brethren were about to kill, but I said [‘]let them alone, don’t hurt them, how will the serpent ever lose its venom, while the servants of God possess the same disposition, and continue to make war upon them[;] men must become harmless before the brute creation, and when men lose their vicious dispositions and cease to destroy the animal race, the lion and the lamb can dwell together, and the sucking child play with the serpent with safety.[’] … I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or any animal of any kind, during our journey unless it— were necessary to preserve ourselves from hunger.“ (Manuscript History, vol. A‑1, 8 [addenda].)
President Joseph F. Smith, “The Destruction of Animal Life,” Juvenile Instructor 48, no. 5 (May 1913): 308–09. President Smith warned the Saints against being “athirst for the shedding of animal blood” simply for sport or pleasure.
President Spencer W. Kimball repeated Joseph F. Smith’s counsel in his October 1978 General Conference address, “Fundamental Principles To Ponder And Live.” He expressed his view that “it is not only wicked to destroy [innocent birds and wildlife], it is a shame.” 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 46, 49–50, 52–56 – Mike Parker 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

The law of consecration; the office of bishop (D&C sections 41–42, 44, 48, 51, 70, 72, 79)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

In October 1962 General Conference, then-Elder Spencer W. Kimball spoke out against marital infidelity, using portions of section 42 to explain the importance of “total allegiance and total fidelity” that husbands and wives should have for each other. Read his remarks in Conference Report (October 1962): 55–60.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 41–42, 44, 48, 51, 70, 72, 79 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

As Seemeth Him Goodby Autumn Dickson

Sidney Rigdon has become an increasingly significant character in the formation of the young church, and this week we get to read a revelation that was directed towards him. Sidney was originally trained as a tanner, but he left that profession to preach because he dearly loved the word of God. He worked with the Baptists for some time before splitting with them over disagreements. He moved to Ohio with his family and was elected preacher over a congregation there. Sidney Rigdon dearly wanted a restoration of Christ’s church; he recognized that the church he was looking for wasn’t on the earth at the time, but he faithfully tried to pattern his congregation after what he learned about in the New Testament.

Oliver Cowdery, on his way to preach to the Native Americans, stopped for a short period in Ohio and preached to Sidney and his congregation. Many, including Sidney, were converted.

As I read about Sidney, I can see how he really wanted to do exactly what the Lord wanted him to do. He wanted to know what the Lord would have him do spiritually. When Oliver found him, he had been trying to live with all things common between his congregation just as the New Testament Saints had done. Now that he found the restored church, he likely wanted to know how he should fully embrace it.

Sidney was also facing some uncertainties as a result of his conversion to the restored gospel; he had been all set up to live in a home that was being built for him as the preacher over the congregation in Mentor, Ohio. After converting to the church, that home was no longer available to him. His baptism had quite literally left his family homeless.

Both of these circumstances, a desire to follow spiritual truth and facing uncertainty, are great reasons to seek revelation. There is a verse in Section 41 directed towards Sidney that seems to suggest that Sidney sought out the will of the Lord. Perhaps he sought it out directly through Joseph, or perhaps he had been seeking it out himself and the Lord answered through Joseph because the Lord knew Sidney’s heart.

Either way, this is what the Lord had to say:

Doctrine and Covenants 41:8 And again, it is meet that my servant Sidney Rigdon should live as seemeth him good, inasmuch as he keepeth my commandments.

I’m not sure how Sidney felt upon receiving this small tidbit, but let’s try to liken it to ourselves.

Facing uncertainty

I want to cover the second portion of his reasoning first. Sidney was facing homelessness and uncertainty.

These are often the times that inspire a desire for revelation. When the world is scary and we’re feeling powerless, it incites a need for a higher power. Sometimes, we just need a message from the Lord that we’re going to be okay. Sometimes, we’re looking for more. Perhaps we’re asking the Lord to give us a more substantial answer about what we’re supposed to be doing. We want actionable items to follow that we know will lead us towards a better and safer situation.

When Sidney came seeking revelation, his family was in a precarious situation and the Lord answered, “Live how you want as long as you follow my commandments.”

I don’t know how Sidney reacted to this tidbit. Maybe he was so excited to simply be in a church that was receiving revelation through a prophet. Maybe he was excited to be trusted by the Lord. Maybe he was excited to get started building the kind of life he wanted rather than being given a specific path.

I’m not totally sure. However, I do know that many of us (or at least those who are vocal at church on Sundays) often want the Lord to give us a clear path. We just want to be told what to do. I’ve learned that the Lord likes us to move forward and make decisions of our own accord and build the kind of life we really want, and He will open the right doors and course-correct as necessary. And yet, if I had received that answer, I think I would have been bummed.

I would have reacted differently at different time periods in my life. At one point, I would have wondered if He was mad at me or if I was too sinful to receive a real answer. At other points, I might have been like, “Hey! I followed You and now I’m going to be homeless and this is all You have for me?!”

Even now, I know that the Lord purposefully chooses to have me build my own life BECAUSE He loves me and trusts me and believes in me. And yet, I still get a bit disappointed that He doesn’t want to give me more than that. I get disappointed because it means that there is work to do on my part; it would be tremendously easier if He would just tell us what to do.

But (I guess) thank goodness He’s not willing to do that. We’re looking at a specific home on the east coast right now, and it’s so scary and we don’t know if it’s right. However, I get to look back on this multi-year process and remember the lessons He’s taught me. I get to decide right now whether I trust Him to lead me along, to bail us out when we’re trying to follow Him and things don’t pan out how we thought, and to manipulate the opening and closing of doors. It’s easy to say that I trust Him to do this. I say that all the time in these posts, and I believe it too. And yet, when we’re in a big decision like this, I get to find out whether I really do trust Him. I get to make continuous, tiny decisions to trust when I feel anxiety or discouragement. It can be an agitating process, but it’s given me opportunities to strengthen those spiritual muscles.

I really am grateful for it even if I tease. It changes me to have these experiences where I stand on the edge of obscurity and find out whether I’m willing to step into trusting the Lord. I don’t necessarily like it, but I love the result. It feels good to trust the Lord.

And I suppose that’s one of my main points here. Every Christlike attribute has to be balanced. It would have been easy for Sidney to want more,but we need to trust what the Lord chooses to give. I believe the way to balance a desire for revelation is to trust the Lord and whatever He chooses to give at any specific time. We do what we can to prepare ourselves to receive. We keep our hearts open. Then we are grateful that He chooses to follow His own will in regards to what He chooses to share. We trust that He is doing so in wisdom, and we trust that He won’t let us truly fail.

A desire to follow the path

The first portion of Sidney’s reasoning to seek revelation was because he wanted to be spiritually led.

A desire to be spiritually led is obviously a trait we should be seeking to develop, but it also has to be balanced and the answer is the same for when we’re seeking revelation about our temporal circumstances. Seeking revelation is balanced with trust.

For a long time, I struggled at the temple. I remember a quote (that for some reason I can’t currently find) given by a General Authority who said that they learn something new every time they go to the temple. I struggled because I didn’t feel that way. I was trying really, really hard to be prepared and open myself up to learn something. I did my best to stay awake and focus. I tried staying in the Celestial Room longer. I tried pondering. I did everything I mentally could to try and learn something new, and I simply wasn’t getting anything.

I often left the temple feeling discouraged and wondering what I had done wrong that I hadn’t learned anything new.

When this General Authority gave this quote, I don’t believe they were necessarily trying to tell us that we should learn something new every time we go. They were simply bearing testimony that going to the temple helped them learn. However, I took it to the extreme, and it left me discouraged.

Christlike attributes have to be balanced, and luckily, I have a wise sister who told me to relax. She said she didn’t usually go to the temple to receive revelation; she simply went to serve. As I looked at my own life, I realized how I had turned my own bedroom into a bit of a temple as I sought out very reverent time to seek revelation on a daily basis. The Lord is given plenty of opportunities to talk to me, and He often does.

Going to the temple became a relief. I was able to think about the person I was serving instead, and I now feel excitement for them and gratitude that I can go without all of the pressure. I could go to the temple and trust the Lord to speak to me as needed.

Don’t get me wrong; I believe the temple is a great place to learn especially when the rest of the world is chaotic and ugly. Stepping into a beautiful and reverent place can help us mentally go into a place where we can receive revelation. There is a reason the Lord gives us temples to seek Him out. What I am trying to teach is that we don’t need to put any added pressure on ourselves to try and hear Him when He’s not talking. Balance your desire for revelation with a trust that He will speak and be heard when He’s good and ready.

Do we need to try and hear Him? Absolutely. We just need to be doing it without the pressure. Seeking revelation can be balanced with trusting the Lord and what He chooses to give us at any given time and where He chooses to give it.

The Lord did not give Sidney much to go off of, but it’s not because He had more important things to do. It’s not because Sidney had earned His cold shoulder or because Sidney necessarily needed to work harder in that given moment (though that is sometimes the case). The Lord chose to give Sidney what He gave because the Lord loved Sidney and knew what was best for Sidney.

I testify that every decision the Lord makes in our lives is in our favor. I testify that we can joyfully seek after the Christlike attributes and spiritual skills because the Lord stands ready to help us in the right amount at the right times. We can seek revelation and be grateful for His voice, and we can be grateful for when He’s silent. They can both be signs of His love.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 41–44 – 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

The doctrine of agency; the Lamanite Mission (D&C sections 29–34)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

The Autobiography of Parley Parker Pratt (Chicago: Law, King & Law, 1888). Read Parley’s account of his early life, conversion to the restored gospel, and service as a missionary and apostle.
Who Are the Lamanites? Scripture Central KnoWhy #486
Native Americans and the Lamanites Latter-day Saint leaders have expressed a variety of opinions regarding whether or not all Amerindians are literal descendants of Lehi. Population genetics indicate that Lehi can likely be counted among the ancestors of all native Americans—a position that the Church has reinforced by changing the 1981 Book of Mormon introduction from “principal ancestors” to “among the ancestors.”

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 29-34 – Mike Parker 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

by Meagan Kohler

The doctrine of personal revelation is elevating and powerful. When I first joined the church I received profound spiritual witnesses through the Spirit that God was aware of me and loves me, that the Book of Mormon is true, and that modern prophets speak for him. These experiences left me with deep impressions about how God feels about me, his church, and his children. Less dramatic whisperings of the Spirit have guided me to others in need, helped me parent better, and pointed me to things I can do better to draw closer to God.

But sometimes I encounter church members whose relationship to personal revelation is just weird. It’s weird in the sense that something seems off but it’s difficult to describe at first. The way they talk about the Holy Ghost, for example, makes it sound more like an intrusive thought than a sacred witness of truth. We’ve all been in testimony meetings where people chuckle at the mic about how they just had an argument with the Holy Ghost in their head telling them to get up and bear their testimony. I’ve felt the Spirit nudge me to bear my testimony, too, but these jokes make it sound like the gift of the Holy Ghost is akin to having multiple personality disorder. Imagine what it sounds like to someone outside of church culture who hears you say you are arguing with God in your head.

This is an example of being a weirdo that’s basically a harmless cultural quirk, but it seems to invite a casual attitude toward the Holy Ghost that can develop into something weirder. For example, sometimes the Spirit does prompt us to do things we’re hesitant about, and that can initiate a real inner struggle. But some people use this idea of an inner “struggle” with the Holy Ghost to obscure their own desires and motivations–even from themselves. If you only bought that timeshare or joined that MLM because you felt the Spirit pushing you to do it, well, you’re not imprudent, you’re obedient.

This version of the Holy Ghost tells people to keep making purchases even when they end up bankrupt. It tells single women to place their romantic hopes on a man who doesn’t return her feelings. It overlooks tax evasion but prompts you to build a bunker. It wants you to make YouTube videos about yourself, but never urges you to visit the widows.

Not only would such an attitude abdicate responsibility for your choices, it would seriously hinder your ability to learn from them. If your spending habits or impulsive business decisions are sanctioned by the Holy Ghost, then even if things go wrong, it’s not because you’ve done wrong or need to change. If your due diligence only extends as far as getting the Holy Ghost’s stamp of approval, there’s no reason to look seriously at your own habits and desires, or what you are becoming.

When people have a relationship with the Holy Ghost that’s kind of thoughtless to the point that it’s constantly spitting out answers to things of dubious spiritual relevance, it makes me think of a Magic 8 Ball. If you shake a Magic 8 Ball enough, you’ll eventually get the answer you’re looking for. When personal revelation amounts to finding a way to feel good about doing whatever it is you want to do, then how long until you go from being a personal revelation weirdo to a personal revelation whacko? If you are unwilling to engage in the difficult work of learning where your emotions and desires end and divine whisperings begin, then the concept of personal revelation becomes worse than no revelation. It becomes a way to feel good about doing things that your conscience and your personal judgement would otherwise protest.

“Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction,” wrote Pascal. What’s terrifying about the Jodi Hildebrandts and Chad Daybells of the world is that they believed what they were doing was sanctioned by God. There is no simple answer for why this happens, but we know it didn’t happen overnight. I have wondered whether the “skill” of discerning God’s favor and approval in every feeling and happenstance played a role. Even being arrested was a kind of martyrdom. “The devil’s been after me for years,” Ruby Franke told her husband shortly after being booked for starving and tormenting their children. Perhaps that was true, if not in the way she thought.

My guess is this belief in God’s approval of evil is usually sincere. But when you spend years casually assigning the hand of providence to the silly and the selfish, perhaps you become so adept at making your will into God’s will that you become a victim to your own sleight of hand. You have developed an unbridled certainty in your own judgement because you’ve convinced yourself it’s not your judgement at all. At this point, the degree to which your inspiration diverges from what’s normal becomes a feature rather than a bug–a testament to your uniquely strong faith and penetrating knowledge.

So, how do we avoid this?

The simplest answer is following the leaders of the church–both what they teach and how they live it. This is a simple answer that has many complexities in application, not because the guidelines are complicated, but because there are so many ways to circumvent them without “breaking” them.

President Renlund recently called our attention to some red flags concerning personal revelation. He warned about “improper motives to promote our own agenda or to fulfill our own pleasure,” revelation that is outside of our purview or “within the prerogative of others,” revelation that is not “in harmony with the commandments of God and the covenants we have made with Him,” and seeking revelation about questions God has already answered.

This list of revelation no-nos is probably not exhaustive, but what stands out to me is how these items reveal what’s in our hearts. If we are pestering God about questions he has answered or praying about get-rich quick schemes, then we are not using revelation as a tool to open us to God’s will, we are asking God to place his divine stamp of approval on our will. Claiming revelation outside our purview does something similar in that it seeks to place the divine stamp on our will for other people–people for whom we have no divinely sanctioned responsibilities and whose pains and burdens we do not carry.

Most talks about personal revelation deal with how to obtain it. Relative to the number of talks about all the things God wants to reveal to us, the talks about what he doesn’t are pretty few. Maybe that points to something important but easy to overlook: that one of the best ways to know when you’re not getting real revelation is to be deeply familiar with the real thing. When we have experienced how the Holy Ghost works in our lives–how it changes us, allows us to help others, and points us toward the Savior–then the self-serving “revelation” becomes less convincing and less interesting.

This kind of revelation does not make us weird. It does not make us inscrutable, it does not make our motives or calculations more mysterious, and it does not make us sound mentally ill. It opens us up and connects us more deeply to the people around us. It makes us approachable and helps us relate better to those in need, rather than making us more insular and cult-y. Being in the world but not of the world still implies being in this world, not inhabiting an alternate reality.

In summary, if you’re doing it right, personal revelation should not make you a weirdo.

Meagan Kohler is a Latter-day Saint convert who studied philosophy, French and Latin at BYU. She writes about faith and culture at the Deseret News and lives in Utah with her husband and four sons.

The post Are you a personal revelation weirdo? 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

Emma Hale Smith; the sacrament; authority in the Church (D&C sections 25, 27–28)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Digital photographs of Emma Smith’s 1835 hymnbook, available online at the Joseph Smith Papers website.
In early 1879, Emma was interviewed by her son, Joseph Smith III, who asked her questions about the Prophet Joseph, the translation of the Book of Mormon, and other events in the restoration of the gospel. Her responses were published as “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” The Saints’ Herald 26, no. 19 (1 October 1879): 289–90. Although Emma denied that the Prophet Joseph ever practiced plural marriage (which he, in fact, did), her eyewitness testimony is otherwise invaluable and inspiring.
Background on Emma’s second husband, Lewis Bidamon, may be found in Valeen Tippetts Avery and Linda King Newell, “Lewis C. Bidamon, Stepchild of Mormondom,” BYU Studies 19, no. 3 (Spring 1979): 375–88.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 25, 27–28 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Are You Focusing on the Roots or Just the Branches of Your Faith?

Faith can flourish or fade depending on where we place our focus. While outward expressions of belief—such as Church programs, cultural traditions, or community involvement—can be meaningful, they are not the foundation of a lasting testimony. What happens when challenges come? Can a testimony built only on surface-level elements of the gospel endure the storms of life?

Strengthening the Roots of Our FaithIn his General Conference address, Nourish the Roots, and the Branches Will Grow, Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf emphasizes that a strong testimony of Jesus Christ must be nourished at the root. He draws from his own life experiences—reflecting on his baptism 75 years ago in Zwickau, Germany, and the memories of his childhood chapel. Though that beloved building is now gone, his testimony has only deepened over time.

Using the analogy of a tree, Elder Uchtdorf explains that Jesus Christ and His Atonement are the root of our testimony. While Church practices, history, and programs are important branches, they only thrive when connected to the fundamental gospel truths. If we focus too much on the branches—be it cultural aspects of the Church, personal expectations, or historical questions—while neglecting our relationship with Jesus Christ, our testimony may weaken in times of trial.

His message is especially relevant to those who may be struggling with questions or feeling uncertain in their faith. Instead of fearing doubt, Elder Uchtdorf encourages us to seek clarity with faith in Jesus Christ—trusting that as we deepen our spiritual roots, our testimony will grow stronger, and the fruits of faith will follow.

Doctrine: Are All Gospel Truths Equal in Importance?Misconception: Every aspect of Church doctrine and history is equally fundamental.There’s a tendency to act as though all religious teachings carry the same weight, leading to confusion when encountering complex or unfamiliar elements of Church history or policy. This perspective can cause individuals to struggle when they find questions they don’t immediately understand.

Response: Not all truths are of equal value. Elder Uchtdorf clarifies that while all truth is important, some principles form the very foundation of faith, while others are appendages. Quoting the Prophet Joseph Smith, he reminds us that the fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of Jesus Christ’s Atonement, Resurrection, and divine mission—everything else is a branch connected to this root.

Common Fallacies:False Equivalence (Assuming all elements of faith are equally essential)

- This fallacy occurs when different concepts are treated as having the same importance, even when they do not hold equal weight. Some mistakenly believe that every Church policy, historical event, or doctrinal interpretation carries the same eternal significance as the core truths of the gospel. Elder Uchtdorf refutes this by emphasizing that Jesus Christ and His Atonement are the root of our faith—while Church history, policies, and cultural traditions are branches. Confusing the branches for the roots can lead to unnecessary doubt when encountering difficult historical details or evolving policies. Solution: When facing challenging questions, prioritize what matters most. Ask: Does this issue change my faith in Christ’s divinity, His restored gospel, or my covenant relationship with Him? If not, keep perspective and stay anchored in the core principles that define true discipleship.

Straw Man Argument (Misrepresenting a position to make it easier to attack)

- This fallacy occurs when someone distorts or oversimplifies a belief in order to criticize it unfairly. Critics of the Church often focus on secondary issues—such as historical controversies, human imperfections, or Church policies—while ignoring the central message of salvation through Jesus Christ. They argue that if certain historical events or policies seem problematic, then the entire gospel message must be false. Elder Uchtdorf teaches that faith must be rooted in Christ and His Atonement—not in cultural traditions, leadership decisions, or historical details. While those topics may be interesting or even challenging, they are not the foundation of testimony. Solution: When engaging in discussions about the Church, redirect the focus to core gospel truths. Ask: Is this issue more important than my personal relationship with Jesus Christ? Recognizing that the Church’s foundation is Christ, not any one historical moment or leader, helps us avoid unnecessary spiritual crises and remain anchored in eternal truth.

Confirmation Bias (Favoring information that supports pre-existing beliefs while ignoring contrary evidence)

- This fallacy occurs when someone selectively focuses on evidence that aligns with their doubts or criticisms while dismissing or overlooking faith-affirming experiences and truths. A person struggling with testimony might fixate on difficult historical events, unanswered questions, or perceived flaws in Church leadership, while ignoring the profound spiritual confirmations, scriptural teachings, and personal experiences that testify of Christ’s truth. Elder Uchtdorf warns against mistaking the branches for the roots—focusing so much on secondary concerns that we neglect the fundamental truths of the gospel. Just because we encounter a question we don’t yet understand does not mean that the entire foundation of faith is invalid. Solution: When doubts arise, seek a balanced perspective. Instead of only consuming critical sources, engage with scripture, prophetic counsel, and personal spiritual experiences. Ask: Am I giving equal attention to faith-promoting evidence, or am I only reinforcing my doubts? A testimony grounded in consistent spiritual nourishment will withstand moments of uncertainty.

“If you want the branches of your testimony to grow and bear fruit, nourish the roots.” — Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf

Defending Divine Doctrines: Faith Requires Constant NourishmentExplanation of Doctrine:Elder Uchtdorf teaches that faith in Jesus Christ is not something we receive once and then maintain effortlessly—it must be constantly nourished. He reminds us that faith is like a tree; if the roots are not fed with scripture study, prayer, and devotion, the branches of testimony will wither. He warns against mistaking surface-level aspects of faith for its foundation, explaining that gospel traditions and programs are valuable, but only when deeply connected to Christ.

Here’s how this doctrine defends core beliefs: Some critics argue that faith is irrational because it cannot be proven like a mathematical equation. But Elder Uchtdorf’s analogy shows that faith grows through experience—just as a tree’s strength is proven over time, faith is confirmed through consistent effort and personal revelation. * Others claim that religious faith is simply inherited tradition, but Elder Uchtdorf refutes this by pointing to Korihor’s false accusations in the Book of Mormon. He reminds us that those who were not deceived by Korihor had testimonies deeply rooted in personal experience, not just tradition.*

Application: How this teaching clarifies misunderstandings: Many leave the Church because they mistake branches (cultural practices, Church history, policies) for roots (faith in Christ). Elder Uchtdorf helps us refocus on what matters most—our personal relationship with Jesus Christ. * Practical application: + When discussing faith crises with others, redirect conversations to core gospel truths rather than secondary issues. + Encourage friends and family to strengthen their testimony through personal experience with Christ, rather than relying on external validation.*

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsContextual Background:The analogy of roots and branches in Elder Uchtdorf’s talk connects directly to Doctrine and Covenants 18, where the Lord teaches about the worth of souls and the importance of anchoring faith in Christ. In D&C 18:10, the Lord declares, “The worth of souls is great in the sight of God.” Just as Elder Uchtdorf warns against mistaking the branches of gospel culture, history, or tradition for the roots of faith, Doctrine and Covenants 18 emphasizes that our value is found in our divine identity as children of God, not in external measures.

Additionally, D&C 18:15-16 teaches that when we bring others to Christ, we experience great joy. Elder Uchtdorf’s message reinforces that when we nourish the roots of our faith—our personal relationship with Jesus Christ—we become spiritually strong enough to reach out and help others in their journey of discipleship. A testimony deeply rooted in Christ allows us to see the worth of souls more clearly and serve them with greater love and understanding.

Doctrinal Connections to Come, Follow Me: This week’s Come, Follow Me lesson on Doctrine and Covenants 18 aligns with Elder Uchtdorf’s message about focusing on what matters most—Jesus Christ and His Atonement. In Doctrine and Covenants 18:10, the Lord declares, “The worth of souls is great in the sight of God.” Elder Uchtdorf’s analogy of roots and branches reminds us that our faith should be deeply rooted in Christ’s love for us, rather than being shaken by surface-level concerns. * This principle also ties into Doctrine and Covenants 18:15-16, which teaches that bringing souls to Christ is of eternal significance. Elder Uchtdorf urges us to strengthen our own testimony by focusing on our personal connection with the Savior, so that we can help others do the same. When we are rooted in Christ, we are not only strengthened ourselves but are also able to reach out and lift others who may be struggling in their faith.*

Living ApologeticsPractical Application:Faith must be actively nourished to grow and endure. Elder Uchtdorf teaches that a testimony rooted in Jesus Christ provides spiritual strength, while focusing too much on secondary issues can weaken our faith. By prioritizing our relationship with Christ, we not only strengthen our own testimony but also help others find stability in theirs.

Reframe difficult questions by returning to core gospel truths. When discussing Church history, policy changes, or perceived contradictions, emphasize that the Church’s foundation is Jesus Christ, not any single historical event or leader. Encourage others to evaluate concerns within the broader context of Christ’s restored gospel and His mission.
Help others distinguish between roots and branches. When someone is struggling with a faith question, guide them to focus on the Atonement of Jesus Christ first. Ask: How has Christ influenced your life? What spiritual experiences have strengthened your testimony? This helps shift their focus from peripheral concerns to personal experiences with God.

Faith in Action – share what you’ve learned – Discuss the “roots and branches” analogy in family or Church settings. Share Elder Uchtdorf’s insight that not all gospel truths are of equal importance and encourage others to identify which gospel principles they consider to be “roots” of their faith. * Bear testimony of Christ in personal conversations. When friends or family members express doubts, remind them of spiritual experiences that have personally strengthened them. Help them recognize that faith is built over time and is not diminished by questions or struggles. * Use social media to share a personal insight. Post a reflection about how deepening your faith in Christ has helped you withstand spiritual challenges.* Include a quote from Elder Uchtdorf’s talk to reinforce the message.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses and FactsDefensive Highlights: Faith must be actively nourished to grow. Elder Uchtdorf teaches that testimonies require ongoing effort, just like a tree needs deep roots to thrive. A neglected testimony will weaken over time, but one that is consistently strengthened will endure trials and doubts. * Not all gospel truths are of equal importance. The Atonement of Jesus Christ is the foundation of our faith, while historical events, policies, and traditions are branches. Strengthening our faith in Christ ensures that secondary issues do not cause unnecessary spiritual crises. * Spiritual experiences are real and transformative. Elder Uchtdorf reminds us that his testimony has grown stronger, not weaker, over time*, proving that faith is deepened through experience, commitment, and personal revelation—not by relying solely on external evidence.

Conclusion

Elder Uchtdorf’s talk reminds us that faith is not something we acquire once and keep forever—it must be continuously nourished. If we actively strengthen our testimony through study, prayer, and action, we will find that even in times of doubt, our spiritual roots will hold us steady.

What small steps can you take today to nourish your faith and deepen your spiritual roots?

“Faith is beautiful because it persists even when blessings don’t come as hoped for. We can’t see the future, we don’t know all the answers, but we can trust Jesus Christ as we keep moving forward and upward because He is our Savior and Redeemer.” — Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf

The post Firmly Rooted in Christ: How to Strengthen Your Testimony and Overcome Doubt appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Joseph Smith’s early revelations to family & friends; restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood(D&C sections 4, 11–12, 14–16, 18–19)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

There has much scholarly debate on the date of the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. The traditional view is that it took place in late May or early June 1829, within a few weeks after the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood. A handful of scholars argue for a later date, however—some time in the summer of 1830.

For an examination of the historical evidence, see Brian Q. Cannon and BYU Studies Staff, “Priesthood Restoration Documents,” BYU Studies 35, no. 4 (1995): 166–73.
Larry C. Porter argues for the earlier date in two articles: “Dating the Restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood,” Ensign (June 1979): 5–10 and “The Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods,” Ensign (December 1996): 30–47.
In support of the later view, see Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1984), 162–63. Ben Park sums up the argument for the later date in “Dating the Melchizedek Priesthood Restoration,” The Juvenile Instructor, 4 August 2008.
Michael Hubbard MacKay argues that the Melchizedek Priesthood was restored over a series of angelic and inspired events in “Event or Process? How ‘the Chamber of Old Father Whitmer’ Helps Us Understand Priesthood Restoration,” BYU Studies 60, no. 1 (2021): 71–101. John S. Thompson makes a similar argument in “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 62 (2024): 263–318.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 4, 11–12, 14–16, 18–19 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Hyrum’s Influenceby Autumn Dickson

When I was younger, I wanted to be a famous singer. This desire followed me into college where I temporarily dropped out of school to pursue a music career. I wanted it so badly. I remember wanting it so much that it would hurt to listen to music on the radio.

I ended up getting really sick, and I left Provo behind. I lived with my parents for about a week before moving in with my sister and her family for six months. Most of my connections were back in Utah, but I kept clinging to that desire. I was doing everything I could to keep my dream going from far away.

I remember sitting on my sister’s bed and talking to her about it. She was trying to talk me out of remaining in the music industry because she knew the dangers that existed there. It wasn’t until later that my eyes finally opened to everything I was being exposed to during that period of my life, and so I didn’t see anything wrong with my pursuing a music career. I didn’t feel like there was anything innately wrong with my desires, and I didn’t plan on letting go of my testimony either. I felt that I could be an example to a lot more people with a microphone in my hand.

My sister responded with a very valid point that Jesus had gone about his gospel very differently. He preached to crowds, but He didn’t seek huge crowds and stadiums. He often ministered one by one.

This principle has expanded in a great many directions for me, but let’s take a quick look at Hyrum before diving further into this principle.

Hyrum

Hyrum sought out Joseph so that he could learn the will of the Lord concerning himself. There were a few things that the Lord counseled him on, but here is one such thing the Lord told him.

Doctrine and Covenants 11:8 Verily, verily, I say unto you, even as you desire of me so it shall be done unto you; and, if you desire, you shall be the means of doing much good in this generation.

Hyrum did desire to do good, and Hyrum did do good.

Now a grand majority of us know who Hyrum Smith was. We know he was the brother to the prophet and that he was a martyr right alongside his brother in Carthage Jail. However, how much do we really know about Hyrum? What “important” callings did he hold? Where did he serve missions and how many people did he baptize? Who was he married to and how many children did he have? How many stories do we have of times when Hyrum supported his brother in the very heavy mantle of dispensation head? In what ways did Hyrum directly contribute to the restoration of the gospel?

I’m sure there are plenty of people who could answer these questions and give us very clear pictures of how Hyrum contributed to the restoration of the gospel in our dispensation. However, I would argue that there are also plenty of people who don’t know much about his specific contribution, myself included. When you extend that beyond members of the church, I would venture to guess that a huge majority of people on the earth know nothing about Hyrum Smith. Many people have likely heard of Joseph Smith, but no one knows about Hyrum despite the role that he played in restoring Christ’s church on the earth.

We logically know that we can do “much good” without getting any recognition, and yet, has that knowledge sunk into our hearts? Do we believe that we can have a profound influence in God’s kingdom in these latter days? What does a profound influence look like in your mind? At what point would you look in the mirror and think, “There it is. I have made a difference”? Do you only picture general authorities, temple presidents, mission presidents, and social media influencers?

There are two truths I want to share. One, you are capable of doing much good, just like Hyrum. And two, it is highly likely that your indelible mark will be obscure, but no less important for it.

You are capable

When someone tries to tell you that you can change the world, perhaps you laugh and think, “I could never speak to huge crowds, and I’ll never hold a ‘big’ calling.”

If we want to step up and step into the roles that God has prepared for us, we need to redefine the characteristics of having a profound influence and we need that new definition to sink into our hearts to the extent that it changes how we act on a daily basis. When we understand what “profound influence” looks like, we feel differently about ourselves and it changes the actions we prioritize.

When we shed erroneous ideas that our influence has to look a certain way in order to be “world-changing,” we open the door for Heavenly Father to utilize us in His powerful way. When we have faith in Him to the extent that we believe He can magnify our abilities, we step out of our own way. We allow Him to be powerful through us.

Heavenly Father’s plan was meant to be built on the shoulders of millions; He set it up that way on purpose. The biggest successes in Heavenly Father’s plan are souls that want to go home to Him, and the biggest influence in that specific kind of success happens on a very individual basis.

I’m not looking to make this political, but I believe it illustrates a very physical aspect of my point. I recently learned about how one of the American presidents tried to make college more affordable by utilizing government funds to help students go to school so that they could become successful. The colleges simply responded by raising their rates. I remember thinking and thinking and thinking. When it comes to big systems, I feel like there is always some unintended reaction that nullifies the good that could have come from the original action. I was sincerely trying to figure out a way to empower those who needed a leg up without bringing these unintended consequences. It occurred to me that the Lord never meant for everyone to simply be taken care of by some huge system. He wanted us involved on personal levels, not only giving financial assistance where needed but also providing the immensely necessary support to empower themselves.

This is not a commentary on what we should do on a government level because there are plenty of nuances to consider. It is a commentary on the fact that I believe Heavenly Father meant for all of us to be involved in the lifting on a personal level. He wanted each and every individual to make a difference. This was the most powerful way to actually make a difference, and it would change us.

He wants you to be involved. He wants you to believe that you can make a difference no matter what you look like, how good you are at speaking, and how talented you are at proclaiming your testimony. He wants you to believe that you can utilize you as you are, to utilize the unique gifts that He gave to you to make an enduring mark on the world.

It comes quietly…

Because He wants everyone to be involved on an individual basis, it makes sense that most of the marks that we leave will not likely be recorded in history books. This has a couple implications. If you find yourself questioning your ability to really change anything for good, then you can take comfort in the fact that your quiet, daily discipleship is likely already making the difference the Lord wants you to make. If you find yourself wanting to make a “big” difference, then you probably need to redefine “big.”

Think about it. Even if you have been foreordained to hold some of the “louder” roles, a lot of the actions that led these famous characters to those historic roles came quietly.

Paul wrote letters in a prison. Abinadi died without knowing how his words would hold any effect or that his story would be recorded and passed on through generations, and I would be willing to bet that some of Hyrum’s most influential contributions to the restored gospel came in the form of his quiet and simple belief in his brother’s calling. The weight that Joseph carried was heavy, and Hyrum’s support helped to carry it. It enabled Joseph to carry it. It enabled the gospel to be restored.

And let’s not forget that the single most important event in the history of the earth happened with one Man in a garden. His friends fell asleep, and He was alone.

Even if you can trace your testimony back to one incredible insight given by a speaker in General Conference, a study of neuroscience teaches us that our brain is built slowly through repeated experiences. Even if it took one conscious comment in Conference, your brain was being prepared far before that. The gospel spreads person to person, and it is retained as we interact and have positive individual experiences with good friends, family, and especially the Savior.

More than likely, the incredibly important influence you will have on the world will come in the form of a link in a chain. It may not sound like the most romantic way to change the world, but it is no less significant. My great, great grandmother taught her children the gospel. I don’t know all of my great, great grandmothers’ names, but I know that because they chose to teach the gospel to their children, I have the gospel in my life. Because they chose to teach their children and not break that link, it made its way to me. The testimony and lessons from my great, great grandmother’s life have found their legacy within my own life. Her influence (though I do not know it directly) has done more to help my conversion to the gospel than any “famous” gospel influences. Because she loved and taught her children, my grandmother did the same. Then my mother. And now me.

What you give gets passed on, even if your name isn’t passed along with it.

I testify that Heavenly Father wanted each of us to take a role in His work. He wanted us to experience the happiness that He experiences as He works with us. He wanted us to feel the joy of working individual by individual, and He wanted us to observe the effectiveness of His plan for everyone to be involved with helping everyone. None of us need to feel more or less important. The only one keeping you from completing a work that is incalculable in nature is you. I testify that He can help you accomplish your great work in surprisingly small and quiet ways. Perhaps we are not aware of the influence that Hyrum had in this vital gospel dispensation, but the Lord is and that is the measure that matters.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 10–11 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Oliver Cowdery became Joseph Smith’s scribe; restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood(D&C sections 6–9, 13)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Elder Boyd K. Packer, “The Candle of the Lord,” Ensign, January 1983, 51–56. Elder Packer shared his insights into how the Holy Spirit communicates with us.
Jeffrey G. Cannon, “Oliver Cowdery’s Gift,” Church History: Revelations in Context. Cannon, a member of the Joseph Smith Papers team, examines the meaning of the “gift” the Lord spoke of in the earliest revelations to Oliver Cowdery (section 6, section 8).

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 6–9, 13 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

How Can We Know That God Answers Us?Many wonder if God hears their prayers, especially in moments of doubt. The life of Joseph Smith provides a profound response to this question. His experiences illustrate that God is a revealing, personal, and involved being who speaks to those who sincerely seek Him.

A Prophet’s Testimony of Jesus ChristIn his General Conference address, Elder Kyle S. McKay testifies of Jesus Christ through the lens of Joseph Smith’s life. Joseph’s search for truth led to the First Vision, launching the Restoration of the Gospel and demonstrating God’s willingness to respond to sincere seekers. Elder McKay highlights Joseph’s unwavering faith, commitment to repentance, and reliance on revelation, showing how these principles remain vital today.

This message is relevant for those experiencing faith questions. It addresses the nature of God, the reality of personal revelation, and the power of repentance. Like Joseph, we can turn to God with our doubts and trust in His divine guidance.

Doctrine: Does God Really Answer Prayers?Question: Why don’t I always receive clear or immediate answers like Joseph Smith did?Many struggle with the idea that God answers prayers, especially when responses aren’t immediate or dramatic. It’s easy to assume divine communication is reserved for prophets or that their faith is insufficient.

Response:Elder McKay emphasizes that Joseph’s experience is a model for all who seek divine guidance. Joseph wrestled with uncertainty before acting in faith. Similarly, answers may come through scripture, personal impressions, or gradual understanding—but God does answer. The key is trusting His timing and methods.

All-or-Nothing Thinking (Viewing Situations in Extreme, Absolute Terms)

This fallacy assumes that something must be either entirely true or entirely false, with no room for nuance or complexity. In this case, all-or-nothing thinking assumes that if one doesn’t receive an answer like Joseph did, then God must not answer at all. However, divine communication varies for each person.

Confirmation Bias (Favoring Information That Supports Preexisting Beliefs)

This occurs when someone selectively focuses on evidence that aligns with their views while ignoring or dismissing contradictory evidence. Some expect only a dramatic spiritual manifestation and overlook quieter, consistent promptings. Recognizing small, daily witnesses strengthens faith.

History: Was Joseph Smith’s Life a Pattern of Deception or Divine Calling?Criticism: Joseph Smith was uneducated—how could he have been called as a prophet?Skeptics argue that Joseph’s lack of education and young age disqualify him from being a prophet. Some claim he fabricated the First Vision and the Book of Mormon to enhance credibility.

Response:Elder McKay underscores that Joseph’s calling was divine, not self-made. His pattern of revelation—from the First Vision to translating the Book of Mormon—demonstrates reliance on God. Despite relentless persecution, Joseph remained faithful. The fruits of his work—doctrinal clarity, continued revelation, and the Church’s growth—affirm his prophetic role.

Common Fallacies:Ad Hominem (Attacking the Person Instead of the Argument)

This fallacy occurs when someone attacks an individual’s character, background, or traits instead of addressing the validity of their claims. In Joseph Smith’s case, critics attack Joseph’s background rather than engaging with the substance of his revelations and teachings. Personal circumstances do not invalidate truth.

Presentism (Judging the Past by Modern Standards)

Presentism is the application of contemporary values and norms to judge historical figures or events. Some critics view Joseph Smith through modern expectations of education, failing to acknowledge that formal schooling was limited in early 19th-century rural America. While Joseph lacked higher education, he produced the Book of Mormon and led a growing religious movement, which speaks to his spiritual gifts and divine calling, not just his academic background.

False Dilemma (Forcing a Binary Choice When More Options Exist)

A false dilemma presents only two extreme choices, ignoring the possibility of a nuanced reality. Assuming Joseph was either a fraud or a perfect individual is a flawed premise. Critics often claim that Joseph Smith must have been either a flawless prophet or a complete fraud. This ignores the historical reality that prophets—like Moses, Jonah, and Peter—were imperfect people called to do God’s work. The truthfulness of Joseph’s revelations does not depend on his perfection as a person.

Defending Divine Doctrines: Continuous RevelationExplanation of DoctrineA key teaching from Elder McKay’s talk is continuous revelation—the principle that God speaks today just as He did in ancient times. Joseph Smith’s mission restored lost truths, confirming that divine guidance did not cease with the Bible. Doctrine and Covenants 130:22 affirms that God is tangible and actively communicates with His children.

How This Doctrine Defends Core Beliefs: Critics argue that Latter-day Saints add to the Bible (Revelation 22:18). However, this verse refers to the Book of Revelation, not all scripture. If God is unchanging (Hebrews 13:8)*, why would He stop revealing truth? * Some claim modern prophets are unnecessary since we have scripture. Yet, the Bible records ongoing revelation—Noah, Moses, and Paul all received divine guidance. Amos 3:7** confirms that God reveals His will through prophets.

Application Clarifying misunderstandings: Many assume revelation ended with the Bible. Joseph Smith’s experience proves that God still guides His people today. * Practical use: When discussing revelation, ask: “If God spoke in the past, why wouldn’t He now?”* Encourage others to seek revelation through scripture study and prayer.

Historical and Doctrinal ConnectionsContextual BackgroundThe First Vision was not an isolated event but part of a divine pattern. Just as Moses at the burning bush (Exodus 3:2-6), Lehi’s vision (1 Nephi 1:8-9), and Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3-6) marked turning points in history, Joseph Smith’s vision initiated the Restoration. The Lord has always spoken to His children, revealing truth through prophets.

In Doctrine and Covenants 6-9, Oliver Cowdery learned firsthand about personal revelation. Seeking to assist Joseph in translating the Book of Mormon, Oliver desired the same gift of revelation. The Lord taught him that revelation comes through study, faith, and the workings of the Holy Ghost (D&C 9:7-9). Just like Joseph, Oliver had to learn that divine guidance often comes as quiet impressions rather than dramatic manifestations.

Doctrinal Connection to Come, Follow Me Doctrine and Covenants 6:22-23 reminds us that revelation often comes as peace to the mind—a principle Oliver Cowdery experienced when he sought divine confirmation. * Doctrine and Covenants 8:2-3 explains that revelation works through both the mind and heart, reinforcing that the Lord speaks to us in ways we can understand. * Doctrine and Covenants 9:7-9 highlights that revelation requires effort, study, and faith* before receiving answers. This principle continues to guide us in seeking personal revelation today.

Oliver’s experiences mirror those of all who seek revelation. Like him, we must learn to trust in the Spirit’s quiet confirmations and act in faith. This week’s lesson emphasizes that revelation is available to all who diligently seek it.

Living ApologeticsFaith in Action –share what you’ve learned- Host a Discussion on Personal Revelation. Invite others to share experiences of divine guidance. Use Joseph Smith’s example to encourage questions and testimony. * Ask Thought-Provoking Questions. Engage in a conversation: “If God spoke in ancient times, why wouldn’t He today?” * Use Joseph Smith’s Story to Comfort Those Struggling with Doubt. Share how asking questions strengthens faith*.

Quick Reference: Key Defenses and FactsDefensive Highlights God still speaks today. Joseph’s experience confirms that revelation did not end with the Bible. * Seeking answers through prayer leads to revelation. The First Vision exemplifies James 1:5. * Prophets are not perfect, but their calling is divine.* Joseph Smith never claimed perfection, yet his revelations remain true.

Conclusion: Encouragement and ReflectionElder McKay’s talk reminds us that God is actively involved in our lives. Joseph Smith’s experience proves that questions lead to revelation, not away from faith. We can ask, seek, and trust in God’s answers.

What questions will you take to the Lord, trusting He will answer in His time?

“Joseph Smith was and is a prophet of God, a witness of the Lord Jesus Christ. He was ‘blessed to open the last dispensation,’ and we are blessed that he did.” – Elder Kyle S. McKay

The post The Man Who Communed with Jehovah: Joseph Smith and the Restoration of Truth appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Joseph Smith’s childhood; the First Vision; Moroni, & the gold plates(Joseph Smith—History)by Mike Parker

Class Notes

Handout

Additional Reading

- “First Vision Accounts,” Gospel Topics Essays, November 2013. An excellent summary on the Church’s website of Joseph Smith’s various accounts of the First Vision, along with a response to criticisms that he misremembered or embellished his accounts over time.
- Dean C. Jessee, “The Early Accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision,” BYU Studies 9, no. 3 (Spring 1969): 275–94. (The entire issue is devoted to the historical setting of the First Vision.) This article was updated and expanded as the opening chapter of John W. Welch and Erick b. Carlson, eds., Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestations, 1820–1844 (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press and Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), 1–33.
- Dean C. Jessee, “The Reliability of Joseph Smith’s History,” Journal of Mormon History 3, no. 1 (1976): 23–46. Jessee explores how the official history of the Church was compiled between 1838 and 1856, the historiographical methods the clerks used, and the limitations of the record.
- Steven C. Harper, “Was Joseph Smith a Money Digger?,” BYU Studies 62, no. 4 (2023): 37–55. Harper evaluates the historical claims that Joseph Smith used his spiritual gifts to seek for buried treasure and find lost items.
- The First Vision: A Joseph Smith Papers Podcast is a six-part documentary miniseries that explores the history and legacy of Joseph Smith’s first vision. The podcast recreates the world in which Joseph Smith was seeking answers to the pressing questions of his soul. Series host Spencer W. McBride interviewed historians and Church leaders for this podcast.

[The below is additional content not included in Mike Parker’s original lesson]

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Joseph Smith—History – Mike Parker 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

He Cannot Allow Sinby Autumn Dickson

By the time Doctrine and Covenants 1 was written, Joseph had already written 60 revelations. In my mind, I imagine Joseph receiving communication from the Lord and writing it down so that he could try and follow and teach it. As time went on and more and more were received, it became clear that the Lord had plenty to say and that these sacred revelations should be made available to others. It hadn’t been originally considered that these words could be considered scripture; it wasn’t until later that the revelations were recognized for what they were. Joseph Smith and other church leaders decided to put them together in a book; this was obviously an inspired decision because the Lord stood ready to write the preface to His own book. This preface is Doctrine and Covenants 1.

The Lord shares a lot of goodness within this chapter. One of the things He chooses to include has been stated often enough before, but for some reason, it hit me a little harder this week.

Doctrine and Covenants 1:31 For I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance;

The word that really hit me as I read this verse was “cannot.” The Lord didn’t say that He refused to look at sin with any allowance. He didn’t say He didn’t want to. He said He couldn’t, and I believe this is significant. I’m sure there are aspects of “refusing” and “not wanting to,” but He chose the word “cannot” for a reason.

I believe the word “cannot” (as opposed to the words “will not”) can help us to understand Him a bit better.

In verse 24, the Lord talks about how He gives His words to His servants in their weakness. It can be hard to capture His true attitude and meaning; if we’re being completely honest, it’s pretty much impossible to express it completely accurately. But I want to try and help clarify it a bit more, and He can continue to help me know when I’ve erred, instruct me when I’ve sought wisdom, and chasten me when I get it wrong. I already know that I’m not going to get this perfect, but I’m grateful Joseph published the revelations he published despite his own weakness. So let’s explore and add layers to our understanding of the Lord together.

Cannot rather than will not

Why can’t the Lord look at sin with any degree of allowance? Note that I’m asking, “Why can’t He?” not, “Why won’t He?”

Well there’s the obvious. If He is to remain perfect so that He can continue to be our Savior, He can’t let go of the prerogative. He has to remain wholly clean. An allowance of sin would probably forfeit the characteristic of perfection.

But I believe it extends beyond that. He can’t afford to look upon sin with any degree of allowance for our sake. It’s important to recognize and feel that because it helps us utilize this doctrine for our benefit rather than to our detriment. When we understand that He refuses to be accepting of sin for us (in comparison to picturing Him scowling down at us in our weaknesses), we understand that He is trying to lift us, not condemning us.

In parenting, boundaries are essential to raise healthy, happy kids. Oftentimes, from the perspective of the child, these boundaries can be perceived as a parent being angry or expecting too much (and sometimes that’s not inaccurate because we’re imperfect). However, it is possible to love and accept the child while maintaining the same boundary. I can look at my child and say, “I understand you’re tired, and I understand that you still need a lot of practice with your emotions. I understand that’s why you hit. I love you and will keep you with me. But hitting is not okay, no matter how tired you are.” I’m not expressing that the child is suddenly unacceptable. I’m not telling my child that they are a failure. I simply can’t afford to communicate the idea that it was okay for them to hit someone else. If I communicate, “It’s okay. You’re tired,” then what will my child choose to do next time they get tired? They’ll never seek to control themselves when they’re tired because I taught them hitting is okay when you’re tired.

When I approach my child with love and a strong, important boundary, I hope they will receive the right message. I hope they will receive the message that I accept them and love them even though I have to push them to be better and can’t look at sin with allowance. I can’t afford to. I have to (for their sake!) hold that boundary.

Sin rather than sinner

It is the same with our Savior. He loves us, but He can’t teach us that He’s okay with sin. It would be detrimental to our spiritual health and progression.

The word, “cannot” is significant, but so is the word, “sin.” He can’t look at sin with any degree of allowance. His atonement was literally performed so that He can look at the sinner with allowance. The entire reason He sacrificed Himself was so that He could allow repentant sinners into heaven. He looks at us and loves us and forgives us and recognizes our circumstances and weaknesses, but He holds that proper and fast boundary. He holds it because He loves us.

Sometimes, like a child, we look at verses like this and think, “He won’t ever accept me. He won’t forgive my sins.” We have to mature to the extent that we realize He can accept us and forgive our repentant hearts while maintaining his refusal of sin. We have to choose to see this verse for the act of love that it is.

There are few things more satisfying than when my kids recognize the love I put into my responses. It is so fulfilling when my kids feel grateful that I push them to do chores, to forgive each other, and to learn to control their tempers. I often teach this sentiment directly rather than hoping the message is inherently understood. When my kids are complaining that I’m requiring something of them (and when they specifically complain that I must not love them), I quite passionately explain that I choose to do these things because I love them. It has somewhat sunk in because when my oldest daughter is well-rested and in a good mood, she has expressed a sentiment along the lines of, “Mom, I don’t want to do this, but I know you’re making me do it because you love me.”

We are the child in this scenario! We can look to the Lord and say, “I see what You are expressing. I’m grateful that You want me to be more.” Like a child, we can choose to read that verse and see condemnation or we can see the wisdom and love of an Eternal Parent. We can refuse to allow Satan to make us believe that the Lord is turning His back on us because nothing would please Satan more. He wants us to get confused and misunderstand what the Lord is trying to say.

He that repents and does the commandments

There is a verse that comes right after the verse we read in the beginning.

Doctrine and Covenants 1:32 Nevertheless, he that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven;

This verse can be confusing. The Lord forgives those who repent and follow the commandments, but usually forgiveness and repenting imply the fact that we didn’t keep the commandments. Satan likes to whisper that we have to stop sinning before the Lord forgives past transgressions, but that’s not true either.

Let’s look at a parent and child again.

There are times in the lives of my children when they need to hear that I love them deeply. A lot of times, this need appears as misbehavior. They’ve done something wrong and if I want them to do better, a huge portion of my message needs to be the idea that I love them and they’re going to be okay.

I try to express this, and I try to express it in this extremely specific manner (even if not in so many words).

I don’t say, “I love you, but we have to do better.” I say, “I love you, AND we have to do better.” A very small word but a very significant difference. The conjunction “but” implies the phrase, “on the contrary.” However, the phrases “I love you” and “We have to do better” are not contrary; they’re complimentary.

I get it. This is such a nuanced little principle, but it’s so significant. If we can teach our loved ones and if we can learn this principle for ourselves, it will change the nature of our relationship with our Heavenly Father.

We will hear phrases like, “Keep the commandments,” or phrases that imply, “We have to do better,” and we will begin to simultaneously hear the message, “I love you.” Because that’s exactly what those phrases are. They are messages, pleadings, and expressions of love. If we can connect those phrases, our children will better recognize the love of their Heavenly Father and Savior, and it will change their entire experience with this high-demand gospel. The high-demand will translate to high-love.

I testify of a Heavenly Father and Savior who love us. I testify that whenever They speak to us, there is an implied message of love. They feel that love constantly, and all of Their responses are drawn out of that love. It’s hard to understand and believe that because the responses that we sometimes give to others around us can be rooted in selfishness, but it is never so with Them. We can read any of their words and find the implied, “I love you,” because They perfectly love us.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 1 – 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

by Scott Hansen

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we believe “that God has revealed” and “will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” (Articles of Faith 1:9). However, change can be unsettling after we have already gotten into a routine. Ordinances, policies, and procedures serve as a mechanism for us to have spiritual experiences. When these things change, it can be hard. So, why do Church policies and procedures change? Here are three reasons:

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: Why Does the Church Change? 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

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

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.

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

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 Afternoon Session

Promptings of the Spirit
Elder Gary E. Stevenson, Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Main Points

All gifts, whether spiritual or temporal in nature, require a lifetime of hard work, study and practice to refine.
We can take actions that will increase our opportunity and ability to feel and recognize the Spirit.

Gospel Principles taught

The Holy Ghost, The Lord’s Covenant People, The Gift of the Holy Ghost, Gifts of the Spirit, Developing Talents

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Godhead, Covenants

Scriptures

Doctrine and Covenants 46:13–25, Doctrine and Covenants 46:8–9, 26, Doctrine and Covenants 87:8, Matthew 18:20, Helaman 5:30

Related talks:

Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives
The Candle of the Lord
Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall

Sources Cited:

Chapter 4: Seek and Rely on the Spirit

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- I add my testimony to you, gifted Latter-day Saints, of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, who bears testimony of Them. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
Description of His Teachings.
- The Savior said it this way: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

The Spirit cannot be restrained from attending a gathering of holy people.
If you hope to feel the Spirit, be with people with whom the Spirit can easily dwell.
Choose to be with people and go to places where righteousness is found. Find your strength in numbers. Find good friends. Be good friends. Support one another wherever you are. Stand with holy people.
The Comforter always shares His voice when we testify with our voice.
The Lord invites us to earnestly seek the best gifts, even spiritual gifts.
A gift alone does not a master make.
Even those gifts received and unwrapped are often accompanied by the dreaded language “some assembly required.”
Exercising spiritual gifts requires spiritual exercise.
As we listen and act on spiritual promptings, the Holy Ghost magnifies our abilities and capacities to far exceed what we can do on our own. These precious spiritual gifts will help us in every aspect of our lives.
The constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is one of the greatest spiritual gifts Latter-day Saints enjoy. How important is this gift? President Russell M. Nelson answered this question categorically when he stated that “in coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.”
Promptings of the Spirit are very personal and come in different ways.
If you hope to feel the Spirit, be in a place where the Spirit can easily dwell.
Our temples and homes are the most sacred of these dedicated spaces.
Be patient and trust that you will receive what you need when the time is right.

Lists

How to invite and recognize the promptings of the Spirit:

Stand in Holy Places
Stand with Holy People
Testify of Holy Truths
Listen to the Holy Spirit

Gifts of the Spirit bestowed on covenant-keeping members of the Church:

the gift of a testimony of Jesus Christ as our Savior
the gift of the Holy Ghost
the gift of faith to heal
the gift of faith to be healed
the gift of discernment
the gift of receiving miracles
the gift of wisdom
the gift of knowledge

The Lord gives spiritual gifts:

To bless us
For us to use to bless others

Spiritual work required to have the guidance of the Holy Ghost in your life:

fervent prayer
consistent scripture study
keeping your covenants
keeping God’s commandments
worthily partaking of the sacrament each week

The fruits of exercising spiritual gifts are:

promptings from the Spirit that help us face our daily needs
promptings from the Spirit that show us what to do
promptings from the Spirit that show us what to say
blessings of peace
Blessings of comfort

Places where the Spirit can easily dwell:

The temple
Our home
Meetinghouses
Seminary & Institute
Church History sites
Visitor’s centers

Invitations/Challenges

Choose to be with people and go places where righteousness is found.
Find your strength in numbers
Find good friends
Be good friends
Support one another
Stand with holy people
Find a quiet place, a holy space where you can seek to receive direction from the Spirit.
You can cultivate an attitude and an environment that invite the Spirit, and you can prepare yourself, but you cannot dictate how or when inspiration comes.
Often the Lord wants us to use our God-given intelligence and act in ways that are consistent with our best understanding.
(An invitation for all youth) Tomorrow, this week, this year, always, pause as you look at yourself in the mirror. Think to yourself, or say aloud if you like, “Wow, look at me! I am awesome! I am a child of God! He knows me! He loves me! I am gifted—gifted with the Holy Ghost as my constant companion!”

Warnings

(The Spirit) caresses so gently that if we are preoccupied we may not feel it at all.” (quoting Boyd K. Packer)
The noise, clamor, and contention prevalent in the world may overpower still, quiet impressions of the Holy Spirit.
Impressions from the Spirit will align with the scriptures and the teachings of the living prophets.
Be certain that the feelings you receive are consistent with your assignment.
Spiritual matters cannot be forced.

Blessings/Promises

As you seek and take opportunities to share your testimony with others, you will create moments to recognize the Spirit for yourself.

Personal Stories Told:

An experience in the Tokyo Japan Temple celestial room during the open house, when a prominent government official commented, “Even the air that I breathe in this room feels different.”
An experience of a popular sports arena filled with youth commemorating the life of Joseph Smith, where the Spirit was present.
Bearing simple testimony to a taxi driver in New York City.

Equations:

A gift ≠ a master
Listen to spiritual promptings + Act on spiritual promptings = the Holy Ghost magnifies our abilities and capacities
IF we testify THEN the Spirit will testify

Application Ideas

Make a list in your journal of holy places in your life. Find a way to spend more time in those places.
Identify the ‘holy people’ in your life. Think about ways you might become more like them.
Think about what makes a good friend. How can you find good friends? How can you be a good friend?
Write out “Wow, look at me! I am awesome! I am a child of God! He knows me! He loves me! I am gifted—gifted with the Holy Ghost as my constant companion!” and put it on your mirror. Read it every day.

The post Consider Conference: Promptings of the Spirit 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

2023 October General Conference, Saturday Morning Session
In the Path of Their Duty
David A. Bednar, Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Main Points

The real strength of the church is those members who are quietly and consistently trying to live the gospel and do their part, even if they are not well-known. They are “no less serviceable” – just as useful – as those whose service is more conspicuous.
Elder Bednar summarizes his feelings for the church members who are on the covenant path by quoting Samuel the Lamanite – these members are “in the path of their duty.”
There are many ways to serve, and they are all valued.

Gospel Principles taught

Faith in Christ, Charity, Service, Obedience, Work and Personal responsibility

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Covenant Path

Scriptures

Alma 48:17, Alma 48:19, Moroni 10:32–33, Helaman 15:5–6, Mosiah 18:9, Helaman 7:17, Moroni 10:30, 32, 1 Nephi 8:28, Doctrine and Covenants 64:33, Doctrine and Covenants 109:24, 1 Nephi 10:3, 3 Nephi 5:25,, 3 Nephi 20:29, Psalm 30:5, Doctrine and Covenants 90:11,

Romans 10:17, Isaiah 40:31, Doctrine and Covenants 133:45, Mark 9:36–37, Omni 1:26, Helaman 3:35, Doctrine and Covenants 121:29,

Related talks

To Them of the Last Wagon- J. Reuben Clark, July 1997

No Less Serviceable – Howard W. Hunter, Sept 1990

Choose Ye This Day to Serve the Lord – Julie B. Beck, 2011

Missionary Work: Sharing What Is in Your Heart – Dieter F. Uchtdorf, 2019

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- I joyfully witness that Heavenly Father and His Beloved Son live and Their promises are sure, in the sacred name of the Lord Jesus Christ, amen.
Description of His Teachings.
- Consider the eternal impact of the service rendered by these devoted disciples—and the marvelous blessings promised to those who minister to children. “And [Jesus] took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them, “Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.”
Description of His relationship with us.
- The phrase “in the path of their duty” describes righteous individuals who yearn to become yoked to the Savior through the authorized covenants and ordinances of His gospel—but may be prohibited from doing so by factors beyond their control. I promise your personal anguish will be relieved and your obedience and faithfulness to patiently submit your will to God will be rewarded in “the own due time of the Lord.”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

“uncelebrated heroes”
I now express my love, admiration, and gratitude for the members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints all around the world.
uncelebrated heroes
“They of the last wagon pressed forward, worn and tired, footsore, sometimes almost disheartened, borne up by their faith that God loved them, that the restored gospel was true, and that the Lord led and directed the Brethren out in front.” (Elder Bednar quoting J. Reuben Clark)
“If you feel that much of what you do this year or in the years to come does not make you very famous, take heart. Most of the best people who ever lived weren’t very famous either. Serve and grow, faithfully and quietly.” (Elder Bednar quoting Howard W. Hunter)
Your strong faith in Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ and your unpretentious, consecrated lives inspire me to be a better man and disciple.
I love you. I admire you. I thank you. And I commend you.
I have described only a few selected examples of covenant-keeping and devoted disciples of Jesus Christ like you who are pressing forward “in the path of [your] duty.” Millions of additional examples of Latter-day Saints who offer their “whole souls” unto God are found in Christ-centered homes and in Church units around the world.
Coming unto Christ by returning to the covenant path from sinful detours into “forbidden paths” is spiritually essential and righteously rigorous.

Lists

The phrase “in the path of their duty” describes members who:

Look for and sit next to people who are alone
Strive to comfort others without expectation of acknowledgment or praise
Support family members as they serve in callings
Are returning to Christ and their covenants
Desire to come to Christ and make covenants
Translate scriptures and conferences
Raise children or “wait patiently upon the Lord” when those blessings don’t come
Nursery leaders and Primary teachers
Children caring for elderly parents, parents caring for and protecting their children
Set up and take down chairs for activities
Invite others thru inspiration to come to church

By the power of the Holy Ghost you:

Love
Serve
Listen
Learn
Care
Console
Teach
Testify

Invitations/Challenges

You love and serve, listen and learn, care and console, and teach and testify by the power of the Holy Ghost. You fast and pray often, wax stronger and stronger in humility, and grow firmer and firmer in the faith of Christ, “unto the filling [your] souls with joy and consolation, yea, even to the purifying and the sanctification of [your] hearts, which sanctification cometh because of … yielding [your] hearts unto God.”

Blessings/Promises

“…individuals who yearn to become yoked to the Savior through the authorized covenants and ordinances of His gospel—but may be prohibited from doing so by factors beyond their control. I promise your personal anguish will be relieved and your obedience and faithfulness to patiently submit your will to God will be rewarded in ‘the own due time of the Lord.’”
They of the last wagon, all who are no less serviceable, and you who today are pressing forward in the path of your duty are the strength of the Savior’s restored Church.
As the Lord has promised, “all thrones and dominions, principalities and powers, shall be revealed and set forth upon all who have endured valiantly for the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Application Ideas

Consider prayerfully asking God how you can become “stronger in humility.” Write down and act upon any ideas you receive.
Choose someone who is an “unsung hero” and send them a note of thanks.
Recognize the ways you are “in the path of (your) duty.” Appreciate what you do to serve!
Make a conscious effort to appreciate equally all the ways and degrees that those around you serve in the Church.
Invite the Holy Ghost to be with you to help you know how to “love and serve, listen and learn, care and console, and teach and testify.”

The post Consider Conference: In the Path of Their Duty appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

2023 October General Conference, Sunday Afternoon Session
Think Celestial!
Russell M. Nelson, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Main Points

“Thinking Celestial” means to view our choices and the circumstances of our lives with an eternal perspective.

Gospel Principles taught

Obedience, prayer, agency, Law of Chastity, Tithing, Faith, Temple Work

Gospel Doctrine taught

The Plan of Salvation, The Atonement of Jesus Christ

Scriptures

John 6:38; Alma 7:11; Alma 7:12; Doctrine and Covenants 19:18; 2 Nephi 9:40; 2 Nephi 28:7; Alma 34:32–35; 2 Nephi 9:39; Mosiah 4:30; Doctrine and Covenants 132:7; Moroni 7:41; 2 Nephi 2:6–8, 27; 2 Nephi 2:11; Doctrine and Covenants 122:7; Doctrine and Covenants 121:8; Isaiah 1:16–18; Doctrine and Covenants 58:42–43; 1 Timothy 4:1; 1 Timothy 4:2; 2 Timothy 3:12; 2 Nephi 32:5; Doctrine and Covenants 42:61

Related talk: Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives

Look for Jesus Christ:

Testimony of Christ.
- “The Lord is directing us to build these temples to help us think celestial. God lives. Jesus is the Christ. His Church has been restored to bless all of God’s children. I so testify in the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen.”
Description of His Atonement.
- “The Savior’s Atonement is what makes our Father’s Plan possible.”
- “Think of it! The Savior suffered ‘pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind’ so that He can comfort us, heal us, rescue us in times of need. Jesus Christ described His experience in Gethsemane and on Calvary: ‘Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore.’”
- “Put Jesus Christ first because your eternal life is dependent upon your faith in Him and in His Atonement.”
Description of His relationship with us.
- “Come unto Christ and receive His promise of complete forgiveness as you fully repent of your sins.”

Inspiring Words & Phrases

Heavenly Father’s Plan for us is fabulous
What we do in this life really matters
Mortality is a master class
Obedience paves the way for a joyful life for you today and a grand, eternal reward tomorrow.
When you are confronted with a dilemma, think celestial! When tested by temptation, think celestial! When life or loved ones let you down, think celestial! When someone dies prematurely, think celestial. When someone lingers with a devastating illness, think celestial. When the pressures of life crowd in upon you, think celestial! As you recover from an accident or injury, as I am doing now, think celestial!
The Lord’s perspective transcends your mortal wisdom.
think celestial and…envision an eternal reward rather than focus on the excruciating difficulties of the day.
Any addiction—be it gaming, gambling, debt, drugs, alcohol, anger, pornography, sex, or even food—offends God. Why? Because your obsession becomes your god.
Public opinion is not the arbiter of truth.

Lists

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.

To build faith:

Pay tithing
Choose to live a virtuous life
Spend more time in the temple

In the temple:

you are shown how to progress toward a celestial life.
There you are drawn closer to the Savior and given greater access to His power.
There you are guided in solving the problems in your life, even your most perplexing problems.

Invitations/Challenges

I invite you to adopt the practice of “thinking celestial”! (Thinking celestial means being spiritually minded.)
Begin with the end in mind. This means making the celestial kingdom your eternal goal and then carefully considering where each of your decisions while here on earth will place you in the next world.
When you make choices, I invite you to take the long view—an eternal view.
Our prayers can be—and should be—living discussions with our Heavenly Father.
When you make decisions regarding morality, please think celestial.

Warnings

For those who have made covenants with God, immorality is one of the quickest ways to lose your testimony.
There is no end to the adversary’s deceptions. Please be prepared. Never take counsel from those who do not believe. Seek guidance from voices you can trust—from prophets, seers, and revelators and from the whisperings of the Holy Ghost, who “will show unto you all things what ye should do.” Please do the spiritual work to increase your capacity to receive personal revelation.
As you focus on thinking celestial, expect to encounter opposition.
Please do not let an obsession rob you of your freedom to follow God’s fabulous plan.

Blessings/Promises

As you think celestial, your heart will gradually change.
As you think celestial, you will view trials and opposition in a new light.
As you think celestial, your faith will increase.
Your service and worship in the temple will help you to think celestial.

Apologetics

When someone you love attacks truth, think celestial, and don’t question your testimony.

Application Ideas

Make an appointment to serve in the temple this week.
Make time to have a vocal prayer and try to have a “living discussion” with Heavenly Father.
Evaluate the importance of ‘public opinion’ in your life. What do you need to change?
Make peace with those you have contended or are contending with.
Start each day thinking of your end goals in mind and what you will do that day to make sure you’re on the path to reach them.

The post Consider Conference: Think Celestial! 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

by Lyndie Jackson

The “Asking Big Questions” series is made in cooperation with the Wilford Woodruff Papers Project.

Saturdays and Sundays are safeguarded days for most people. Between school, work and other activities, our weeks get hectic and weekends are reserved for relaxing with family and friends and accomplishing tasks that could not be finished during the week. But faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, along with members of other religions, carve out time during their weekends to attend church meetings.

Church attendance is important for many reasons, not the least of which are to worship God, to feel the Spirit, and to keep God’s commandment to honor the Sabbath day. There are many other reasons to attend church meetings, such as renewing our covenants with God, learning the gospel, and joining a community of believers. Our lives can be exceedingly blessed by going to church, even (and maybe especially) when it feels like a sacrifice.

CONTINUED HERE

The post Asking Big Questions: Why Is Going to Church Important? 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

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

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

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.

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

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 into them, so that we can all approach them with a little more knowledge than we may have previously held. That doesn’t make them easier to digest. Some of them are pretty awful, and it’s incredibly difficult for me to understand how someone can hold those views about other children of God.

However, I want to make one other thing very clear: I will gladly condemn these words and attitudes, but I will not condemn the people espousing them. That’s not my place. As I pointed out in my last post, some of these men were incredibly blessed and favored by the Lord. They were not perfect and they made their share of mistakes, but I will not hold them to standards of perfection that the Lord refuses to hold them to. If He’s willing to show them grace despite their flaws, all that means is that He’s willing to do the same for me despite my flaws. So, I’m going to extend them the same charity that He shows me, and assume that they were trying their best to serve the Lord even though I find some of these statements to be pretty appalling.

This was a difficult post for me to research and write. It hurt my heart to read some of these talks and quotations. It was a good reminder that we shouldn’t follow prophets and apostles blindly, and that we don’t follow them because they’re perfect or even necessarily correct in everything they teach us. We follow their teachings because they were called of God to expound on His teachings and to help point us back toward Him. There’s a reason we’re counseled to pray about it when they teach us something that doesn’t sit right with us.

Sometimes, those teachings won’t feel right because they’re conflicting with our own assumptions. Their teachings are correct in those instances, but our hearts aren’t, and we need to do the work to get our hearts right with God. We need to pray for enlightenment and understanding in those cases. Other times, what those teaching won’t feel right because they’re not correct.

We need to learn how to tell the difference, and it takes practice. But it’s important, because nobody is perfect except the Savior and the Father. The rest of us get it wrong occasionally, and that includes prophets and apostles. That shouldn’t be a shock to any of us, because you only have to read the first few chapters of the Bible to see that prophets aren’t perfect, and you only have to read the Gospels or the book of Acts to see that the apostles aren’t perfect either.

They are wise men with a lifetime of serving God behind them, and they’re right far more often than they’re wrong. They’re also right far more often than the rest of us are. Because of that, we need to follow their counsel far more often than we don’t. We just need to remember the very wise words of Elder Ballard:

…[I]t is important to remember that I am a General Authority, but that does not make me an authority in general!

My calling and life experiences allow me to respond to certain types of questions. There are other types of questions that require an expert in a specific subject matter. This is exactly what I do when I need an answer to such questions: I seek help from others, including those with degrees and expertise in such fields.

I worry sometimes that members expect too much from Church leaders and teachers—expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities. The Lord called the apostles and prophets to invite others to come unto Christ—not to obtain advanced degrees in ancient history, biblical studies, and other fields that may be useful in answering all the questions we may have about scriptures, history, and the Church. Our primary duty is to build up the Church, teach the doctrine of Christ, and help those in need of help.

(And thank you to Ben Spackman for providing the reference to that quote, which I’ve been trying to find for a while now.)

Now, some of you are probably thinking, “Sure, but what about when it’s the doctrine they get wrong?”

Unfortunately, that happens sometimes too. It’s more rare, but it happens. It happened to Peter, who thought that the Savior was going to lead a rebellion against the Romans and that Gentile converts needed to obey the Law of Moses. It happened to Jonah, who tried to call down the power of Heaven to destroy the people of Nineveh instead of acknowledging their repentance. It happened to Abraham, who nearly destroyed an entire city over a misunderstanding. It even happened to Joseph Smith, who wrote an op-ed for the Messenger and Advocate in 1836 saying that he believed the enslavement of the black race was decreed by Jehovah and that abolitionists were fighting against the design of God by trying to free them. (He later thankfully changed his mind.)

Some of the things our past leaders taught about black people and the Priesthood restriction were wrong. Some of them are offensive and difficult to read. That does not make them bad people, and it doesn’t mean they were not called of God. It just means they were wrong about this.

Critics will often point to the claim that Church leaders can never lead the Church astray as an argument against the idea that they aren’t perfect. They say that means the prophets and apostles can never make a mistake. But they’re misunderstanding the quote. “Leading the Church astray” is leading us into widespread apostasy to the point where we lose Priesthood authority. That didn’t happen in this case, and in fact, the Lord has promised that the Priesthood will never again be taken from the Earth.

Having said all of this, I’m going to jump on in because there are unfortunately a lot of these statements left to get through.

President George Albert Smith

“The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time … The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the pre‑mortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality.” (George Albert Smith, Statement by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on the Negro Question, August 17, 1949)

The document this quote comes from often gets labeled as an official First Presidency statement on the question of race and the Priesthood, but it’s not one. This wasn’t something that was read out over the pulpits and printed in official Church publications the way that other First Presidency statements are treated. So, I appreciate that Faulk didn’t label this as an official statement, the way so many other places do.

According to the B.H. Roberts Foundation, it’s actually part of a form letter that would sometimes get sent out in response to letters asking about the Priesthood restriction:

In regards to the 1949 statement, the First Presidency does not allow us to provide copies of their correspondence. However, we can confirm that the following text was used by the first Presidency in responses to inquiries about the priesthood restriction for several years beginning in 1949. The text was never issued publicly but, rather, was used as standard language in private correspondence.

FAIR has the full text of the statement:

August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.”

The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.

The First Presidency

The first thing I want to point out is that Wilford Woodruff’s statement here is actually taken from his notes on Brigham Young’s rather infamous speech given to the Utah territory legislature in 1852. It wasn’t even his comment to begin with.

The second thing I want to highlight is that there are two different ways to read this statement. You could read it the way that critics of the Church always frame it, that the First Presidency was saying that black people weren’t valiant in the pre-existence and their restriction from the Priesthood was a punishment for that.

Trying to use Brigham Young’s words to make that point is pretty disingenuous, however, since Young dismissed that idea outright:

No, they were not, there were no neutral [spirits] in Heaven at the time of the rebellion, all took sides. … All spirits are pure that came from the presence of God. The posterity of Cain are black because he committed murder. He killed Abel and God set a mark upon his posterity. But the spirits are pure that enter their tabernacles.

Obviously, we don’t believe that black skin is a mark of a spiritual curse today, but it was a common belief in Brigham’s day. The more important point is that he entirely rejected the idea that any of God’s children on Earth had been less-than-valiant in the pre-existence.

This is more than a little ironic, since Orson Pratt, the man many critics uphold as the racially progressive model the Church should have followed instead of Brigham Young, taught, “Among the two-thirds who remained [after the Devil was cast out], it is highly probable that there were many who were not valiant in the war [in Heaven], but whose sins were of such a nature that they could be forgiven.”

The other way of reading that First Presidency statement relies heavily on some of Brigham’s other thoughts. You see, he believed that when Cain murdered Abel, he deprived Abel of his posterity and “of extending his heavenly kingdom by multiplying upon the earth.” Brigham believed that those who had been meant to have been from Abel’s lineage had already been assigned to him. So, they would all have to be reassigned to other lineages, be born, and also receive their temple ordinances before any of Cain’s posterity would be able to receive theirs. Those descendants of Cain were aware of that decision in the premortal life, but that “rather than forsake him they were willing to bear his burdens and share the penalty imposed upon him,” and come to Earth even knowing it would mean they would have to wait to receive the Priesthood and temple ordinances. They wanted a body so badly, they were willing to accept whatever trials they had to in order to achieve that goal.

When that form letter talks about how everyone born into mortality had kept their first estate and how the privilege was so great, spirits made that choice regardless of what handicaps they would have to endure, it echoes Brigham’s beliefs that black people wanted the privilege of a body so badly, they were willing to wait for the blessings of the Priesthood in order to have it. This way of reading that letter actually says that they were so valiant that they were willing to endure extra hardships on Earth in order to receive all of the blessings available to them in Heaven after they received their bodies. That was the choice made in the pre-existence, not the choice to be neutral or less valiant than white members had been.

I obviously have never met any of the men in the 1949 First Presidency. I don’t know what prejudices they held or how they intended this letter to be read. All I can do is point out that there’s more than one way to look at it.

The B.H. Roberts foundation also has an extended version of this letter that seems to back up some of this:

Why the Negro was denied the Priesthood from the days of Adam to our day is not known. The few known facts about our pre-earth life and our entrance into mortality must be taken into account in any attempt at an explanation.

Not all intelligences reached the same degree of attainment in the pre-earth life.

And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all.

The Lord thy God sent his angel to deliver thee from the hands of the priest of Elkenah.

I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to deliver unto thee the works which my hands have made, wherein my wisdom excelleth them all, for I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen.

Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born….

And we will prove them herewith to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;

And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

Man will be punished for his own sins and not for Adam’s transgression. (2nd Article of Faith.) If this is carried further, it would imply that the Negro is punished or allotted to a certain position on this earth, not because of Cain’s transgression, but came to earth through the loins of Cain because of his failure to achieve other stature in the spirit world.
All spirits are born innocent into this world: Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God.
The negro was a follower of Jehovah in the pre-earth life. (There were no neutrals.)

To me, this all leans more toward the second interpretation of this statement than the one the critics love to assign to it. It’s still not a great or ideal explanation, and I’m not trying to claim that it is.

But this is the benefit of a church that believes in on-going revelation. We believe that if earlier prophets get something wrong, later prophets will eventually correct it. It’s exactly what happened when Wilford Woodruff had his famous revelation on the sealing ordinance, which restructured the way sealings had been done since before Joseph Smith was murdered. And it’s what has happened here with these upsetting racial teachings.

In the years since the 1978 revelation on the Priesthood, attitudes have shifted considerably and scholarship has grown in leaps and bounds. We know a lot more than we did back then, both in terms of personal progress and in the knowledge of our Church’s history.

The First Presidency in 1949 shared what they believed was true. It was their interpretation of the scriptures and their knowledge passed down from prior generations. We now know that their interpretation of those scriptures was incorrect. But it’s important to remember that when they shared that interpretation, it was done in ignorance, not malice.

President Joseph Fielding Smith

“That negro race, for instance, have been placed under restrictions because of their attitude in the world of spirits, few will doubt. It cannot be looked upon as just that they should be deprived of the power of the Priesthood without it being a punishment for some act, or acts, performed before they were born.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, 1940)

Putting this quote in more context, it says:

Man had his agency and because of it one-third of the hosts rebelled. We naturally conclude that others among the two-thirds did not show the loyalty to their Redeemer that they should. Their sin was not one that merited the extreme punishment which was inflicted on the devil and his angels. They were not denied the privilege of receiving the second estate, but were permitted to come to the earth-life with some restrictions placed upon them. That the negro race, for instance, have been placed under restrictions because of their attitude in the world of spirits, few will doubt. It cannot be looked upon as just that they should be deprived of the power of the Priesthood without it being a punishment for some act, or acts, performed before they were born. Yet, like all other spirits who come into this world, they come innocent before God so far as mortal existence is concerned, and here, under certain restrictions, they may work out their second estate. If they prove faithful in this estate, without doubt, our Eternal Father, who is just and true, will reward them accordingly and there will be in store for them some blessings of exaltation.

The full quote is equally as difficult to read as the edited version, and Joseph Fielding Smith contradicted not only Brigham Young but also his own father by giving this statement. I don’t know how or why he came to believe this idea.

This teaching in particular is incredibly offensive to me. I have friends whom I love very much who are of African-American ancestry, and the thought of anyone thinking this of them is deeply upsetting to me.

But he was born in 1876, in a very different time period than I was. He grew up with different attitudes and beliefs. And in fact, his views began to change toward the end of his life, and he actually softened somewhat on this issue.

“Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, 1940)

This portion was taken from a chapter that was sometimes removed from later editions of the book.

Putting it back in context doesn’t make it any easier to swallow, but it does show a slightly softer side of a man who could be very firm and unretractable:

…Moreover, they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginning. Enoch saw the people of Canaan, descendants of Cain, and he says, “and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.”

And it came to pass that Enoch continued to call upon all the people, save it were the people of Canaan, to repent.” (Moses 7:8, 12.) In just it should be said that there have been among the seed of Cain many who have been honorable and who have lived according to the best light they had in this second estate. Let us pray that the Lord may bless them with some blessings of exaltation, if not the fulness, for their integrity here.

It’s paternalistic, and he goes out of his way to call black people inferior more than once, but I also don’t think he was intentionally trying to be rude. I think he was trying to be kind, and it came out very badly.

However, I’m sure that later generations will think ours is pretty patronizing in some ways, too. So, again, I don’t agree with it, I’m not going to defend it, but I’m also not going to condemn him for saying it. That’s between him and our Father in Heaven.

Apostle Mark E. Peterson

“We must not inter-marry with the Negro. Why? If I were to marry a Negro woman and have children by her, my children would all be cursed as to the priesthood. Do I want my children cursed as to the priesthood? If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to inter-marriage with the Negro, is there? There are 50 million Negroes in the United States. If they were to achieve complete absorption with the white race, think what that would do.” (Elder Mark E. Peterson, Race Problems as They Affect the Church, address given at BYU, August 27, 1954. Marriott Library University of Utah, Mark E. Peterson Papers)

This quote and the next one are taken from the same talk, so I’ll address this below.

“In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant” (Elder Mark E. Peterson, lecture at BYU, 1954)

First, I do think it’s pretty dishonest to cite these as two different quotes from two different sources when they’re taken from the same talk. This was a talk given to BYU faculty at a teachers’ convention, not an official statement of doctrine during an event like General Conference.

Second, this talk is a very difficult one to read. I personally really struggled with it, I’m not going to lie. It was hard to read, and it was hard to understand the connections he was making between his different sources.

FAIR has a good take on it. I’m a little short on space so rather than quote from their article, I’ll just mention some of the highlights and encourage everyone to read the full thing.

Petersen based his claim on D&C 132:16:

Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

Basically, he meant that because at that time, black people weren’t able to be sealed in the temple, they’d have to live as ministering servants in the next life. This statement being directed at black people not only contradicts the entire purpose for work for the dead, but also contracts nearly every prophet from Joseph Smith onward. Those ministering angels are not determined by race, and work for the dead is not withheld from the righteous people who would have enjoyed temple blessings had they been able to access them during this life.

FAIR goes on to give multiple quotes refuting this idea, and points out that not everything said by an apostle is official doctrine.

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie

“Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them … Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man’s origin. It is the Lord’s doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of Spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pp.527-528)

Yeah, Elder McConkie said that. His teachings were based in large part on those of his father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith. I want to point out that Faulk omitted some portions that make these statements slightly less egregious:

The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them (Moses 7:8, 12, 22), although sometimes negroes search out the truth, join the Church, and become by righteous living, heirs of the celestial kingdom of heaven. President Brigham Young and others have taught that in the future eternity worthy and qualified negroes will receive the priesthood and every gospel blessing available to any man. (Way to Perfection, pp. 97-111.)

And, after the last sentence:

Certainly the negroes as children of God are entitled to equality before the law and to be treated with all the dignity and respect of any member of the human race. Many of them certainly life according to higher standards of decency and right in this life than do some of their brothers of other races, a situation that will cause judgment to be laid “to the line, and righteousness to the plummet” (Isa. 28:17) in the day of judgment.

He was trying to say that there were good, righteous black people who were more righteous than those of other races, and who had been led to the truth by God because they were willing to hear His voice and listen to His Spirit, and who would be blessed with all of the blessings of Heaven one day.

It wasn’t phrased well and the doctrine he outlined wasn’t accurate, but I actually have a lot of respect for Elder McConkie. As soon as he realized he was wrong, he publicly owned it. he admitted his error and became an early and fierce advocate of the 1978 Priesthood revelation. He spoke in favor of its passage when it came time for the general assembly to vote on it; he helped write the text of Official Declaration 2; and he was the one who encouraged the Brethren to release that declaration immediately rather than waiting until October’s General Conference, because he didn’t want to give Satan the chance to do anything to derail it.

President David O. McKay

“The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God … Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man’s mortal existence, extending back to man’s preexistent state.” (Pres. David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner. Letter of the First Presidency Clarifies Church’s Position on the Negro – Dec. 15, 1969, The Improvement Era, Feb. 1970, p.71)

This is a prime example of why it’s good to read the full document instead of just relying on a cherry-picked quote. This letter also says:

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. … 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 pray that all of the blessings of the gospel of Jesus Christ may in 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.

Targeting David O. McKay specifically on this subject is short-sighted and tells me that Faulk didn’t do anywhere near the level of research that he claimed to do. Either that, or he knows better but has no problem at all lying to his audience.

At one point, President McKay told Marion D. Hanks that he’d pleaded and pleaded with the Lord, but hadn’t received the answer he wanted. Elder Adam S. Bennion reported that McKay had prayed “without result and finally concluded the time was not yet ripe.” But he didn’t give up.

As reported by FAIR and also found in David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonismby Gregory Prince:

Sometime between 1968 and his death in 1970 he confided his prayerful attempts to church architect, Richard Jackson,**“I’ve inquired of the Lord repeatedly. The last time I did it was late last night. I was told, with no discussion, not to bring the subject up with the Lord again; that the time will come, but it will not be my time, and to leave the subject alone.”

He prayed and prayed to reverse the Priesthood restriction, only for the Lord to finally tell him to stop asking because it wasn’t going to happen under his tenure as leader of the Church. Regardless of what you believe or feel about the origins of the restriction, President McKay is not the one to attack for it. We know that some of the justifications he repeated for the restriction were not correct, but he tried as hard as he could to have that restriction lifted.

In closing, I just want to wrap up with some additional words from Elder McConkie’s famous talk, “All Are Alike Unto God”:

The gospel goes to various peoples and nations on a priority basis. … Not only is the gospel to go, on a priority basis and harmonious to a divine timetable, to one nation after another, but the whole history of God’s dealings with men on earth indicates that such has been the case in the past; it has been restricted and limited where many people are concerned. For instance, in the days between Moses and Christ, the gospel went to the house of Israel, almost exclusively. By the time of Jesus, the legal administrators and prophetic associates that he had were so fully indoctrinated with the concept of having the gospel go only to the house of Israel, that they were totally unable to envision the true significance of his proclamation that after the Resurrection they should then go to all the world. They did not go to the gentile nations initially. In his own ministration, Jesus preached only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and had so commanded the Apostles. … With some minor exceptions, the gospel in that day went exclusively to Israel. The Lord had to give Peter the vision and revelation…. The Lord commanded them that the gospel go to the Gentiles; and so it was. There was about a quarter of a century, then, in New Testament times, when there were extreme difficulties among the Saints. They were weighing and evaluating, struggling with the problem of whether the gospel was to go only to the house of Israel or whether it now went to all men. Could all men come to him on an equal basis with the seed of Abraham?

There have been these problems, and the Lord has permitted them to arise. There isn’t any question about that. We do not envision the whole reason and purpose behind all of it; we can only suppose and reason that it is on the basis of our premortal devotion and faith.… We have revelations that tell us that the gospel is to go to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people before the Second Coming of the Son of Man. And we have revelations which recite that when the Lord comes he will find those who speak every tongue and are members of every nation and kindred, who will be kings and priests, who will live and reign on earth with him a thousand years. That means, as you know, that people from all nations will have the blessings of the house of the Lord before the Second Coming.

We have read these passages and their associated passages for many years. We have seen what the words say and have said to ourselves, “Yes, it says that, but we must read out of it the taking of the gospel and the blessings of the temple to the Negro people, because they are denied certain things.” There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren which we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, “You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?” And all I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet.Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.

We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter anymore.

It doesn’t make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year, 1978. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them.We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the Gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the Gentiles.

He’s absolutely right. Those comments from the past, as difficult as they can be to read and accept, simply don’t matter in a Church that believes in ongoing revelation. That’s the key that we need to hold on to. It’s the entire reason we have prophets and apostles in the first place.

And, despite the occasional errors that can pop up in the statements by those prophets and apostles, we are better for having them. They are a blessing to every one of us. I am so grateful to my Father in Heaven for sending us these men who willingly spend hours on their knees, pleading and pleading with Him to grant the changes that would make our lives better.

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 no exception to that. I’ll be discussing quotes, attitudes, and beliefs that I personally find appalling.

But like I always say, history is messy. Expecting it to be easy is naïve.

There are two things that are absolutely imperative to understand when we’re talking about these things.

The first is that when these quotes were made and these theories were tossed around, society was verydifferent than it is today. Racial attitudes, customs, beliefs, and even widely accepted science are almost completely unrecognizable to our attitudes and beliefs today. You cannot view the past through today’s lens if you want to understand why people said what they said and thought what they thought. Judging the past by today’s standards is a logical fallacy known as “presentism.”

If you’re making a comparison to show how much things have changed, that’s one thing. It’s quite another, however, to look at the people of the past and think we’re smarter, more enlightened, better human beings than they were. Every time period and society throughout the history of the world has its flaws, including ours today.

The second thing we need to understand is that these attitudes, quotes, and beliefs do not define these people that we’ll be discussing. Heavenly Father uses imperfect people to achieve His goals, and He loves us and honors our devotion to Him regardless of those flaws. Some of these men were highly favored of God—not for holding these beliefs, but because those beliefs were one small aspect of who they were. Their other attributes made up for their flaws in God’s eyes. Some of them saw the Savior face to face. Some heard His voice speaking to them out of Heaven. Some saw other divine messengers. Some had incredible visions.

This doesn’t mean that God approved of their racism. It just means that God understands that we’re not perfect, and He accepts our offerings anyway.

Like Elder Holland once taught:

[B]e kind regarding human frailty—your own as well as that of those who serve with you in a Church led by volunteer, mortal men and women. Except in the case of His only perfect Begotten Son, imperfect people are all God has ever had to work with. That must be terribly frustrating to Him, but He deals with it. So should we. And when you see imperfection, remember that the limitation is notin the divinity of the work.

Our prophets and apostles are not perfect. They’re flawed human beings just like we are, and sometimes, they make mistakes. But here’s why that’s a good thing: it means that we don’t have to be perfect to serve God and to be acceptable to Him, either.

This is a hard topic without a clear-cut answer. Some people will come to one conclusion, and others will come to an entirely different conclusion. We’re all going to have different perspectives and opinions on this kind of thing. That’s perfectly okay. In the absence of clear revelation or documented fact, it’s fine if we disagree on our ultimate conclusions.

The LFMW starts off this section with multiple quotes from past leaders, so we’ll go through them in context one at a time. I’m just going to start at the top and go through as many as I can this week. Before I do, I just want to make one thing clear: I do not agree with any of these statements or the attitudes behind them. I don’t condone them, and I grapple with how men who were called of God could hold these beliefs about other children of God. All I’m trying to do is to put them in context of the times in which they were said, and in the talks or books themselves.

For over 150 years the Church has taught and sustained racially prejudiced doctrines while attributing these actions to the will of God.

This is only partially true. The famous Priesthood revelation was given 45 years ago as of June 9th. The Priesthood restriction was in place from 1852 to 1978, a total of 126 years. As anyone with basic math skills can point out, that is not “over 150 years.”

Moreover, while different theories and speculations as to the reason behind the restriction were taught and shared by various members, including many of the church leadership, it was only doctrine in the sense that it was something some people publicly taught. Official doctrine, by definition, is the codification of a set of beliefs by a church, religion, or branch of knowledge. The reasons behind the restriction were never officially codified or canonized by the Church. Some leaders were fond of presenting their opinion as fact, but it was also acknowledged that no one knew for sure what the reason was.

It was attributed to the will of God because they truly believed it was the will of God. And we don’t actually have anything from God saying otherwise.

These teachings include a ban on black members from holding the priesthood and participating in the temple, and went as far as preaching death as a consequence for inter-race marriage.

Just to be clear, even when Utah was not yet a state and Brigham Young had basically full control over the territory, and even though there were interracial couples in the territory at the time in violation of the law, no one has ever been put to death by the government in Utah/Deseret territories for being in an interracial marriage. There are tragically three lynchings of black men in Utah’s history, and one of those, Thomas Coleman, was murdered over his relationship with a white woman. The exact nature of their relationship varies according to the source, from friendliness to courtship. The other two men, Robert Marshall and William “Sam Joe” Harvey, were killed by mobs after they each killed a white man—though, in Marshall’s case, it’s not definitive that he committed the murder for which he was hanged. None of these horrifying events were condoned by Church leaders.

Recently, the Church has tried to clean up this part of its image by disavowing these past teachings.

That’s one rather cynical way to look at it. You could also look at it as the Church trying to ensure that all of its members know definitively that those old theories are not true and that they are not to be shared as being accurate explanations for the restriction.

Racist Teachings
President Brigham Young

“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.10, p.110)

This particular paragraph of the Journal of Discourses gets quoted out of context quite often. We do not have the original transcript of this talk, so everything said in this paragraph needs to be looked at with some degree of skepticism.

The reporters for the Journal of Discourses took shorthand, word-for-word transcripts of the sermons in question as they were being given. Then, they were translated from shorthand script into English. During that conversion process, they were edited by the reporters. Those edits ranged from minor grammatical corrections of a few words here and there to large passages that were either omitted or added by the reporters. They’d freely write their own thoughts into the sermons and put things into their own words, disregarding what the original speakers actually said.

Some of the sermons in the JoD contain significant departures from the original spoken text, and the speakers were often not given the opportunity to approve the talks before they were published. This agitated the speakers. In fact, according to the article linked in the above paragraph, on one notable occasion Heber C. Kimball actually called out the reporters from the pulpit during his sermon and forbade them from altering a single word of his talk.

We only have the original shorthand transcripts for a small number of those sermons, and they can be found online at the Church History Catalog in the section titled Parallel Column Comparisons. At the upcoming FAIR Conference this August, the only person in the world currently able to read George Watt’s personal shorthand style, LaJean Purcell Carruth, will be discussing all of this. George Watt was the main reporter for and the person behind the creation and publication of the Journal of Discourses.

The Church’s website also contains a 3-part series of articles discussing all of this at length, called “Preached vs Published: Shorthand Record Discrepancies.” You can find those articles here:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

This information has only come to light in the past few years, but we often only have the gist of any particular talk. The exact wording is often quite different. Carruth and her team did not find any talks that were unaltered, but the degree of difference varied by the talk.

So, unless we have the original shorthand transcript for a particular talk recorded in the JoD, we can’t know for certain how much was altered and how much was intact. The subject of the sermon and the basic premise of each talk is accurate, but the exact words used are often anyone’s guess. We simply cannot treat any of those talks as definitively accurate.

Because we don’t have the original transcript of this talk, we have no idea if Brigham Young said this or not. He certainly gave a sermon where he discussed this topic toward the end, but we don’t know if these were Brigham Young’s words or George Watt’s words. Brigham said other similar things before that were sometimes seemingly literal and other times seemingly symbolic, but we can’t be positive that this particular quote came from him.

We also can’t be sure there wasn’t a whole lot of removed context that’d make that paragraph make more sense.

Particularly given the context in the transcript of this talk, this quote is somewhat confusing. It’s all about how the US Government was corrupt and while the Saints were loyal to the country, the government was not loyal to them in return. In this portion, he said that Congress should have passed laws governing the treatment of slaves and ensuring that they were treated humanely and not like animals. He also said in the very next paragraph after the cited quote that the white race would be cursed for their treatment of the black race unless they repented.

This weird contradiction in just a few paragraphs has led many people to look for other explanations. For example, W. John Walsh suggested that historical context gives quote this an entirely different meaning. He pointed out that when Brigham mentions “the chosen seed,” he’s talking about Priesthood holders who have joined the covenant of Abraham. Because interracial marriage was illegal in Utah after 1852, when Brigham gave this speech in 1863, white Priesthood holders could not marry black women. So, this hypothetical relationship would either have been fornication or adultery, which obviously are both serious sins that have strict penalties under the laws of God. President Spencer W. Kimball once taught, “Marriage gives life. Fornication leads to death.” He was talking about the spiritual death that comes from unrepentant sin. Maybe that’s what Brigham Young was talking about too, especially considering that in some areas of the country, as Walsh points out, unmarried white men were urged to satisfy their hormones with black women so as to protect the white women from being defiled or subject to unwed motherhood. In those parts of the country, they didn’t consider that as being wrong or sinful. So, Walsh believes that Brigham was teaching that white Priesthood holders shouldn’t be using black women for premarital or extramarital sex, because it was still a sin even if, in other parts of the world, they considered black women to be something less than human.

He isn’t the only one to have made that suggestion, and maybe he’s right and maybe he’s wrong. I’m not advocating one way or the other because I genuinely don’t know. I know that the sermon in question is contradictory and confusing if taken to mean interracial marriage, but Brigham was also vehemently against interracial marriage and he was known to make other contradictory and confusing statements. So, until we can discover the exact wording of the sermon, and until Brigham can explain himself on this particular quote, I will just say to take it all with a grain of salt. Look at the JoD critically, but also look at Walsh’s interpretation critically.

“How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam’s children are brought up to that favourable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, p.290)

This quote and the one two down from here are literally from the same paragraph of this sermon. The talk is about how mankind was blessed with light and intelligence from God, and that people can either rise above their station as they learn more and become more enlightened, or sink below it as they succumb to the natural man. In context, this quote says:

The whole object of the creation of this world is to exalt the intelligences that are placed upon it, that they may live, endure, and increase for ever and ever. We are not here to quarrel and contend about the things of this world, but we are here to subdue and beautify it. Let every man and woman worship their God with all their heart. Let them pay their devotions and sacrifices to him, the Supreme, and the Author of their existence. Do all the good you can to your fellow-creatures. You are flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone. God has created of one blood all the nations and kingdoms of men that dwell upon all the face of the earth: black, white, copper-coloured, or whatever their colour, customs, or religion, they have all sprung from the same origin; the blood of all is from the same element. Adam and Eve are the parents of all pertaining to the flesh, and I would not say that they are not also the parents of our spirits.

You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, un-comely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race—that they should be the “servant of servants;” and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree. How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam’s children are brought up to that favourable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed. When the residue of the family of Adam come up and receive their blessings, then the curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will receive blessings in like proportion.

Now, this is one where we do have the original transcript, and it’s significantly different throughout most of the talk. Large chunks were removed and rewritten. This portion is mostly intact, but still not identical, and I’m copying it over without punctuation just as it appears on the website:

…the whole object of the creation of the world is to exalt it to live forever and forever not to come into this world and quarrel and contend about the things of this world subdue the earth beautify it let every man and woman worship God with all his heart pay his devotions and sacrifices to him the Supreme and Author of his existence do all the good he can to his brethren you are flesh of my flesh bone of my bone and God has created of one blood all the nations and kingdoms that dwell upon the face of the earth black or white copper colored spotted or whatever color or customs or religions and [illegible] our God has created all those nations of one blood the flesh from the same element the blood is from the same element the tabernacle from the same element their parents the same Adam was our father pertaining to the flesh I would not really get up an argument and say he was not the father of spirits too she Eve was the mother pertaining to the flesh and I would not say she was not pertaining to the spirit neither and all the human family sprang from this same character we are his offspring you see the countenance dark black uncouth uncomely disagreeable rude in their habits wild and deprived seemingly of all the blessings of intelligence bestowed on mankind we are taught they come from the first man that commits the odious crime of killing one of his brethren shall be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam Cain killed his brother you might have killed him and that would have stopped the whole [family?] but no I will put a mark on him it is the flat nose and black skin passed along down until you come through the ark with Noah and then another curse pronounced upon the same race and that they should be the servants of servants they will be and the abolitionists can’t help it neither now how long are they to be cursed this mark and curse will remain on them and they never can hold the keys of the priesthood or share in it until all the races of children and descendants of Adam have received the promised enjoyed the blessings of the priesthood and keys there of upon this earth until the last one of residue of Adam’s children are brought up in favorable condition before the children of Cain can receive the first ordinances of priesthood they was the first that was cursed and they will be the last ones the curse be removed from I am tiring myself very materially…

So, obviously, Brigham’s beliefs differ quite a bit from ours on this topic. He was raised a Protestant, and he held onto some pretty Protestant ideas even after his conversion. One of the very common beliefs of the first half of the 19th Century was that black people were the descendants of Cain and were cursed because he was cursed. Others believed the same about the curse of Ham, and Brigham was known to have combined the two on more than one occasion, as he did here. This is one of those racist theories our current leadership has disavowed.

Brigham was not the only early leader of ours to espouse these ideas. Many of them did, including Joseph Smith in 1836. Today, we have a different understanding of generational curses in the scriptures than they did in the early days of the Church.

Their interpretations were colored by the society in which they lived, just as ours are. That can be a hard thing for some of us to accept and understand. But everyone thinks their interpretations of the scriptures are correct. The key is recognizing that and being willing to change your interpretations as you gain more knowledge.

“You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, pp.282-291)

I switched this quote with the one below because it’s dealing with the same paragraph of the same talk as the one we just covered. I already quoted this sentence in context from both the JoD and from the original transcript.

What I wanted to highlight was the wording of the original transcript. While he was talking about black people being cursed according to his understanding of the scriptures, he wasn’t talking about all black people being “uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of…intelligence.”

He was describing the impression you get when you look at certain people. The original wording was describing those people who have a “dark black” countenance. “Countenance,” especially as used in the scriptures, is someone’s facial expression or the way God watches over His children. It can also mean a person’s bearing: the way they hold themselves, the way they move, the air they give off.

If someone has a dark countenance, the expression usually doesn’t refer to that person’s skin color. It means someone who is angry or upset or even, in some circumstances, evil. It’s like having a dark aura. Brigham seemed to be talking about people who didn’t have the gospel, who needed the light of Christ to elevate them.

Remember, the point of the talk was that human beings could improve themselves and gain further light and knowledge in this lifetime. He was talking about rising up from a lower station in life to a higher one, through the light of the gospel. He also specifically brought up black people in the context of saying that someday, their curse would be reversed and they would be given the ability to improve their station, too. But, he said, that opportunity had to come from God at the right time, and wasn’t something that he or the abolitionists or any other human being could do.

At least, that’s the impression that I get when I read his full talk. Other people might disagree, and that’s okay. I’m not denying that Brigham Young held racist beliefs. So did Joseph Smith, so did Orson Pratt, and so did every other person living in the 1800s compared to today. Our society has changed. It doesn’t make them bad people. It just means they’re flawed human beings like the rest of us. And sometimes, they got things wrong.

“You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborigines of this country are dark, loathsome, ignorant, and sunken into the depths of degradation …When the Lord has a people, he makes covenants with them and gives unto them promises: then, if they transgress his law, change his ordinances, and break his covenants he has made with them, he will put a mark upon them, as in the case of the Lamanites and other portions of the house of Israel; but by‑and‑by they will become a white and delightsome people. (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, pp.335-338)

I’m not sure why this quote is in here when it’s not talking about black people, but okay, sure, let’s address it.

This talk has a very similar theme to the last one, improving yourself and increasing your knowledge through the light of Christ and your devotion to the gospel. This similarity in themes is not surprising, considering it was given the day before the prior talk was at the same General Conference. Unfortunately, we do not have the original transcript of this talk.

Since the quote is edited, I’ll post the entire paragraph here:

You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborigines of this country are dark, loathsome, ignorant, and sunken into the depths of degradation; and they cannot tell. I can tell you in a few words: They are the seed of Joseph, and belong to the household of God; and he will afflict them in this world, and save every one of them hereafter, even though they previously go into hell. When the Lord has a people, he makes covenants with them and gives unto them promises: then, if they transgress his law, change his ordinances, and break the covenants he has made with them, he will put a mark upon them, as in the case of the Lamanites and other portions of the house of Israel; but by-and-by they will become a white and delightsome people.

Here, Brigham was talking about Native Americans and how they were in a lower station in life compared to white Americans. It was common belief among the early Saints that all Native Americans were believed to be the descendants of the Lamanites, and were cursed by God for the destruction of the Nephites according to the prophecies of the Book of Mormon. He used the words “white” and “dark” in the context of “good” and “bad.”

However, there’s no denying there was a racial component to this, and the attitude is gross and off-putting to modern sensibilities. I’m not going to defend this statement, but I’m also not going to get too worked up over it. A man from the 1800s held racist beliefs. That’s not a shock to me. Everyone in the 1800s held racist beliefs.

Brigham Young taught some profound things in his lifetime, and he did a lot of great things. I have no doubt that he was exactly who the Lord needed to move the Saints to the Rocky Mountains and keep the Church together and thriving over the next half a century. There’s a lot about the man worth admiring. However, assuming it’s accurate, this quote isn’t one of them.

No human being is ever going to live up to your expectations 100% of the time—yourself included. We are mortal, and we make mistakes. We disappoint each other all the time. We need to be able to cut each other some slack, or we’ll never make it through this life without our relationships surviving intact. Learning how to separate the good from the bad is a skill and it takes practice to learn.

And you know what? It works the same way with our church leaders, too. We can’t hold them to standards we aren’t willing to hold ourselves to. They’re fallen and mortal, just like we are.

The only ones who are not going to let us down in this life are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They won’t, because They’re perfect.

Expecting that perfection from other human beings is an exercise in futility. We’re flawed. When God calls us to do His work here on Earth, He doesn’t magically erase those flaws. He expects us to serve Him despite those flaws. And like Elder Holland said above, those flaws are in us. They’re not flaws in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

So, as we read over all of these quotes and the ones we’ll go through next time, just remember: if God only called perfect people, the only one He’d have ever called is His Son. If we want to be forgiven for our flaws at the Judgment Bar, we need to be willing to forgive the flaws of others.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 20: The Early Church – Blacks and the Church [A] appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

Evangelical Questions: Baptism for the Dead 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 baptism for the dead. As you know we’re going through the Come Follow Me readings and addressing common […]

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Matthew 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20–21 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

Plural marriage is one of the top two or three most controversial things about our church’s history. It’s something that most people have strong feelings about. There doesn’t seem to be much middle ground, and it’s been a divisive doctrine right from the very beginning.

It’s probably what we’re most known for, and is definitely what we’re most mocked over. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been watching a show or movie, only to have a random “joke” tossed out about “the Mormons” and polygamy.

Personally, I know a great many people who are disturbed or embarrassed by this part of our history. I’m sure you all do, too. Some people really, really struggle with this doctrine. It’s one I personally developed a testimony of about ten years ago, but I had very conflicted feelings over it before then. It’s still not something I’d be happy to live and I’m incredibly grateful that I live in a time when I don’t have to, at least in this lifetime. I do firmly believe that it did come from God, but it’s complicated and messy. I can’t give anyone a testimony or make anyone believe the way I do. Everyone needs to resolve that question for themselves.

What I can do is help clarify some of the history and some of the doctrinal reasons that were given for its implementation. I can point you toward research done by people much smarter than I am. I can respond to Faulk’s claims with the same level of scrutiny I’ve given his other claims. And I can discuss this topic openly and honestly, the way I always try to, and not shy away from those messy, complicated aspects of the practice.

I’m biased—I’m telling you right up front that I believe this practice was instituted by God. Thomas Faulk is biased, too. He believes it wasn’t instituted by God. But you shouldn’t take either of us at our word. Put in the work and do the research, and most importantly, pray to Heavenly Father. Tell Him how you feel about it, and ask Him for guidance, understanding, and clarification. It’s what I did, and it’s the best advice I can give: develop your own testimony. Don’t rely on mine or your spouse’s or your parents’, or anyone else’s for that matter. Obtain your own, and maintain and grow it over time. Let the Holy Ghost work on you. Let Him teach you. It’s why He’s there.

Another thing I want to say right off the bat is that many of my citations on this topic are going to come from the work of Brian Hales. He is perhaps the world’s leading authority on Joseph Smith’s personal practice of polygamy. I can’t think of any other scholar who would even be close except for Don Bradley, Brian’s frequent collaborator and research assistant. They are both very knowledgeable on this topic, far more so than any of the authors of these various “letters.”

Faulk introduces this topic like this:

What kind of motivations could a man have to wed many women?

There are many things that would motivate a man to marry multiple women. Joseph Smith did not leave a personal statement of his motivation, but his friends repeated his motivation multiple times: he believed it was a direct commandment from God. It was also referred to explicitly as a commandment in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Therefore, the question in this case is likely not what his motivation was. It should be whether or not you believe him when you hear his motivation.

As I said above, this is a question I took directly to Heavenly Father. I put aside my personal assumptions and I asked Him if it was a commandment from Him, and if it was, to open my mind and give me understanding and insight as to why it was a commandment. Because I did that, I can say that yes, I believe Joseph when I hear what his motivation was, according to those who knew him and the revelation he received.

The idea that he did it for reasons of lust isn’t borne out by the evidence. There isn’t any evidence of sexual relations in most of his unions, and the ones that do have evidence show that it happened rarely.

By some estimates Joseph Smith married up to 65 women from a growing group of people that intensely admired him and that he held great influence over.

There are two parts to this question, the number of Joseph’s wives and whether or not he coerced them.

The exact number of Joseph’s wives is unknown and varies depending on the source. Hales puts the number at 35, not 65. Wikipedia lists approximately 50 potential wives, drawing on the work of Todd Compton, George D. Smith, and Fawn Brodie. That list is unconfirmed and some names are purely speculative. I can’t find a single source but Faulk who puts it as high as 65. Most sources put in the 30-40 range.

Something to bear in mind here is that these were not all marriages as we consider them today. Many—more than half, according to the evidence—were sealings for the next life only. Sealings and marriages are not the same things, though we often perform them together in the temple today. In the Nauvoo period, there were three different types of unions: marriages or sealings for this life only; sealings for the next life only; and marriages for time and eternity, like those we conduct today.

Joseph engaged in at least two of these types of unions, time-and-eternity and eternity-only, so while they’re all referred to his as his “wives,” that term isn’t technically accurate. Many were only sealings for the next life, with little-to-no contact in this life. They didn’t live as a married couple, there were no sexual relations, and they were rarely ever alone together in any capacity. And after Joseph’s death, several of the Apostles married Joseph’s wives for time-only. We’ll surely dive into all of this in more detail later in this section.

One prominent accusation of critics is that Joseph used his influence to coerce women into marrying him. There were two or three accusations of that at the time by women who were close to John C. Bennett and William Law, but none that hold up very well under scrutiny.

He also declined the opportunity to marry additional wives, which he likely wouldn’t have done if his behavior was predatory in any way.

Reports by the vast majority of those whom Joseph proposed plural marriage to suggest that he was very cautious about it, often using an intermediary. These were not passionate declarations of love or lust; at least on a few occasions, they were described as businesslike, contractual obligations.

Most importantly, several women turned him down without any reprisals or consequences, and he actively encouraged all of the women involved to pray for their own testimonies of the practice before answering him. The women were always to have a choice in the matter.

Even more interestingly, multiple women described intense spiritual experiences in response, from visions of the Celestial Kingdom to being surrounded by halos of light to divine messengers confirming the commandment from God.

For unspecified reasons his polygamy is never addressed in the Church education system, yet when studied in detail, problems appear concerning the timeline that Joseph began this practice, the secretive nature with subsequent denial, and the types of women married.

Is Faulk legitimately claiming that between four years of Seminary, four years of Institute, attending the MTC, and going through at least 22 years of Sunday School before graduating college, he never once was taught that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy? I find that incredibly difficult to believe. Maybe he just wasn’t paying very close attention in class or something, I don’t know, or maybe I’m just being judgmental. But I honestly don’t understand how someone can study the Doctrine and Covenants and read Section 132 without coming to the realization that the prophet who restored plural marriage also practiced it himself.

Plural marriage was deemphasized for a few decades in the 20th Century after the practice was ended, but it was never hidden information. The reason for this minimization was almost assuredly to further separate our church from that of the fundamentalist sects who still continue the practice. But even with that, it was still widely available information.

I’ve told this story before, but we moved into the house where I spent most of my youth when I was seven years old. That’s the ward I was baptized in. Before we moved there, I had a friend who lived up the block from me who was the daughter of a polygamist family. When I learned that her father had three wives, I thought it was kind of weird, but not that weird, because I’d already been taught in Primary that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both had more than one wife. I didn’t know any of the details yet by that point, but I’d been taught even at that young age, prior to baptism, that it happened. And that wasn’t the only time I was taught about it in a Church setting. I learned more in Sunday School as I grew older, and more still in Seminary and Institute.

And growing up in Utah, it’s common to meet those who had ancestors who were married to Joseph Smith. I had a friend in middle school who was a descendant of Edward Partridge and was named Emily. It was impossible to be friends with her and not know that she was named after her distant relative who was one of Joseph’s plural wives.

I know that not everyone had those same experiences, and I do sympathize with those who learned the information later in life and were shocked by it. But I don’t understand how someone can grow up in the Church and serve a mission or watch tv and movies and never once hear that Joseph Smith had multiple wives. I don’t understand how people could be aware of the exodus from Nauvoo across the plains, or learn of the martyrdom, without knowing that plural marriage was a catalyst for all of it. I’m not saying that to berate or belittle anyone who didn’t know about it, but I just genuinely don’t understand how they didn’t know. I’m always surprised and confused when I hear that from someone who didn’t convert to the Church later in life.

Many of those same people are equally shocked when they hear I learned it so young. In fact, a friend of mine has insinuated that my memories are false and that I gaslit myself into believing that I learned it before adulthood. But that same friend also can’t explain why I was comfortable with my friend’s polygamist family without having a basis for that, or how I knew about my friend Emily’s ancestry.

The point is, we all have different experiences in this Church, and trying to make your experience apply universally just doesn’t work. That’s something the authors of these different “letters” do, claim that their experiences are the exact same experiences everyone has in the Church. But that’s just not true. Their experiences aren’t universal, and their conclusions don’t have to be, either.

As far as the “problems” that Faulk describes, he’ll go into more detail as we go along, so I’ll address them as they come up.

Timeline

An issue arises when we compare the date of the revelation to begin polygamy and the dates of Joseph’s marriages.

This “issue” is pretty easily explained by the actual history of the revelation. The date when it was written down was not the date when it was first received. Joseph apparently received at least a portion of the revelation back as early as 1831 while working on the JST. Then, subsequent portions as it related to the Temple Endowment and celestial marriage may have come over the next few years, or it all may have been given at once. The full timeline is murky, but the evidence does show that at least part of it was received in 1831. It wasn’t recorded yet presumably because of its controversial nature and because the time had not yet come when the Saints were commanded to live by its doctrine.

The story goes that, in 1843 when Emma was struggling so badly with the doctrine, Hyrum went to his brother and requested a written copy of the revelation so he could take it to her and try to help her understand and accept it. Joseph apparently warned him that it was a bad idea, but agreed to let him try, and dictated it to William Clayton. Hyrum’s meeting with Emma did not go well, to put it mildly, and Hyrum apparently told them later that “he had never received a more severe talking to in his life.”

So, that’s why it was ultimately written down, but it was received well before then.

Doctrine and Covenants, (Heading) Section 132

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant and the principle of plural marriage. (The Church has recently amended this heading to include, “evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831.” What they fail to clarify is that the 1831 revelation shows that Joseph instructed some elders to “take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome” (Letter from W.W. Phelps to Brigham Young, August 12, 1861, Joseph Smith Collection, LDS Church Historians Office.)

This is conflating two different things, and one of them is not confirmed. It’s true that the section heading for 132 does agree that at least some of it was received in 1831. However, it is somewhat disingenuous to claim that the Church has “recently amended this heading to include, ‘evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831.’” The way it’s worded, it implies that the Church only recently added the information about it being known as early as 1831.

You see, as Reddit user WooperSlim pointed out, in the 1981 edition—when the section headings were standardized—it originally said, “it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.” All they did was clarify that it was some of the principles, and update some of the phrasing.

And, as I said earlier, some elements of the revelation may have come later.

There is no existing copy of any revelation on marriage given in 1831, though. There are two secondhand reports that there was some kind of revelation given that recommended marriage to the “Lamanites,” but they conflict on the details. More importantly, neither record purports it to be the same revelation as the celestial marriage covenant given in D&C 132.

The first record was a letter from Ezra Booth, a former member of the Church who had apostatized and turned critical of Joseph. This letter was printed in the Ohio Star on October 27, 1831, and claimed that Joseph was encouraging members of the Church to divorce their wives and marry Native American women instead. This was apparently so that the Church members could take up residence in what was then called Indian territory and proselytize that way.

The second record is the one mentioned by Faulk above, a letter from W.W. Phelps written on August 12, 1861, thirty years after the fact, in which he quotes the supposed revelation. It’s unknown what source he was working off when composing the letter, because if it was memory alone, it’s highly suspect because of how detailed it is. In that letter, Phelps tells Brigham Young that Joseph gave a revelation saying that some of the missionaries to the Indian territory should marry Native American wives. Phelps added that when he asked Joseph about that, since they were all already married, his response was that they should have more than one wife like Abraham did.

We have no way of knowing whether that report is accurate or not. That there were two people who claimed to know about it, even if the details differ, points to something of the sort being said. But Booth was not one of those missionaries who were supposedly given the revelation, so it would appear that he was just passing along information that he heard from someone else.

And it’s unknown whether Phelps was recreating it from memory 30 years later, or if he was working off of notes taken around the time, or a copy of the revelation, or what. By that point, he’d spent 30 years justifying and defending plural marriage, so it’s entirely possible his memories altered over time. He admitted right in the letter that nobody in the company at the time had paper or pen or ink to write with, so whatever notes he would have made would have been from several days later—or more—after the revelation was supposedly given.

None of the other missionaries ever mentioned it, so we can’t even say that this revelation was ever even given, let alone that it said anything about plural marriage. The certainty with which Faulk makes his declaration is just not warranted by the evidence.

In 1833 Fanny Alger became Joseph’s first marriage after Emma – ten years before the official revelation. At the time, Fanny was living in the Smith home, helping Emma with housework and the children.

This isn’t quite accurate. We don’t know much about Fanny Alger’s relationship with Joseph Smith, but we know some things. She went to live with Joseph and Emma as a servant in the household in 1833, but best estimates of the actual marriage date puts it sometime in late 1835 or early 1836.

It was also not “ten years before the official revelation,” as we just covered. It was about eight years before the revelation was written down, but it was approximately four years after it was revealed to Joseph that the practice would be restored. According to Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, it was also at least a year after the angel with the drawn sword first commanded Joseph to start practicing it himself.

It is true, however, that Fanny was the first of Joseph’s plural wives.

A family friend, one of Brigham Young’s plural wives, recalls:

“Mrs. Smith had an adopted daughter, a very pretty, pleasing young girl, about seventeen years old. She was extremely fond of her; no mother could be more devoted, and their affection for each other was a constant object of remark, so absorbing and genuine did it seem. Consequently it was with a shocked surprise that the people heard that sister Emma had turned Fanny out of the house in the night…By degrees it became whispered about that Joseph’s love for his adopted daughter was by no means a paternal affection, and his wife discovering the fact, at once took measures to place the girl beyond his reach. Since Emma refused decidedly to allow her to remain in her house … my mother offered to take her until she could be sent to her relatives” (Ann Eliza Webb, Wife No. 19, 1875)

Again, there’s some distorted information in all of this. Ann Eliza Webb Young wasn’t even born until 1844, well after Fanny had moved away. Categorizing Ann Eliza as a family friend of Fanny’s is a gross inaccuracy. They never even met one another.

Fanny stayed with the Webb family for a few months after moving out of the Smith home, but that was in 1836. You could possibly consider Fanny a family friend of Ann Eliza’s parents, but there’s not much evidence they kept in touch after she left town. Besides, that isn’t the claim that Faulk made.

Beyond that, listing Ann Eliza as a plural wife of Brigham Young without giving the rest of the details is seriously sketchy. She divorced Brigham after four years, sold off a bunch of his possessions from the house he set up for her, got herself excommunicated for apostasy, and then went on the lecture circuit telling wild, untrue stories about her time in the Church. She also wrote an autobiography that was later proven to be more fiction than fact, and no credible historian should take her word seriously without doing a lot of fact-checking. I won’t get into her personal life other than that, but she had a lengthy history of dishonesty, and using her as an unironic source tells me a lot about Faulk’s level of research.

Oliver Cowdery also addresses this situation when he noted his extreme displeasure regarding Joseph’s conduct with Fanny Alger while married to Emma. In a letter to his brother, Warren A. Cowdery, Oliver wrote:

“We had some conversation in which in every instance I did not fail to affirm that what I had said was strictly true. A dirty, nasty, filthy affair of his and Fanny Alger’s was talked over in which I strictly declared that I had never deserted from the truth in that matter and as I supposed was admitted by himself.” (Oliver Cowdery, Far West, Missouri, January 21, 1839)

There’s been some interesting research done on this letter. First of all, we don’t have a copy of the actual letter. Back in the 1800s, it was common for people to have what they called letter books. They would copy their letters into them before they send them, so they’d have a full record of the correspondence. The copy of this letter is from Oliver’s letter book, which was maintained by his nephew.

Second, we need to focus on the word “affair.” According to the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary, it wasn’t referring to a romantic or adulterous affair. It was using the other meanings of the word: “business” that was conducted, “matters,” or “concerns.”

But more importantly, Oliver didn’t even use that word. His nephew did. The word “affair” was written over the top of another word that had been crossed out. That word was “scrape,” which is “a low word” meaning a “difficulty” or “perplexity.” It being a low word meant that it was kind of a crass term, not something that people used in polite society. Because it wasn’t a polite word, Oliver’s nephew apparently felt it would reflect badly on Oliver for using it, so he edited it while copying it into the letter book.

Essentially, Oliver was referring to “a dirty, nasty, filthy situation,” something he didn’t approve of but not something he was willing to call adultery.

This is important because Oliver despised the entire idea of plural marriage. He did not believe it came from God, and he believed that Joseph was a fallen prophet for discussing it. It’s the main reason for the deterioration of his friendship with Joseph and for his excommunication. Only two years before rejoining the church and four years before his death, he wrote a letter in which he called the practice “an abomination.” That position likely didn’t change before he died. He viewed the practice as sinful and wrong.

Even with Oliver’s important role in the formation of the Church, Joseph could not allow his affairs to become public. The issue of polygamy divided Oliver and Joseph so wide that Joseph turned Oliver out of the Church after his unceasing disapproval of the practice.

It appears that Faulk took the word “affair” at face value. Oliver was not excommunicated to silence him, and it was not the only reason for his excommunication. He was charged with a lengthy list of things that included writing counterfeit checks and defrauding members of the Church, something that hurt his feelings deeply. He maintained his innocence on those charges until the end, because he highly valued his reputation as an honest man. And the reason he valued it so highly was because he wanted people to believe his testimony of the Book of Mormon:

But from your last [letter], I am fully satisfied, that no unjust imputation will be suffered to remain upon my character. And that I may not be misunderstood, let me here say that I have only sought, and only asked, that my character might stand exonerated from those charges which imputed to me the crimes of theft, forgery, &c. Those which all my former associates knew to be false. I do not, I have never asked, to be excused, or exempted from an acknowledgement, of my actual fault or wrong—for of these there are many; which it always was my pleasure to confess. I have cherished a hope, and that one of my fondest, that I might leave such a character as those who might believe in my testimony, after I should be called hence, might do so, not only for the sake of the truth, but might not blush for the private character of the man who bore that testimony. I have been sensitive on this subject, I admit; but I ought to be so—you would be, under the circumstances, had you stood in the presence of John, with our departed brother Joseph, to receive the Lesser Priesthood—and in the presence of Peter, to receive the Greater, and looked down through time, and witnessed the effects these two must produce,—you would feel what you have never felt, were wicked men conspiring to lessen the effects of your testimony on man, after you should have gone to your long sought rest. But, enough, enough, on this.

That lengthy list of charges included insinuating that Joseph committed adultery, but that was far from the only thing on the list.

In a chapter of a book titled The Persistence of Polygamy, Don Bradley shared his thoughts on the matter. I agree wholeheartedly with his characterization of Oliver:

Even the vehement oral accusations and letter by Cowdery, for instance, fall short of stating that Smith’s behavior constituted adultery. In his trial, Cowdery was charged with “insinuating” that Smith’s relationship with Alger was adulterous, accused of this in the testimony, and convicted of making insinuations rather than assertions that Smith had committed adultery. Though said to have given his verbal answer with incongruous body language, he stated “no” when asked point blank if Smith’s confessions to him amounted to an admission of adultery. There is nothing to indicate that “adultery” was his term. This reluctance to use the term “adultery” seems out of line with his emphatic condemnation of Smith’s “dirty, nasty, filthy” behavior and his insistence that his reports had been “strictly true” and “never deserted from the truth of the matter.”

Because Cowdery was alienated from Joseph Smith at the time of his trial and was being expelled from the church, it is not likely that the best construction was being placed on his words and actions. And Cowdery was not in attendance at his trial, rendering him unable to defend himself from exaggeration and misunderstanding. The wrong he saw in Smith might thus have not been adultery, but polygamy.

Evidence coincident with Cowdery’s return to the church eight years later indicates his revulsion to polygamy and his incredulity that it would be allowed as a religious practice. For Cowdery, polygamy was a sexual sin in itself, and perhaps arguably constituted adultery. Such an uncertain definition on Cowdery’s part would account for his curious mix of vehemence against Smith’s “dirty, nasty, filthy” behavior on the one hand and reticence to directly call it “adultery” on the other.

Though Cowdery’s letter, with its talk of Smith’s “dirty, nasty, filthy affair,” would seem to explicitly identify the relationship as an extramarital affair, it does not. The letter stops short of an accusation of adultery….

It’s an important point that Oliver wasn’t there for his trial, so he couldn’t rebut what they were saying about him. The testimonies against him easily could have been exaggerated or misconstrued. However, it also seems quite clear that he believed polygamy was an immoral sexual sin, even if it may not have technically been adultery.

He was found guilty and excommunicated at this trial, by the way, after Joseph got up and explained the truth of the situation between him and Fanny. The minutes of the meeting state that he addressed “the girl business,” but they’re deliberately brief and vague. It does not say what he told them, just that he gave an explanation that satisfied them. According to Bradley, though, the scribe of those minutes later wrote a letter where he said that polygamy first came to light in 1838, the year of the trial. It seems pretty clear that Joseph told the High Council about being commanded to practice plural marriage at that time, and that they accepted his explanation even if they didn’t fully understand or believe it at that time.

Additionally, Fanny’s uncle Solomon Hancock was on that High Council. So, her own family believed Joseph’s explanation and found Oliver guilty of, among other things, wrongly insinuating that Joseph had an affair with Fanny.

Whether he actually implied that openly or not, Oliver saw polygamy as something immoral and filthy. He viewed it just like he viewed any sexual sin. He may have hesitated to call it adultery outright, but he certainly didn’t approve and didn’t seem to see much difference, though he acknowledged that Joseph did.

The main accusation flying around during the Kirtland days was not of polygamy, it was of adultery. Joseph repeatedly and strenuously denied that he was engaged in adultery, and that was the crux of his argument with Oliver on the subject. Oliver was hesitant to call Joseph a liar, but he wasn’t shy about saying that he believed what Joseph was doing was wrong. He did not believe that something like polygamy could ever come from God. Joseph was equally forceful in saying that it wasn’t wrong, it was a commandment from God, and it wasn’t adultery. Joseph’s denials from this time period were focused on this point: he was not an adulterer and did not appreciate being called one.

But Oliver was not “turned out of the Church” simply for that reason, and it was not done to silence him. Nothing could have stopped Oliver from saying whatever he wanted to after he was excommunicated, but he didn’t make any further accusations. Instead, he continually reaffirmed his testimony of the Book of Mormon and the miraculous things he’d witnessed. He and Joseph had forgiven one another and were headed for reconciliation when Joseph died. Most importantly, he was rebaptized and died strong in the faith.

Oliver’s story is an exemplification of the pride cycle and the redemptive power of the Atonement. It’s not the story of a whistleblower being silenced for daring to speak the truth.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 16: The Early Church – Polygamy [A] 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

General Conference starts tomorrow! 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 negative social media posts, etc.

Download FAIR’s General Conference workbook here!

We are going to end our countdown the same way we started, with a video from Jennifer Roach, this time about listening for your own revelation during General Conference:

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 1 Day! 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

I have deep respect for all of the Book of Mormon witnesses. The things they went through because of their testimonies are, in parts, both devastating and galvanizing. Putting their names onto those documents truly became a trial by fire. And, as is usually the case with lifelong trials, sometimes they rose to the occasion and sometimes they didn’t. That makes them relatable and human, but it also makes them inspiring examples that we can follow in our own difficult situations.

Over the past two years, I’ve learned something about standing by your testimony in the face of vicious opposition. Since I first started my CES Letter series, and especially since I put my real name and face to it, I’ve had people attack my intelligence, my character, my writing ability, and my appearance. I’ve had people call my testimony, sincerity, and integrity into question. I recently compiled a list of more than 60 personal insults directed at me on a fairly large LDS-related subreddit that still stand today, despite direct appeals to moderators that I consider friendly acquaintances. I’ve had Jeremy Runnells and John Dehlin sic their followers on me in attempts to flood my social media accounts with abuse. I’ve had people attempt to dox me and publish my private information. I’ve had people call me the vilest names you can think of. I’ve even had someone spit on me because I was willing to stand up for my testimony.

And my experiences are nothing compared to what the Witnesses had to endure for their testimonies.

We’re going to spend the next few weeks talking about those Witnesses and their experiences. The Letter For My Wife spends the next six pages on this topic, and though I haven’t read them in detail yet, I did skim over them in preparation for this post. From what I saw when I did, we’re in for quite a ride.

Faulk begins:

Losing confidence in the truthfulness of Joseph’s claims made me think of the witnesses to the plates and how their testimonies lend credibility to the entire narrative; however, research turns up issues of their own.

The Witnesses do lend credibility to Joseph’s account, that’s true. That isn’t their only purpose, but it’s a big one. I’m curious to see exactly what that “research” entails, though, because by now, Faulk has already given us numerous incorrect assertions as fact. Either he’s been blatantly lying, or his research up to this point has failed him.

These included the fact that no scribe ever saw the plates, the 3 and 8 witnesses only saw the plates with their spiritual eyes, the printed testimony did not reflect literal events, and nearly all the witnesses left the Church.

Okay, I guess we’re starting early on the inaccuracies. Everything in this sentence is incorrect. Several of the scribes eventually saw the plates in person; the Witnesses saw the plates with their actual eyes; the printed testimony absolutely reflected literal events; and only about half the witnesses fully left the Church, though none of them ever recanted their testimonies despite their disagreements with Joseph Smith. I’m sure we’ll delve into all of those points in more detail as we go on.

The Scribes

During the translation process, Joseph was either behind a curtain or the plates sat underneath a cloth in a box in another room. No scribe to the translation process (Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris or Emma Smith) was ever allowed to see the plates.

Um. So, at this point, I have to ask: does Faulk actually know who the Witnesses were? Because both Martin Harris and Oliver Cowdery did see the plates. It didn’t happen during the translation process, granted, but they did see them.

There were other scribes, as well. John Whitmer was another Witness who served as a scribe at some point during the translation and also saw the plates. According to Emma Smith, her brother Reuben Hale was another of the early scribes. Reuben was not one of the Witnesses. And according to Evidence Central, Samuel Smith and Christian Whitmer, both Witnesses, also served as scribes.

So, there are seven scribes that I’m aware of, and of those, five physically saw the plates at some point.

Emma only felt the plates through a cloth on the table.

This is true. According to her final testimony, however, she also never asked to see them:

Q. Are you sure that he [Joseph] had the plates at the time you were writing for him?

A. The plates often lay on the table without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen table cloth, which I had given him to fold them in. I once felt of the plates, as they thus lay on the table, tracing their outline and shape. They seemed to be pliable like thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb, as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book…

Q. I should suppose that you would have uncovered the plates and examined them?

A. I did not attempt to handle the plates, other than I have told you, nor uncover them to look at them. I was satisfied that it was the work of God, and therefore did not feel it to be necessary to do so.

Major Bidamon [Emma’s second husband] here suggested: Did Mr. Smith forbid your examining the plates?

A. I do not think he did. I knew that he had them, and was not specially curious about them. I moved them from place to place on the table, as it was necessary in doing my work.

In her own words, she knew he had them, but she wasn’t very curious and didn’t need to see them. I personally would have been dying to see them, but apparently, we are very different women!

It’s interesting to me that she doesn’t remember Joseph ever forbidding her from looking at them, though. According to her father, Isaac Hale, Joseph did forbid him from seeing them, and that’s why he wouldn’t allow the plates into his home:

Soon after this [Joseph and Emma moving to Harmony], I was informed they had brought a wonderful book of Plates down with them. I was shown a box in which it is said they were contained, which had, to all appearances, been used as a glass box of the common sized window glass. I was allowed to feel the weight of the box, and they gave me to understand that the book of plates was then in the box—into which, however, I was not allowed to look.

I inquired of Joseph Smith Jr., who was to be the first who would be allowed to see the Book of Plates? He said it was a young child. After this, I became dissatisfied, and informed him that if there was anything in my house of that description which I could not be allowed to see, he must take it away; if he did not, I was determined to see it. After that, the Plates were said to be hid in the woods.

As soon as they were able, Joseph and Emma moved out of Hale’s home and into a smaller cabin elsewhere on his property. This cabin is where they kept the plates and where most of the translation happened.

Emma’s statement is interesting for another reason. In the famous revelation given to her in which she’s called an elect lady, verse 4 says:

Murmurnot because of the thingswhich thou hast not seen, for they are withheldfrom thee and from the world, which is wisdom in me in a time to come.

I always assumed this was regarding the plates and her desire to see them. But maybe it was about something else entirely. It was a personal revelation given to her, and only she and the Lord can really know what was in her heart and mind during that time. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I’m more than happy to take Emma at her word. As strange as the idea is to me personally, maybe she honestly didn’t care whether she ever saw the plates or not. Different people have different wishes and desires.

Why wouldn’t Joseph want anybody to see the plates?

Because he was commanded not to show them to anyone who wasn’t authorized to see them. It wasn’t his decision. Joseph wasn’t shy about explaining that. It’s even in our scriptures:

Again, he [Moroni] told me, that when I got those plates of which he had spoken—for the time that they should be obtained was not yet fulfilled—I should not show them to any person; neither the breastplate with the Urim and Thummim; only to those to whom I should be commanded to show them; if I did I should be destroyed.

I mean, that’s a pretty good reason, don’t you think? If an angel of the Lord told me not to do something or else I’d be destroyed, I wouldn’t do it either.

Faulk then lists his sources for the information so far:

(By the Gift and Power of God, Elder Neal A. Maxwell January 1997 Ensign quoting David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness*, ed. Lyndon W. Cook, [1991], p173) and (Joseph Smith III, “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” pp289–90).*

I find these sources to be very curious. I’ve already linked to Emma’s testimony twice and quoted a portion of it. It conveniently answered the question he had about Emma not seeing the plates, but he neglected to quote from that part.

I don’t know if he didn’t actually read it and is pulling his words from a different source entirely, or if he’s deliberately misconstruing his actual sources. The third option is that he didn’t understand what his sources were saying. Personally, though, I think Faulk has shown that he’s smart enough to understand a simple Q&A without difficulty, which only leaves the other two options.

As for the other source listed, I’m a big fan of Elder Maxwell. Again, Faulk seems to be citing things he hasn’t fully read, or is deliberately lying about what he read. The part of the article where the David Whitmer interviews was cited gives further clarification on this point:

With regard to the physical circumstances of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his scribe, Martin Harris was quoted as saying there was a blanket or curtain hung between himself and Joseph during the translation process. If Martin is accurately quoted, perhaps this occurred when the Prophet was copying characters directly from the plates in the sample to be taken to Professor Charles Anthon, since the dates mentioned are several months before Martin Harris’s brief scribal duties began. I say this because although David Whitmer mentions a blanket being used—it was only to partition off the living area in order to keep both the translator and scribe from the eyes of visitors (see David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness, ed. Lyndon W. Cook, [1991], 173).

In fact, Elizabeth Anne Whitmer Cowdery, Oliver’s wife, said, “Joseph never had a curtain drawn between him and his scribe” (quoted in John W. Welch and Tim Rathbone, “The Translation of the Book of Mormon: Basic Historical Information,” F.A.R.M.S. report WRR–86, p. 25). Emma likewise said of her days as scribe, early on, that Joseph dictated “hour after hour with nothing between us” (“Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” 289).

Maxwell said specifically that there was nothing between Joseph and his scribes during the translation process, even if the plates were covered by a cloth. Faulk appears to take this to mean that the scribes never saw the places, which is demonstrably untrue for five of the seven listed above. One of the other two testified that she was not specifically forbidden from seeing them, though she never asked if she could.

So, that only leaves one of the seven scribes who definitely did not have the opportunity to see the plates uncovered. That is very different from Faulk’s claim that “no scribe ever saw the plates.”

The 3 Witnesses

The History of the Church records the event where Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery became the first witnesses to the gold plates after Joseph Smith. Joseph describes how the men gained their witness of the plates in a purely visionary setting.

Again, this statement is somewhat misleading, in more ways than one. For one thing, The History of the Church was written by scribes and compiled from multiple different sources. Those sources included dictation by Joseph, but also other documentation like letters, journal entries, meeting minutes, etc. It was written in Joseph’s voice as if he was the one speaking, but often, he wasn’t. This particular section probably was dictated and approved by Joseph, but it’s difficult to know that for certain.

As the Joseph Smith Papers Project explains:

JS dictated or supplied information for much of A-1 [this notebook], and he personally corrected the first forty-two pages before his death. As planned, his historian-scribes maintained the first-person, chronological narrative format initially established in the volume. When various third-person accounts were drawn upon, they were generally converted to the first person, as if JS were directly relating the account. After JS’s death, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, George A. Smith, and others modified and corrected the manuscript as they reviewed material before its eventual publication….

Aside from the material dictated or supplied by JS prior to his death, the texts for A-1 and for the history’s subsequent volumes were drawn from a variety of primary and secondary sources including JS’s diaries and letters, minutes of meetings, the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, church and other periodicals, reports of JS’s discourses, and the reminiscences and recollections of church members. … While it remains difficult to distinguish JS’s own contributions from composition of his historian-scribes, the narrative trenchantly captures the poignancy and intensity of his life while offering an enlightening account of the birth of the church he labored to establish.

So, just bear in mind, while the following quotation is probably from Joseph’s own words, there’s the possibility that it was taken from elsewhere and rewritten to sound like Joseph speaking. This is within the first 42 pages of the notebook, so he definitely approved it, but it’s unclear whether or not he actually said it.

The other and more important way that Faulk’s sentence is misleading is his characterization of the following account as being a “purely visionary setting.” That is not what any of the witnesses ever claimed. We’ll go into that in detail a bit later in this post, but this is not an honest claim by Faulk.

“Not many days after the above commandment was given, we four, viz., Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and myself, agreed to retire into the woods, and try to obtain, by fervent and humble prayer, the fulfilment of the promises given in the above revelation—that they should have a view of the plates. We accordingly made choice of a piece of woods convenient to Mr. Whitmer’s house, to which we retired, and having knelt down, we began to pray in much faith to Almighty God to bestow upon us a realization of these promises.

According to previous arrangement, I commenced by vocal prayer to our Heavenly Father, and was followed by each of the others in succession. We did not at the first trial, however, obtain any answer or manifestation of divine favor in our behalf. We again observed the same order of prayer, each calling on and praying fervently to God in rotation, but with the same result as before.

Upon this, our second failure, Martin Harris proposed that he should withdraw himself from us, believing, as he expressed himself, that his presence was the cause of our not obtaining what we wished for. He accordingly withdrew from us, and we knelt down again, and had not been many minutes engaged in prayer, when presently we beheld a light above us in the air, of exceeding brightness; and behold, an angel stood before us. In his hands he held the plates which we had been praying for these to have a view of. He turned over the leaves one by one, so that we could see them, and discern the engravings thereon distinctly. He then addressed himself to David Whitmer, and said, ‘David, blessed is the Lord, and he that keeps His commandments;’ when, immediately afterwards, we heard a voice from out of the bright light above us, saying, ‘These plates have been revealed by the power of God, and they have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct, and I command you to bear record of what you now see and hear.” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol.1, pp.54–55)

Nowhere in this quote does Joseph say this wasn’t a real experience, or that it was “purely visionary.” Look at the language he does use. He describes it as a literal, physical event that they both saw and heard.

Joseph Smith, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery saw an angel and the plates after Martin Harris withdrew from the group. Joseph goes on to tells how he, “…left David and Oliver and went in pursuit of Martin Harris, whom I found at a considerable distance fervently engaged in prayer.” Then they both joined in prayer, and according to Joseph, “the same vision was opened to our view.” Remember, the word “vision” means dream not reality.

No, the word “vision” does not always mean “dream.” It can mean that, but it can also mean a bunch of other things. According to the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary, in Joseph’s day it also meant, among other things, “the act of seeing external objects” or “actual sight.” It also has a definition that says, “In Scripture, a revelation from God; an appearance or exhibition of something supernaturally presented to the minds of the prophets, by which they were informed of future events.” Revelation can occur in your mind, as this particular definition says, but it can also occur in front of your eyes, as one of the other definitions says.

As the book of Ether explains, the things we see with the eye of faith are things we also see with our physical eyes:

And there were many whose faith was so exceedingly strong, even before Christ came, who could not be kept from within the veil, but truly saw with their eyes the things which they had beheld with an eye of faith, and they were glad.

When Christ appeared to Mary and His apostles after His death, or His appearances on the Mount of Transfiguration, or Joseph’s experience in the Sacred Grove, it was both a spiritual and a physical experience. Particularly in the case of Christ appearing to the Apostles, where they touched the nail wounds in His hands and thrust their hands into the spear wound on His side, it was not a dream. He was physically there in front of them.

However, in each of those experiences transfiguration was necessary. Moses explains:

But now mine own eyes have beheldGod; but not my natural, but my spiritual eyes, for my natural eyes could not have beheld; for I should have withered and died in his presence; but his glory was upon me; and I beheld his face, for I was transfigured before him.

By this definition, seeing something with your spiritual eyes doesn’t mean seeing it in a dream. It simply means being transfigured.

That it’s not an experience any of them can easily describe makes perfect sense to me. I doubt I’d have the vocabulary to explain what that truly feels like, either. Would you?

It is important to note that Joseph never claimed to have carried the plates into the woods where they prayed.

Faulk doesn’t quote anyone suggesting otherwise, so I’m not sure what the point of this statement is. We already knew Joseph didn’t carry the plates into the woods with him when he knelt with the Three Witnesses in prayer.

Praying to see the plates in the woods seems rather odd if Joseph actually possessed physical plates.

No, it doesn’t. One of the conditions of seeing the plates was that they had to demonstrate faith. What better way to do that than by praying?

Why was prayer necessary to see the plates if they were in fact, a physical object?

Joseph tells us exactly why in that same account quoted above:

Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and myself, agreed to retire into the woods, and try to obtain, by fervent and humble prayer, the fulfilment of the promises given in the above revelation—that they should have a view of the plates.

They were praying for permission. “The above revelation” states that it’d be by their faith that they could obtain a view of the plates, the sword of Laban, the interpreters, the breastplate, and the Liahona. It also says that after they’ve obtained that faith, they’ll see them with their eyes, not in a dream. The prayer was to demonstrate that faith.

Martin Harris’ behavior also seems strange if the plates actually existed.

Without any elaboration on what he means here, this is difficult to respond to. Martin Harris’s behavior doesn’t come across as odd to me at all, so it’s unclear what Faulk actually means. Is he talking to the secondhand statements from decades later claimed to be by Martin? Or his actual firsthand statements, and if so, which ones? Is he talking about his behavior in the time period leading up to this miraculous experience? Or the behavior immediately afterward, or years later? Is he talking about Martin leaving the Church for a time, or his returning? Or the activity he got up to in the interim?

Faulk doesn’t clarify. That’s something I’ve noticed he does a lot. He’ll make a statement and then not elaborate on it, leaving us to guess what the issue is and what he thinks about it. Because these things aren’t personally controversial to me, I have to take time to figure out what might be considered controversial about them, and then respond to that. It’d all be a lot easier if Faulk just explained why he thinks something is controversial.

The Testimony of The 3 Witnesses is Not Accurate

Printed in the Book of Mormon is the Testimony of the Three Witnesses. It is not an accurate account of the events, but a reconstruction of multiple experiences.

It’s actually both an accurate account of the events and a reconstruction of the experience of Joseph and Martin, as well as that of Joseph, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery.

“And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates… And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true.” (Testimony of the Three Witnesses, The Book of Mormon)

Yeah, that’s an accurate retelling of the events. Read their full testimony:

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Oliver Cowdery

David Whitmer

Martin Harris

At no point does it say that they all saw those things at the exact same time and place. It just says that they all had those experiences. Martin had the same experience as David and Oliver did; he just had it a short time later.

It was a brief summary of the events, but it was an honest one. Nothing in that testimony was a lie or a distortion of the truth. They were bearing their testimonies of the things they’d seen, not giving a moment-by-moment account of every single thing that happened in those woods.

The language in this statement makes it seem as if all four men experienced this event together.

Where does it say anything of the kind? I just quoted the entire thing, and it doesn’t say or even imply that anywhere. It simply says that it happened.

However, the History of the Church passage clearly shows that the Martin Harris’ vision happened separately.

Right, so does every Church history book or manual on the topic. This isn’t something the Church ever tried to hide. This was the story told right from the very beginning, in the very first history they ever tried to write of the organization of the Church. At no point did anyone ever claim that Martin had his vision at the same time that David and Oliver had theirs. This is just Thomas Faulk inventing controversy out of nothing.

Not only that, but later statements made by David Whitmer and Martin Harris show that the angel brought additional objects for them to see. This is curiously left out of the signed Testimony of the Three Witnesses.

Yep. The revelation stating that there would be witnesses to the plates said that too, in the very same History of the Church passage that Faulk quoted from above. This revelation is today’s D&C 17:

1 Behold, I say unto you, that you must rely upon my word, which if you do with full purpose of heart, you shall have a view of the plates, and also of the breastplate, the sword of Laban, the Urim and Thummim, which were given to the brother of Jared upon the mount, when he talked with the Lord face to face, and the miraculous directors which were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the Red Sea.

2 And it is by your faith that you shall obtain a view of them, even by that faith which was had by the prophets of old.

3 And after that you have obtained faith, and have seen them with your eyes, you shall testify of them, by the power of God;

4 And this you shall do that my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., may not be destroyed, that I may bring about my righteous purposes unto the children of men in this work.

5 And ye shall testify that you have seen them, even as my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., has seen them; for it is by my power that he has seen them, and it is because he had faith.

6 And he has translated the book, even that part which I have commanded him, and as your Lord and your God liveth it is true.

7 Wherefore, you have received the same power, and the same faith, and the same gift like unto him;

8 And if you do these last commandments of mine, which I have given you, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; for my grace is sufficient for you, and you shall be lifted up at the last day.

9 And I, Jesus Christ, your Lord and your God, have spoken it unto you, that I might bring about my righteous purposes unto the children of men. Amen.

Again, this is not obscure or buried information. It’s in the D&C for everyone to read. In their Witness statement, they testified of the Book of Mormon and the reality of the golden plates, shown to them by an angel of the Lord. Did they need to say that the angel also showed them other objects at the same time?

I don’t personally think so, especially when people were already trying to physically harm Joseph in order to steal the plates. If they knew he also had a sword and a golden ball and ancient armor, wouldn’t they try even harder to get them?

You might disagree and feel that they needed to list all of those things. That’s okay; you’re entitled to your opinions. But it seems clear to me that between the Witness statement and the revelation in the D&C, we know what happened that day. The accounts given by those involved backed this information up in its entirety, as well as added additional detail. Again, it’s not hidden information.

“We not only saw the plates of the Book of Mormon but also the brass plates, the plates of the Book of Ether, the plates containing the records of the wickedness and secret combinations of the people of the world down to the time of their being engraved, and many other plates … there appeared as it were, a table with many records or plates upon it, besides the plates of the Book of Mormon, also the Sword of Laban, the Directors i.e., the ball which Lehi had-and the Interpreters [Urim and Thummim].” (David Whitmer, interview by Orson Pratt, Book of Mormon Compendium, 1878, pp.55-56)

Why fail to mention the other plates and important Nephite artifacts?

I gave one possible reason already—the persecution they were already enduring from those trying to steal the plates. Maybe they didn’t want to draw further attention to them and risk putting their lives in danger.

Or perhaps they didn’t feel it was necessary, since the golden plates were the truly important part. The others, while cool objects to see, were not vital, essential parts of the translation process. You could make a solid case for the interpreters being vital, of course. However, Joseph’s use of his own personal seer stone for part of the translation process tells us that, while important, they weren’t necessary.

I don’t know why they didn’t include them in the Witness statement. I didn’t write it, and neither did any of you. Maybe we would have phrased it differently in their place; who knows? But we know what happened, and the Witness statement covers the essential parts of their experiences. As I said, it was a brief summary of what happened, not a moment-by-moment recounting of the details. Maybe I just don’t expect as much from other flawed human beings as Thomas Faulk seems to. I don’t know.

I do know that the Witnesses saw what they said they saw. The Holy Ghost has confirmed this to me many times over. He’ll confirm it to you too, if you only ask. Remember, we have to ask before it’ll be given to us. We have to seek before we’ll find. We have to knock before the door will be opened unto us. We have to do our part, and then the Holy Ghost will do His.

The post Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 8: The Early Church – The Witnesses [A] 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

(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

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 starts tomorrow! 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 feel about General Conference, […]

The post FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 1 Day! 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 10 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 – 10 Days! 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

“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

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

Abraham 1:1–19 God will bless me for my faith and righteous desires. by Jennifer Roach In my day job I’m a mental health therapist. My specialty is helping people recover from trauma. I sit with the loveliest people who’ve been through the very worst things. Abuse, neglect, betrayal, horrific accidents, loss that would make your […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 7 – Genesis 12–17; Abraham 1–2 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

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

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. Jenny Reeder, First: The Life and Faith of Emma Smith Jenny Reader’s books are for sale in the FAIR […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #74 – Jenny Reeder, “First: The Life and Faith of Emma Smith” appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Two Trees by V.H. Cassler (This is from a presentation given at the 2010 FAIR Conference) The Restored Gospel teaches me that the term “God” means an exalted woman and an exalted man married in the new and everlasting covenant (and we also get that from D&C 132). We are taught that there is […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 3 – Genesis 3–4; Moses 4–5 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

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. Dan Peterson, The Book of Mormon Witnesses: Sincerity and Reality The Witnesses film and books by Dan Peterson are […]

The post FAIR Conference Podcast #72 – Dan Peterson, “The Book of Mormon Witnesses: Sincerity and Reality” 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

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

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

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

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

by David W. Smith “A Fulness of the Holy Ghost” From the beginning of his presidency, President Russell M. Nelson has repeatedly emphasized the blessings of temple service. In his very first address as President of the Church he said: As a new Presidency, we want to begin with the end in mind. For […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 40 – Doctrine and Covenants 109-110 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

This volume of the Joseph Smith Papers contains 96 representative documents from the period of March – July 1841. During this time period, Joseph continued having legal problems with Missouri, the Kinderhook Plates were found, he led the Nauvoo Legion, construction continued on the Nauvoo House and temple, and he taught about the temple, eternal […]

The post Book Review: The Joseph Smith Papers Documents, Volume 12: March-July 1843 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

In the summer of 1830, while The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was yet in its infancy, Oliver Cowdery, “the second elder of [the] church” (D&C 20:3), wrote Joseph Smith, saying, “I command you in the name of God to erase those words, that no priestcraft be amongst us.” Oliver Cowdery was referring […]

The post Lessons from Oliver Cowdery for Today appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

“Ye Were Also In The Beginning With The Father” By Kara Dawson D&C 93 teaches in two separate verses that “ye were also in the beginning with the Father” (v.23) and “man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be” (v.29). […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 35 – Doctrine and Covenants 93 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

By René Krywult In September 1832 Joseph Smith received D&C 84, which talks about the oath and covenant of the Priesthood, about receiving the Son and the Father, and about the necessity of the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood in order to see God and live. Also, a command to build a temple was issued. […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 33 – Doctrine and Covenants 88 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

by Hanna E. Seariac One of the amazing elements of the Doctrine and Covenants is the way that the Lord teaches us about personal stewardship and responsibility in the scripture. Many callings are given to the saints and the faithful, where God asks them to stretch and grow to fill the capacity of their calling. […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 21 – Doctrine & Covenants 51-57 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

The Story Behind the Revelations: Using the Joseph Smith Papers to Better Understand the Doctrine and Covenants by Matt Grow & Matt Godfrey (This is from a presentation given at the 2014 FairMormon Conference) Matthew Grow: It’s a great privilege to speak to you today about the Joseph Smith Papers and the Doctrine and Covenants. What […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 20 – Doctrine & Covenants 49-50 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

As anyone knows who has been camping, it takes a lot of work to kindle a fire and to keep it burning brightly, especially when confronted with the challenges of wind or rain. Likewise, it takes constant spiritual effort to kindle and maintain the fire of faith in the face of criticism and doubt. Just […]

The post Kindling the Fire of Faith appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

A House of Order, a House of God: Recycled Challenges to the Legitimacy of the Church by Cassandra Hedelius (This is from a presentation given at the 2015 FairMormon Conference) I. Introduction to Mormon Gnosticism Apologetics is a very broad field and different topics can involve extremely different audiences. My topic today is a little […]

The post Come, Follow Me Week 18 – Doctrine & Covenants 45 appeared first on FAIR.

View Details

David Whitmer was instrumental in helping Joseph Smith during the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon and in the establishment of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Today he is primarily remembered as one of the three witnesses of the Book of Mormon plates (The Testimony of the Three Witnesses). In […]

The post David Whitmer, Misinformation, and COVID appeared first on FAIR.

Revelation Archives - FAIR: Recent Episodes

FAIR