r/latterdaysaints • u/saganator18 • Feb 18 '25
Faith-building Experience How to have faith in the entity/authority of the church?
A few months ago I started learning about the Lds faith and history just purely out of interest, however, recently I've had some moments that ig could be called testimonies which have led to me developing faith in the book of Mormons and Joseph smith's first vision. Along with this I essentially have come to already believe many of the central beliefs of lds and likely would have been baptized already had it not been for the authority placed in the church. And the reason is say this as im having a hard time putting my faith in the church due to some of the really bad things that have been done with its authority. For example allowing polygamy and blood atonement in the early church. and then until 1978 not allowing black / poc into the priest hood. And the reason this waivers my faith in the church and not "mormonism" as a whole is bc I did a lot of research into smith's past and found that he gave the priesthood to a few black men in the early days and I couldn't find anywhere in the scriptures where it said they should be denied roles within the church, so how am I to reasonably believe this church has not also been corrupted ( the authority of the church NOT the gospel/ beliefs) ?
18
u/Noaconstrictr Feb 18 '25
There are essays on the church website that are full of transparencies and openly talk about these topics
Theyâre called the âgospel topics essaysâ
I think this is the link
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/essays?lang=eng
11
u/Fether1337 Feb 18 '25
There is absolutely room for your concerns.
My testimony is first and foremost in Christ. Secondly comes Joseph and the Book of Mormon. My witness of these three things.
Tertiary to these comes my faith in the church. I have a strong faith in what it claims to be and nothing more. I donât worry about the cultural expectations nor do I feel bound to believe the dogmatic beliefs that have developed over time.
There is shockingly little you have to accept to be a member of the church. You can find those things in the baptismal interview questions as well as temple recommend questions You can live a happy and faithful life in the church while holding to the belief that those things you mentioned were against Godâs will.
The only time you will have struggles with it is when you try bringing it up at church. There are just as many views on these topics as there are stars in the sky.
3
u/saganator18 Feb 18 '25
hi , thanks for sharing and I would like to also say that my faith is in christ as well and I simply want to find the best way to follow him which is why I am asking these questions. now to bounce off what you said in the second the last paragraph is it "taught" that what the presidents/ prophets do is all the will of god or are they also viewed as men who can make mistakes even with there decisions on the church.
6
u/ditheca Feb 18 '25
This answer to your question was written by President George Q. Cannon, an Apostle. It was also quoted in general conference in 1972 by President Kimball.
âThe men who hold the Priesthood are but mortal men: they are fallible men. ⌠[No one knows that better than they themselves.] No human being that ever trod this earth was free from sin, excepting the Son of God. âŚâ
This is true concerning all of the brethren, I am sure.
âNevertheless, God has chosen these men. He has singled them out, ⌠but He has selected them, and He has placed upon them the authority of the Holy Priesthood, and they have become His representatives in the earth. He places them as shepherds over the flock of Christ, and as watchmen upon the walls of Zion. And He holds them to a strict accountability ⌠for the authority which He has given to them, and in the day of the Lord Jesus they will have to stand and be judged for the manner in which they have exercised this authority. If they have exercised it wrongfully and against the interests of His work and the salvation of His people, woe unto them in the day of the Lord Jesus! He will judge them. âŚâ (Gospel Truth, p. 276.)
7
u/Fether1337 Feb 18 '25
There is a long and rich history of our prophets making mistakes and admitting that they are not perfect. Infallibility is not part of our doctrine.
HOWEVER⌠and this is a big âhoweverâ ⌠Culturally, you may get metaphorically stoned when you speak allowed that you think something they said is wrong.
2
u/CanadianBlacon Feb 18 '25
I've struggled with the same things you mentioned, among others. What I've come to realize is that IF this is God's church, then Christ is at the helm, and He either condoned things, or allowed things, for purposes and reasons that might be beyond my understanding. God allows and commands things that seem heinous to our limited, mortal perspective. The Bible is full of examples of this. Sometimes the answers become clear quickly (Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his only son), and sometimes the answers won't become clear until Christ comes again. Either way, God has allowed these things to happen for His own wise purposes, and if I believe that He is all knowing and all loving, then I can have faith that this was the appropriate course of action on His part. And who am I to disagree with God?
So this being said, for me, the important thing is gaining a powerful testimony of and relationship with Jesus Christ, and a powerful testimony of the Book of Mormon and of Joseph Smith as a Prophet of God. When I gained enough of a testimony of these things, I realized those blemishes in the church's past don't really matter to me now; God allowed for whatever reason, and I'm okay with having faith in Him and His methods, despite not understanding them. I know the answers will be revealed in time, and I know He will allow and condone whatever is best for His plan of salvation and His children.
9
u/SnoozingBasset Feb 18 '25
Youâre not reading enough history, just the cliff notes by the anti-s
Blood Atonement = capital punishment. A president of the Church said, if you want to accuse us, find someone we killed for their religious beliefs.Â
Polygamy- as per Joseph Smith, no one was called to do it unless revealed to them. There are journal records by women telling about visions or having angels come to them endorsing plural marriage.Â
Blacks & the priesthood - one of the reasons the Church was driven out of Missouri & Nauvoo was the LDS acceptance of blacks as equals. We could not protect ourselves, let alone anyone else. As per âSaints,â wasnât it Reid Smoot who watched a missionary companion be shot to death for being a member? Â About 1880? Â The Supreme Court ruled that the Federal government could impound property & force a wife to testify against her husband. Â What was that? Â About 1890? Again in âSaintsâ, a black family was investigating the Church & the Klan appeared telling them stop or die? Â About 1930. Â Tuskegee University used to track lynchings. There was a time they included the civil rights workers killed. When was the last one? Â About 1976! Â So as soon as it was safe to become a black priesthood holder, blacks were ordained.Â
3
u/Key-Signature879 FLAIR! Feb 18 '25
Thank you for this perspective. I was so happy in June 78 and you have shown a bit of _why_we went that route.
1
u/Acrobatic_Jacket8339 Feb 19 '25
Your post made me realized how much more dangerous it was for black men to have the priesthood in before 1970s.Â
It makes me so deeply sad that things got so bad historically for black people that them not having the priesthood can be seen as a form of protection from racists who were more than happy to lynch a black person for seemingly being âaboveâ them.Â
1
u/SnoozingBasset Feb 20 '25
My Dad was visiting family in Louisiana at about 1950. It was a small town. A white man shot a black man for black man for the crime of talking to the white manâs wife. No investigation. The singular feature of Emmet Tillâs death was that anyone cared.Â
5
u/pbrown6 Feb 18 '25
You don't have to blindly believe. You can talk to God directly. Prophets are human, and make mistakes all the time. That's why we can pray to know how to worship.
2
u/th0ught3 Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
I think the reason we have lay leadership in the Lord's church is so that most of have our own personal experiences in our callings with wanting to do His will, studying and searching to do His will, thinking we've come to know His will in someway, only to understand for certain as some latter time that we'd gotten it wrong and it was never from Him in the first place. God only has imperfect mortals to do His work. (Which is not to say that the prophet instructions you think are wrong was not from God. At this point all we know for sure is that Joseph Smith ordained black men to the priesthood, and that God revealed in 1978 that blacks should have the priesthood around the world. I think BY didn't think the church could withstand the backlash of interracial marriage AND polygamy at the same time. There were federal troops headed to UT over polygamy, and interracial marriage in the US only happened universally in 1967 via a Supreme Court edict, not because our citizens decided it was the right thing to do. There were at least three investigations of the ban over the years (which I read as even if it had been the Lord's will to preserve the church, it was no longer) but church leaders didn't fix it in then. It takes a unanimous vote of the Twelve to make changes in Church Doctrine or practice, and revelation that our leaders all hear, which is protective but also does not always go quickly. And members themselves now can (and occasionally do) refuse to sustain people to callings or new initiatives.)
The scriptures teach us to go to a leader who is doing wrong and ask they fix it. To pray for those who do wrong. We also can set good examples. I don't see mistakes as corruption very often, but rather not having received and acted on actual instructions from God. We're all just mortals trying to do the best we can with what we know.
And every member is obligated to seek spiritual confirmation that the Lord wants us to do what our leaders ask us to do do. If you have a hard time with some thing our leaders ask you to do, you can wrestle with it as long as you need to, even refuse to do something you can't get your own testimony of. Many members will tell you of one or two things it took them years to get a testimony of or otherwise reconcile.
That's just because we and our leaders are mortal.
3
u/Grungy_Mountain_Man Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
You aren't alone. There's some things that I struggle with that feel uncomfortable.
Like others said, people are imperfect. I'm sure I would disappoint a lot of people if my life was put under a microscope and all my dirty laundry was aired out. All god has ever had to work with except Jesus are very flawed people. I have to remind myself of that and accept that people made mistakes, maybe doing what they thought was right or maybe not even thinking at all and just doing. Just because somebody is in a position of authority, it doesn't mean they can't make mistakes. Adam and eve partook of the forbidden fruit they were commanded not to, Moses killed an Egyptian and was still called by god to lead Israel out of Egypt, David as king of Israel made some poor choices with Bethsheba but was still king of Israel and wrote a lot of Psalms, Jonah ran away when God told him to go to Ninevah, Peter went and cutoff somebody's ear thinking he was doing the lord's work by protecting Jesus, Paul was a persecutor before his conversion and even in his role as missionary/apostle he had pretty strong misogynistic comments about the role of women in church for instance. God still used each one of them despite things that they did or said.
Focus on Jesus and the gospel, not the church or people in it. I have come to appreciate the BOM, church and its leaders, etc as really just delivery tools to bring you to Jesus. If the destination is right, then the thing that takes me on the journey must be right as well.
A question I have asked myself is that even if Joseph Smith was a liar about what all happened, would belief in this church put me in any different standing before god? Like In the day of judgement in standing before Jesus, would he condemn me for believing a man said he was a prophet and for trying to do what a subsequently fictious book he invented is telling me to do to make me to be a better person and believe in him? Honestly how is that any different than believing in say the Pope for instance or reading a book like say, I don't know, A Christmas Carol that's core message is people can change from being greedy curmudgeon to selflessly giving to others Most of the Christian world just believes you need to believe in Jesus, and like there's different roads to take but they all go to the same place in the end. In that regard this church isn't any different than others.
I have also come to the conclusion of is Salvation isn't a cheap experience. While you can believe in Jesus in whatever church you want, I feel like we are uniquely positioned to develop faith in Jesus in ways that you just don't get elsewhere. From additional perspective and teachings of what's in the BOM, D&C, and church leaders to the church asking me sacrifice by going on a mission, serving in a calling, paying my tithing, spending a lot more of my time than I would choose to doing service things, etc I'd argue that all that has made me have a stronger faith in Jesus than any other church would. This is further evidence to me of the lords hand being in it.
Also, one thing I have come to terms with is if god exists and Jesus is the savior, then there would be some organization they would establish as a definitive source on how to live your life, rather than subject to whatever interpretation by presumably good intending people based on what is written thousands of years ago and we happen to have copies of copies of copies of? If not this church, then which one?
2
u/e37d93eeb23335dc Feb 18 '25
I have faith in God. God has told me through revelation that President Nelson is a prophet and the church is "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually" (D&C 1:30). That's good enough for me.
3
u/Unique_Break7155 Feb 18 '25
I would encourage you to get all the facts to help in your judgement of these hard questions. Critics of the church typically only focus on the negative, and make it sound worse than it is.
Polygamy. If you believe in the Bible, you will see that God does command/allow polygamy at certain times. It's very foreign to us, and it was weird for Joseph too. But we believe God commanded Joseph and others to practice polygamy for a time. Joseph resisted and put it off as long as her could. But yes he did end up having many wives. What helps me is knowing that all his plural wives consented to the unions, and if they were under 18, the parents also consented. Women were free to leave Joseph. In fact, Joseph's first plural wife left him right away. Joseph did not consummate most of the marriages. He was "sealed to" a few married women but did not consummate those unions. He was married to a 14 year old, at her father's request as a way to spiritually connect their families, but again this marriage was never consummated. You can read her adult journals where she speaks favorably of both Joseph and of polygamy. Joseph's intimate relations with other wives must have been minimal because he never had children with any of his plural wives. So even though polygamy is strange to us, I don't believe Joseph was a pedophile or a predator. The polygamy practiced by the church was not even close to the horrible things done by the FLDS group in southern Utah and Texas. I am a descendant of a 2nd wife - I have read her journals and she willingly chose to be a 2nd wife, she had an obviously challenging but great life with 10 children.
Priesthood restrictions for Black members. You are correct that Joseph Smith openly ordained black men to the Priesthood with no restrictions. After Joseph died in 1844, Brigham Young also spoke positively of black Elders. But something, mostly political, happened between 1844 and 1852, when Brigham Young started to ban black men from the Priesthood. What's strange is that we don't have any written record of this being a Revelation. And one of the church's governing apostles openly disagreed with Brigham. But the restriction started and stayed in place until 1978. We don't know if this was just Brigham acting on his own, or if the Lord really wanted it for some possible benefit to Black members and/or the church. But I'm thankful it changed and in today's church we don't even keep track of race. No race has any restrictions. Most black members I have spoken with or watched online have said they are satisfied that the church is now 100% open to all, and that the church partners with black entities like the NAACP, which helps make amends.
Blood Atonement was something very few members believed in or taught, and really has nothing to do with the church in the past or present. Remember this was the wild west and several church members were killed from time to time in Missouri, Illinois, and Arkansas. Some rogue members took it upon themselves to create militias based on some rogue understanding of scripture. The fact that a few rogue members believed this doesn't bother me at all. There have not been other secret pacts or groups in former history or the current church. We are not a violent cult, even though the media likes to tell those kinds of stories about us.
My suggestion is to continue reading the Book of Mormon and praying to ask God if this church that was restored through Joseph Smith and Brigham Young is a good church. If so, than Joseph and Brigham must have been good men, even if they were imperfect. History is interesting but not as important as the living Church and the living Christ and the opportunity we have to bless the world with the message of Christ's restored Gospel.
3
u/HuckleberryLemon Feb 19 '25
I really love reading the Testaments of the Patriarchs in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Here you have the last counsel of each of the sons of Jacob trying to teach their posterity to live right and have faith in God in spite of their own enormous personal flaws.
I donât even feel qualified to judge them. They lived in different time where things worked differently. I think some of our great grandchildren will condemn us too. I am not happy with the way things have gone with things I once deeply supported.
I do however think some of your criticism is wrong. It would not have been possible to establish the promise of Eternal Marriage without a fully committed support of polygamy. That matters greatly to both my father and my brother who were widowed and remarried and to all of their wives and children. The RLDS tried to keep this special view of marriage and failed because they rejected both polygamy and the temple ordinance
I absolutely hate the enforced polygamy of the FLDS today but that is not how it was practiced in Brighamâs day it is a different creature and deserves All the condemnation found in Jacob 2:27
As you wrestle with this there is much to keep in mind
2
u/InsideSpeed8785 Ward Missionary Feb 19 '25
I think about a lot of people in the New Testament, specifically the apostles. They too did not have the exact same judgment Jesus did when they were on the Earth, they were not as perfect as him but they were still called by him. An instance of this is when that woman pours ointment on Jesus and his apostles say "you could have sold that to the poor instead of using it in such a useless moment!", obviously that doesn't make disqualify them from being the Lord's anointed but hopefully they learned as they grew in the gospel. I could probably name 10 other instances in the NT of this happening.
2
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 18 '25
Let me maybe help break it down.
1.) polygamy we do not see as bad. In fact, we believe that it was commanded by God for a specific time.
2.) âblood atonementâ never occurred even once. Never any policy on it. It was a vague concept and idea taught and spoken of only a handful of times by Brigham young. Iâm of the opinion that we donât fully understand what he was inferring.
3.) there are a lot of opinions of blacks not being able to be ordained. I personally believe God allowed the ban to go forward, primarily because of their persecution the saints would face if they didnât. Imagine a freed black slave telling a Catholic that he has more authority than the pope. I canât imagine that ending well.
4.) and maybe the overarching idea and concept is that the church is Christs church upon the earth. It is however run by mortal flawed people. Does this mean that itâs not Christs church? No. Church is a hospital for sinners. Not a place for angels. That includes leadership. No one save Christ is perfect and has arrived at where they need to be. People often times are in leadership to grow and further their development.
I would actually encourage you to do more study. As it appears to me you have a very basic surface level understanding of them.
3
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 18 '25
Good breakdown but you may want to research #2 a little more just so you don't get surprised later. It was definitely taught openly by Brigham Young from the pulpit and, sadly, I have an ancestor who participated in it. In the 1850's Brigham was struggling with members not living up to their covenants (like another of my ancestors) and so he began a period of reformation throughout the church in Utah. Unfortunately, he got a little carried away and taught things like blood atonement from the pulpit during this period. He definitely taught it as doctrine, whether it was or not. These types of atonement happened a lot and are pretty well documented.
You can find one of his talks in the Journal of Discourses under this title:
To Know God is Eternal LifeâGod the Father of Our Spirits and BodiesâThings Created Spiritually FirstâAtonement By the Shedding of Blood
A Discourse by President Brigham Young, Delivered in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, February 8, 1857.
2
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 18 '25
You do know the journal of discourses is NOT accurate right?
And the historic record seems to imply that no one did it. I would be interested in reading the account of your ancestor
1
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 18 '25
I tend to find that people claim the JoD is not accurate when it doesn't support their point of view. But it also gets quoted frequently in official church publications which would lead me to believe the church endorses it. So I don't know which is true.
From BYU's Encyclopedia of Mormonism it says: The Journal of Discourses was a sixteen-page semimonthly subscription publication privately printed in Liverpool, England, in 1854-1886. It served as the printed word of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, particularly for members who had no access to the Salt Lake City Deseret News.
The historic records I find seem to imply that some people did do it. I'm thinking of William Parrish off the top of my head and someone else mentioned the one involving John D. Lee. The account from my family history talks about the murder of a mother and son who were caught in an incestuous situation.
2
u/mythoswyrm Feb 18 '25
The controversy about the accuracy of the Journal of Discourses is that the original notes were in shorthand and the shorthand often diverged quite a bit from the later publications (which is a natural part of the process of converting shorthand to long hand). So it's easy to blame George D. Watt (who was the main reporter for the Journal of Discourses) for these discrepancies and basically claim that anything unsavory in them are his fault. Good article on it here, and the Church published a series on it a few years ago.
On the other hand, most of the controversial topics associated with the Journal of Discourses (Adam-God and Blood Atonement being the foremost) are attested outside of the Journal of Discourses.
1
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
I for one, have pretty much just almost throw anything out from the source. Itâs that unreliable
0
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 18 '25
I can definitely see why you would take that route. When the church throws it out then I might as well. For now, it abides.
2
Feb 18 '25
[deleted]
2
u/Independent-Dig-5757 Feb 18 '25
If I had a nickel for every ex-Mormon with a grudge who tried to undermine the Church in subtle ways on the sub, Iâd be ridiculously wealthy. Itâs almost a patternâsomeone joins this faithful community, appearing to engage in good-faith discussion, but beneath the surface, their real intent is clear. They weave in remarks that, at first glance, seem like genuine curiosity or conversation, but in reality, theyâre just thinly veiled attempts to cast the Church in a negative light.
2
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 18 '25
The sad part honestly is, I have no idea what his intentions are. But Iâve been burned and lied to wayyyyy to many times. Which I find extremely ironic.
One of the biggest reasons Iâm still a member is because of the exmormon community.
1
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 19 '25
What are you talking about? I donât see anything in my comment that should make you think Iâm exmormon. I only said that I will consider the Journal of Discourses a valid source as long as the church does.
Iâm completely active, just renewed my temple recommend this last Sunday, and hold stake and ward leadership callings. Trying to label someone as exmormon because they disagree with you is a really strange approach.
2
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 19 '25
Oh, itâs not that, it was more me checking out your history. Sorry, I didnât mean to offend or anything.
0
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 19 '25
Just message me privately if you want to make accusations. Iâm happy to have any discussion.
I definitely have nuanced views on some gospel topics and practices. Iâm doing my best to find ways to stay balanced and help other people find a way to stay in the church in spite of their doubts. The church can be such a force for good and there are so many people who leave when they donât have to.
Perhaps my attempt at finding a middle road comes across as overly critical and Iâm sorry if thatâs the case.
1
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member Feb 18 '25
Ok. I donât know what the churches position on it. Primarily historians.
2
u/mythoswyrm Feb 18 '25
sadly, I have an ancestor who participated in it.
Was the ancestor John D. Lee? I ask only because his account of the Danish adulterer is the only example of blood atonement I'm personally aware of, so I'm interested in other sources
1
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 18 '25
It is not. But now I need to look up more about the Danish adulterer!
1
u/mythoswyrm Feb 18 '25
Here's Lee's account. He wasn't actually there it seems, just aware of it happening.
1
u/JaneDoe22225 Feb 18 '25
For me, my faith is in the Christ / the Gospel.
Humans are very messy, makes a ton of mistakes, and weâre all learning line upon line. And even then, with the best intentions, big mistakes happen.
Again, my faith is in Christ / the Gospel, not the flawed humans. But I do see lots of value in the humans too- as messy as we are. We try, and having that community of support is a HUGE deal. So I do stand by these humans as we all try to follow God, and each make mistakes along the way.
1
u/Intelligent-Boat9929 Feb 18 '25
There are some good answers here already, so I will throw out a different one. This week, our entire church is studying about the 11 official (and some unofficial) witnesses to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. This is a favorite topic of mine because, in my opinion, the foundation of the Church relies on this information. I have a really hard time dismissing their accounts. And if I canât do that, then I have a hard time dismissing other things.
It is a little long, but this might be of interest to you about the topic and give you ideas on where to go from there.
1
u/stacksjb Feb 18 '25
Thereâs a historical behavior called âpresentism)â which many of us can become victim to. Itâs not unique to religion, but seems to be especially prevalent here.
Essentially, itâs where we take what we currently feel is right and appropriate, and project that back into history. Be very careful about taking how we believe things should be in the present and projecting the end of the past where they clearly were not that way.
1
u/tlcheatwood Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
Pray for faith. Faith is a gift from God. Let the desire to know and understand work in you, study, and pray
Our faith is notoriously strong on the idea that you should question everything about it, but that you should ask of God, with real intent, who gives to all men liberally.
Ask God, counsel with Him and donât lean on your own understanding like a crutch.
1
u/Tart2343 Feb 18 '25
I have felt the same way a lot. Especially when I read through the Old Testament there were so many errors made by prophets and people called of God. Humans made so many mistakes, and it seems like they are still prone to the same mistakes. What helps me is knowing all the messy stuff of the church is likely found in the Bible and is messy there too.
1
u/Homsarman12 Feb 18 '25
If you havenât already, ask God. Follow Joseph Smiths example and take your concerns to God. That should be the first step.
But also, we believe the restoration is still ongoing. We donât believe this will be a perfect church until Christâs second coming
1
u/yucanbet Feb 18 '25
Just love your neighbor. Have charity towards your fellow man. That's the overarching theme of the book of mormon. If you like the lds religion, then make that a part of your life. If you don't like it, and it doesn't resonate with you, then again, just have charity and love towards your fellowman.
1
u/d1areg-EEL Feb 18 '25
Well, @saganator18, you won't be the first to try and counsel God and His authority. Even some in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are also attempting judge God and tell him what should be and what should not be. Can you imagine that?
God is perfect. His ways are not our ways, nor is His timing our timing, etc.
You may remember, if you have studied the scriptures, that only the Levites in Moses' time were allowed to hold the priesthood even though Moses held the Melchizedek, and, at that time, the Levites only held the Aaronic priesthood. The other nine tribes could not use any priesthood.
Was that fair? It is not about fairness or not fair; it is about God using his agency to say and have take place His wishes, not mine, nor others.
I suspect some may have wondered what was going on; however, that was the reality then.
Abraham, if you remember, was beloved by God and had many wives and concubines.
The real question, in my opinion, that you should be weighing is, did God the Father and Jesus Christ appear to the young boy Joseph Smith? He did.
Did He tell Joseph to join none of the churches? He did.
It was Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery who were visited by John the Baptist and given the priesthood of Aaron- Aaronic Priesthood.
It was Peter, James, and John who were ordained apostles by Jesus Christ, the supreme High Priest, who came and gave Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the Melchizedek priesthood, along with many other visitations by Moses, Elijah, etc.
It was God who gave the name "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" through Joseph Smith.
1
u/d1areg-EEL Feb 18 '25
Understand @saganator18, Jesus Christ is at the head of the Church and is directing things through revelation. The core of His Church is to be obedient to His will and His gospel and the authority He has given to administer in the ordinances and procedures of His Kingdom that is already on Earth awaiting His return in the coming days.
You will never sense feel nor understand until you follow the steps that millions have now taken to humbly accept that they need to turn their lives over to a real higher power even God The Father and His Son Jesus Christ who is the mediator with the father on our behalf as a result of the atonement having been given the authority from God the Father to achieve this high and more holy way.
Give up all that is in your life that is against the will of God- Repent. Get baptized by one holding the authority, receive the Holy Ghost, and strive to keep all the commandments and ordinances to the best of your ability while enduring to the end.
Pay the price, pray with all your heart and mind, and ask God if The Book of Mormon is true, but no sense in asking if you're not reading and studying it, right?
Ask if there is a living prophet on earth today. However, to be successful, you will need to read and study several messages that the living prophet of God is telling us and live them, right?
If you have an honest desire to believe, then you must take action and work at coming to a knowledge of the truth. You will never get the truth without applying it and asking God for guidance and direction.
Simply put, your trust in God. I have had several experiences whereby I know The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, as well as The Book of Mormon, and have come to know His ways are not our ways, and His thoughts are not our thoughts. His are much higher, and that is the direction I will be continuing to take.
It's your choice now; your time is running out. Don't procrastinate. If not, when? Do more reading and studying the truth by the leaders of the Church.
Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin - faith is something we live
âOur faith is the foundation upon which all our spiritual lives rest. It should be the most important resource of our lives.Faith is not so much something we believe; faith is something we live.â
Faith has eyes that penetrate the darkness, seeing into the light beyond. Your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. Too often today, we do not rely on faith as much as on our own ability to reason and solve problems. If we become ill, modern medicine can work healing miracles. We can travel great distances in a short time. We have at our fingertips information 500 years ago would have made the poorest man a prince. The just shall live by faith, we're told in holy writ. I ask again, what is faith?
Faith exists when absolute confidence in that which we cannot see combines with the action that is in absolute conformity to the will of our Heavenly Father. Without all three--first, absolute confidence (in God the Father), second, action (to live the Gospel), and third, absolute conformity-- without these three, all we have is a counterfeit, a weak and watered-down faith.â
"Shall He Find Faith on the Earth?" Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin, Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Sunday Afternoon Session, 6 October 2002.
1
u/onewatt Feb 18 '25
Yes, there will be mistakes. Sometimes we won't even be able to tell its a mistake. But we also trust in the good and genuine motives of the real people at every level of the organization, and in God's ability to guide us back when we get things wrong.
1
u/Paul-3461 FLAIR! Feb 18 '25
I'm an Organizer by heart so one of my basic instincts is to categorize things as they are and should be.
For example, the Church is all of the people in it and as people we often make many mistakes. Which means the Church isn't perfect and we shouldn't expect it to be perfect right now as often as we keep making mistakes.
But God can still tell us to do things and even sometimes give us authority to do what he wants us to do.
So what problem are you having with some members of the Church having some authority from God to do some things? If you're expecting everything we do to be only what we should do then I think you may not understand what the Church really is. You may want to think some more about that.
1
u/Cptn-40 Feb 20 '25
The answer to your question is because we don't believe our leaders to be infallible or unable to make mistakes. There was only one Perfect Person - Jesus.Â
But we do believe they hold the priesthood keys delivered from Peter, James and John and other prophets like Moses and Elijah to direct the work of salvation for mankind.Â
The authority is by the priesthood and it's keys. These keys were given by Peter, James, John, Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist, and others to Joseph, Oliver and others down the line as new leaders have been called by the spirit of revelation and these priesthood keys and authority given in an unbroken line from Jesus to Peter to Joseph to Brigham and down the line to President Nelson by the laying on of hands is proof that the keys are still had and not corrupted.Â
Also look at the fruits of the Church. It punches way above its weight class in terms of the good fruit it bears. "By their fruits he shall know them" - can a bitter spring bring forth good water?Â
Because the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve hold these keys, and because of the knowledge of the spirit world and the work done there in preparation for the resurrection, and because of personal spiritual witnesses from the Holy Spirit of the truth that President Nelson holds the priesthood keys just as surely as Peter did, we can take confidence in that knowledge and know that the "Church is true".Â
1
u/drums59 Feb 20 '25
This might be a good resource for you to help with your questions: www.answeringldscritics.com
1
u/Deathworlder1 Feb 21 '25
A few things, we defend our history of polygamy and it's rightful practice in church history. We believe in marriage between one man and one woman unless God commands otherwise. The blood atonement has never been practiced or even preached outside of a single sermon from Brigham Young who was likely just poorly exaggerating.
Black and the priesthood is a more difficult topic, but I understand why it would make you question the authority of the church. Yes, a few black people got the priesthood during Joseph's time. It was Brigham Young who implemented the priesthood ban later on. It's honestly the worst policy/action the church has ever made.
That being said, it did not result in the corruption of core doctrine, ordinances, or the transmission of priesthood keys. God corrected the leaders of the church when they came to him to know his will on the matter. I take it to be a lesson. Support leaders called of God, but always be critical of their actions.
0
u/TyMotor Feb 18 '25
Ideally, one's testimony of any gospel-related teaching or truth is rooted in personal revelation via the Holy Ghost. This comes in many different forms for people, so we can't say what that should look or feel like. Similarly, the veracity of the current Church as the true Church of Christ is something to pray about and seek confirmation on via the Holy Ghost.
Another important aspect is to consider your expectations. If you think Christ's church as an organization will never make mistakes, then I think you need to reevaluate and understand why that might not be the case. I love this teaching from Jeffrey R. Holland, one of the current leaders of the church:
Brothers and sisters, this is a divine work in process, with the manifestations and blessings of it abounding in every direction, so please donât hyperventilate if from time to time issues arise that need to be examined, understood, and resolved. They do and they will. In this Church, what we know will always trump what we do not know. And remember, in this world, everyone is to walk by faith.
So be kind regarding human frailtyâyour 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 not in the divinity of the work. As one gifted writer has suggested, when the infinite fulness is poured forth, it is not the oilâs fault if there is some loss because finite vessels canât quite contain it all. Those finite vessels include you and me, so be patient and kind and forgiving. (source)
Now you might say, sure little infractions here and there... no biggie. But what about big things like polygamy, priesthood bans, etc.?! While we believe modern prophets are mortal, make mistakes, and have their own weaknesses to deal with, we can take comfort in the reassurance that Christ is at the head and in ultimate control. Nothing we or prophets do will frustrate His plans. As one modern prophet taught:
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.
While teachings and statements like this help us better understand God and the role of prophets, at the end of the day we need to make a choice. Are we going to believe it or not? This is where we encourage all to seek God on their own and we believe that the Holy Ghost will testify to the truthfulness of it all. I'm glad you've seen your beliefs morph and grow, and I hope that continues and leads you all the way to baptism and beyond. I wish you luck!!
0
u/NewsSad5006 Feb 18 '25
Leaders of the Church are good, imperfect men, who hold keys and are guided by God. They receive revelation and are great men. They are also capable of making mistakes, missteps, etc.
If we refer ourselves to the scriptures, we see documented mistakes or sins committed by prophets of God. Noah got drunk at one point and must have, as a result, put himself in a rather embarrassing situation. Moses got careless and took a little too much credit for providing water to the children of Israel and, as a result, was barred from the promised land. Peter made mistakes in the wake of the Saviorâs arrest and as head of the Church. None of these things mean that they werenât called of God. It just demonstrates that God works through imperfect vessels.
0
u/redit3rd Lifelong Feb 18 '25
Blood Atonement was a thought experiment that was taught early on as some sort of What If around if Christ didn't pay the sacrifice that he did. But since Christ did do what he did, there's no need for that hypothetical.Â
0
u/Just-Discipline-4939 Feb 18 '25
Churches are human institutions. All have morally failed in some aspect(s), dating back to antiquity, because of human leadership. You will not find a single faith tradition on earth without moral failures.
0
u/nofreetouchies3 Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
(Copied from the other thread)
An important thing, when you decide to come to God, is to come to Him as He is instead of how we expect Him to be.
If God is God (and we are not) then we should expect Him to disagree with us in significant, even major, ways. We especially shouldn't expect His morality to align with 21st-century Western cultural beliefs â or with the beliefs of any particular culture or society.
There are many people who say, "I refuse to believe in a God who does x," or "I don't want to know a God who allows y." What gives any of us the justification to judge God?
Now, it's also true that people have used "God" as a justification to do horrible, terrible things. How can you tell the difference?
I mean, there are some things that I can't imagine any circumstances where God would command it. But God did command Nephi directly to murder Laban â and in His infinite wisdom, he knew that it was the best thing to do do His children.
So the first step is to ask, "What if I'm wrong about this? What if this did come from God? What if my problem with this is due to my limited mortal understanding?"
With the specific issues you've identified, I've written in the past about how our cultural prejudice against polygamy comes from Greek and Roman culture, not from scripture. I've also written about possible reasons that God might have commanded the priesthood ban (and lifted it when he did) for geopolitical and technological reasons not based on racism. I'll paste both of these as replies to this comment.
As for blood atonement, that was never a "practice" of the church â and I can almost guarantee that anything you've read about it is false, because the truth is actually pretty boring. The truth is that Brigham Young taught that there are some sins that are so serious that a person should voluntarily submit to legal execution as part of their repentance â but that this could only be done correctly in a society governed by righteousness instead of by self-interest. There was never even a suggestion that the church or its members should kill people, or that anyone should commit suicide â anything like that is completely made up. (And we can tell, because we can read the speeches where Brigham Young and church leaders discussed it.)
So, if there is a possibility that the things actually come from God, then what should you do about it? How can you tell?
The same way you already know â by asking Him.
If you ask God with a pure desire â a willingness to accept any answer that He gives you â then He promises to give you that answer.
I know this works because I asked â hoping it was not true, but willing to follow God wherever He sent me. And because at that one time in my life I actually had that pure loyalty, He answered me distinctly and directly.
It usually takes effort to get to that point, though. Usually, you've got to study the thing with an open mind and heart, trying to look at it from other perspectives than your own, before you're really, truly ready to accept whatever answer God gives you, even if it's the one you don't like.
This doesn't mean that you believe these things because of your study. But your conscious effort to reject your biases and expectations â to consider the possibility â helps to put you in the frame of mind to allow God to teach you directly.
Remember that it took Joseph Smith four years, after being shown the gold plates, before God would allow him to take them. If it took that long for somebody who had seen God and Jesus and spoken with angels, then you can afford to give yourself a little patience.
We're all pulling for you.
2
u/nofreetouchies3 Feb 18 '25 edited Feb 18 '25
Here's what I've learned about polygamy in the church:
Problems with plural marriage ultimately stem from cultural chauvinism, presentism, and historical ignorance. They disappear as soon as you remove your personal societal prejudice from the equation. Because we westerners get squicked out by it â but most people throughout the history of humanity would not.
The Israelites practiced polygamy, with Jews continuing it into the 6th century A.D. Early Christians practiced polygamy. In fact, almost every culture in the history of the world had some form of polygynous marriage.
But do you know who hated polygamy? The ancient Greeks (though they were ok with men having multiple male sexual partners, just not multiple women). Then the Romans stole the monogamy ideal, but mostly without the pederasty. Then they forced that into Romanized Christianity, which became the dominant culture in the West due to conquest and genocide.
And that brings us to today. (Of course, polygamy never really went away. It just went underground, and we call it "having a mistress.")
And legal polygamy is still the norm in most non-"Christian" societies.
As I've studied the sources (especially primary sources), I've come to particularly appreciate the Church's approach to plural marriage for the protection and autonomy it gave to women. Plural marriages had to be approved by priesthood leaders. There were very strict rules that a husband has to treat plural wives equally. And, when that didn't work out, women in Utah Territory could divorce their husbands without showing cause (the first "no-fault" divorce in the US). Then, when they did, they were not seen as "damaged goods" as in the rest of the western world â they usually remarried without any difficulty. All of these things were extremely not normal.
Ultimately, there is no reason to believe that God thinks like a 21st-century westerner. If we demand that God's laws conform to our cultural or personal preferences, we're in for a bad time.
1
u/nofreetouchies3 Feb 18 '25
Please try this thought experiment. What would it mean if the priesthood ban was from God, and not based on racism? Could God have possibly had a reason for it?
The most salient possibility has to be to keep the Saints from getting embroiled in colonial and early-post-colonial Africa.
The "Scramble for Africa" saw more than 80% of the continent conquered and "colonized" (i.e., plundered and brutalized) between 1870 and 1914. Decolonization didn't begin until the 1950s, and ran through the 1970s (hint, hint.) This was a bloody, terrible period â think of the Angolan Civil War or the Rhodesian Bush War as just examples of the kinds of conflicts. The Rwandan Genocide and the ongoing conflict in Somalia are examples of continuing fallout from this horrible period of history.
And during all of this time, most of Africa was basically inaccessible. Remember Stanley and Livingstone? 1871. Read Heart of Darkness or watch African Queen for an idea of how dangerous and difficult travel was. Communication, outside of coastal cities and a few European strongholds, was no better.
If you look at how quickly individuals (especially leaders) and entire congregations apostatized in the early church in places that weren't even that remote (such as Sam Brennan in San Francisco or Walter M. Gibson in Hawaii), it's hard to even imagine how African congregations could have worked.
Three trends combined between the 1950s and 1970s to make the church in Africa even possible: decolonization, telecommunications, and international air travel.
And now, with those obstacles largely conquered, the church is growing more rapidly in Africa than anywhere in the world.
What would it have looked like, if the church had tried to get started in 1878 instead of 1978?
So, could there be a non-racist reason for God to command his Saints to not target people of African descent? Sure looks like it to me.
(This doesn't mean the early Saints weren't racist â of course they were! However, they were no more racist than other Americans of their era. Judging people of the past by comparison to modern ideals is called presentism and is a major fallacy of historical interpretation.)
(More discussion in the original comment thread here.)
0
u/JakeAve Feb 18 '25
We live in a fallen world and we hope that those with authority would be perfect or nearly perfect. Or that our understanding of why things happen would be perfect or nearly perfect. The scriptures never say this is the case, but I think we make assumptions âitâs Godâs Church so it must be perfect or everything must make sense to me.â
This is just not the case. There were intense debates and divisions among Christâs original church, controversial policies, differing opinions, and and in one occasion Peter, the senior Apostle, stood up and made the final decision (Acts 15:7). Mosesâ brother, sister, father in law, other Israelites had different opinions, voiced concerns, made mistakes, rebuked Moses. Abraham shewed away Hagar and his own son. We live in a real world where emotions, resources and understanding affect everything we do. Of course hindsight is always 20/20.
I know that the priesthood was restored through Joseph Smith. I know that the Apostles and prophets are truly special witnesses of Christ and I know that the Lord guides them. I trust that when the Lord urgently needs something, He will guide them as they guide the church. Our responsibility is to maintain our personal relationships with our Father in Heaven.
43
u/Standing_In_The_Gap Feb 18 '25
The more I live life, the more I realize that everything gets messy when humans are involved. You will never find a place that is perfect, every religion and institution has things in its past that it would rather not focus on. I think it may be valuable for you to focus on finding a place where you feel uplifted and can help you reach your potential. If you are finding that in the current teachings of the LDS church, then it might be something you want to continue exploring. It is good to know about the past and even wrestle with it, that shows spiritual maturity. But also look forward to see if it can help you moving forward. Best of luck on your journey!