Short takes

Mortal souls? Not exactly 

The church's definition of immortality is defective:  “Immortality is a state of endless life beyond the power of death, which is obtained following the Resurrection. All mortal souls will eventually become immortal through the power of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

Joseph Smith stated that all souls are co-eternal with God. Here's a better definition:

“The souls of all men and women are everlasting and co-eternal with God, who became God after dwelling on an earth and attaining exaltation. Through the Resurrection, all souls unite with immortal physical bodies and can obtain exaltation through the Atonement of Christ.”

Never see R-rated movies? Just another myth

Some active members of the church routinely assert that Latter-day Saints must not attend R-rated movies in order to “follow the prophet” or to be obedient. Perhaps they are unaware of the answer to the question below.

Question:  How many presidents of the church have said adult members should never view R-rated movies?

Answer: None

Yes, President Ezra Taft Benson counseled young men at a 1986 General Conference priesthood session not to view R-rated movies in order to keep their minds free of “entertainment that is immoral, suggestive or pornographic.” (He later offered similar counsel to young women of the church.) But the general membership of the church has never received counsel from a church president not to attend R-rated movies.

Indeed, President Benson's counsel to youths suggests that attending R-rated movies might be acceptable even for LDS young people if the movies contain no sexually explicit material.  In fact, I would not hesitate to recommend to my fellow Latter-day Saints age 16 and above that they view such R movies as The King's Speech, Gran Torino and Schindler's List.

Although no president of the church has said we should never see R-rated movies, Elder Robert L. Simpson stated in October 1972 general conference that members should not view R-rated movies.  Let's keep in mind that Elder Simpson was an assistant to the Twelve and was expressing his opinion, not the position of the prophet, the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve or of the church. (If certain members feel they need to be extra faithful by striving to obey fringe-area guidance from lower-level authorities, these same members should feel free to do so.  And while they're at it, if they engage in the in-vogue practice of repeating the word “Father” in prayers, they would also be well-advised to obey a higher-level authority—a president of the Twelve—who has counseled us to stop repeating the name of Deity in public prayers.  See “Father, Father, Father” on this site.)

Here's a couple of other problems with letting a rating given by the Motion Picture Association of America determine whether we see a movie. First, by relying solely on rating and ignoring movie content, we may miss a great movie containing one F-word while convincing ourselves it's OK to see a PG-13 movie that is mediocre and full of vulgarity, violence or idiotic content. Second, the MPAA rating ignores the fact that many members live in countries where their movies receive no MPAA rating. Third, by automatically following someone's counsel never to see an R-rated movie, we trust in them and the MPAA to guide us rather than wisely exercising our agency.

No public prayers, plenty of inspiration

Latter-day Saints are quite gung-ho about our U.S. Constitution being inspired, and most active members see prayer as entirely acceptable in government meetings. They might not be enthusiastic about a certain passage on page 88 of The Great Prologue, by Elder Mark E. Petersen.  There, Elder Petersen observes that Benjamin Franklin earnestly appealed for daily prayers at the constitutional convention. How did the delegates react to his request? They firmly rejected it. Franklin later wrote: “The convention, except for three or four persons, thought prayers unnecessary.” 

Inspired revision of a biblical passage

In the Bible, we read that Jonah was on a ship, a great wind came up and he ended up in the belly of a whale for three days.

My inspired and more believable revision of this passage is as follows:  Jonah was on a ship when a great wind came up, and three days later he ended up in Wales.  It was possibly Scotland, but when a local asked Jonah if he wanted the address (pronounced uh-dress in a British accent), Jonah misunderstood and replied, “No, I don't want a dress. I'm a man.  Oh, and by the way, the Germans are gonna eventually bomb you guys.”

Inspiration comes from different places. 

No individual exaltation?

President Russell M. Nelson has said “Salvation is an individual matter, but exaltation is a family matter.”

Or not.

We teach that salvation is Christ's victory over death and that everyone resurrects through the Lord's merits and generosity.  In other words, the entire human family is saved regardless of individual behavior.  Exaltation, on the other hand, is an individual matter.  Abel, yes; Cain, no—same family.  If an individual's heart is sufficiently pleasing to the Lord, he will eventually be exalted even if no one else in his family is.  Yes, we currently believe that one man and one woman must be sealed to each other to receive exaltation, so perhaps exaltation would be more often a “couples” matter than a family matter.  (Many couples are childless.) 

Besides, if exaltation were a family matter, the following people might be up a creek: Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother; Joseph and Emma Smith; Adam and Eve.  (Read on.)

According to LDS doctrine, Heavenly Father and Mother lost a third of their children even before the earth was created.  Later, we were informed by revelation that of their remaining children, the vast majority will be unworthy to return to dwell with them.  In today's world, parents with such a miserable record would be sent to counseling.

As far as Joseph and Emma Smith's family exaltation, keep in mind that neither Emma nor any of their children remained active in the church after Joseph's death.

Adam and Eve's exaltation is based on their individual behavior, not their son Cain's terrible behavior nor the misbehavior of nearly all of their descendants whose lives, not sins, were washed away by a flood.

Nothing is more individual than a person's own worthiness level, which, I'm sure President Nelson would agree, is connected to exaltation.

Lehi's family landed . . . 

In the New World, when Lehi talks to his family about this “land of promise,” he is talking about a land to which other people would come as they were “led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord.” (2 Nephi 1:5)   This brings to mind the centuries-long immigration to the United States from other nations. We are reminded of the welcoming words on the Statue of Liberty about bringing to the United States “your huddled masses.”

When we read Lehi's words, we certainly do NOT think of people yearning to migrate to Central America, where poverty, crime and government corruption have long made the area a place from which residents flee.  Moreover, we hardly think of Central America as “a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity.” (2 Nephi 1:7)  In fact, many who have lived in Central America have found themselves often dealing with widespread lawlessness and fighting against dictators who come and go—not exactly a place where Lehi's descendants “shall dwell safely forever.” (verse 9)  

Yet, many believe that Lehi and his group settled in Central America, more specifically in the area of what is now Panama, with its “narrow neck of land” presumably providing geographic evidence that this was where they lived.  Perhaps we need to give up our fixation on Central America being the landing zone for the original Nephites and Lamanites.  Another candidate might be the Chesapeake Bay area, which has a stretch that could be called a “narrow neck of land.”  Moreover, when Moroni carried his golden plates and other objects to bury at the present Hill Cumorah site in western New York state, it is certainly much easier picturing him making the journey north from the Chesapeake Bay region or elsewhere in today's eastern United States, rather than traversing 4,000 miles from Central America. (Crossing the Rio Grande and the Mississippi likely wouldn't have been great fun for the aging Moroni.)  On the other hand, Alma 63 does say that the shipbuilder Hagoth launched his ship “forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward,” which does sound more like the Panama area.  Still, in the Chesapeake Bay area if he had launched into the west sea, he could still have proceeded north via the Susquehanna River.

The best focus

The paragraph below is from reflections by Linda and Richard Eyre about their friend Stephen Covey.  It ran in the July 20, 2012, Deseret News.

“One evening he told us that there were many large, extended families who summered at a different lake, the one where he and Sandra always took their kids for the Covey family reunion. He said that after watching all those families for several years, he realized that they fell into three categories: families that were church-centered, families that were family-centered and families that were Christ-centered. It was only the third category, he said, that lasted, stayed strong and stood the tests and challenges of life without becoming divided.”

The paragraph below is from the Aug. 9, 2020, obituary of LDS scholar Armand Mauss.

“I gradually reached the decision, as Jesus of Nazareth taught us, that the good, moral life boils down to the two great commandments of loving God and loving each other as God's children.  This is the simplest, but most profound and effective, moral code in human history.  Compared  to these two commandments, all other moral demands, from whatever sources, pale into insignificance.  The main focus becomes how we should treat each other in this life, rather than on preparing for the next life.”  (Italics added.)

(Mauss' “main focus” on the second great commandment is reminiscent of Christ's later words: “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.”

Our need to focus on the second great commandment over all others also seems to be the message of message of the Golden Rule, as stated in 3 Nephi 14: 12: “all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and the prophets.”  (Italics added).  

Proof that there is a God

I offer the following experience as proof that there is a God.

Around midnight in the late 1990s, I waited in my car for a left-turn signal on northbound State Street and North Temple in Salt Lake City.  I had just finished a Saturday afternoon/evening shift at the Deseret News, but for the occupants of many of the other 10 or so cars it perhaps was late-night party time.

At the front of the left-turn line was a car with several rowdy young men, windows open and loud music rolling forth.  Behind them was a car with two more males.  I was third in line, and other cars to the right occupied the northbound lane. As the rest of us dutifully waited for the lights to change, the first car peeled out and accelerated through the red light onto westbound North Temple.  In effect, the message the young men sent to the rest of us was: “Hey, losers. You can obey the law if you want, but we sure as hell don’t have to.”

A few seconds later, as I muttered to myself, it got worse.  The men in the second car also peeled out!  I surmised that the fellows in both vehicles were part of the same night-on-the-town group. My muttering grew more intense. I'm ashamed to admit that I might have thought, or spoken, the words “cocky bastards.” My main thought was: Why is there never a cop around when you need one?

Finally, the light changed and the rest of us proceeded.  About two blocks later, to my surprise I saw the two peel-out cars parked on the side of the road.  As I passed, I saw flashing lights on the dashboard of the second car—it was an unmarked police car!

In that moment I went from being a muttering loser to a man with one joyful thought:  “Yes, there is a God.”

The Spirit made me do it

Many active, mainstream members take a dim view of those who don’t always follow the Brethren and who appear to pick and choose when to obey. That's especially true if the picker and chooser is an Obama-lovin' bleeding heart liberal. Yet mainstream, more traditional members also pick and choose—but with a major difference.  When one of them chooses to disobey, he may feel he is doing so because the Spirit has directed him. (Which is, by the way, a good excuse for disobeying.)

Following are five common ways that active members disobey the Brethren. 

First, testimony bearers, perhaps the majority, tend to disregard specific counsel from the church about testimonies not being, in effect, mini-speeches or verbal newsletters. Yes, some may be unaware of the counsel, but unawareness represents a failure to pay close heed to leaders—also a form of disobedience.

Second, speakers routinely disregard the time limit assigned for their talk.

Third, the leaders of some organizations, perhaps caught up in a presumably spiritual lesson, allow their meetings to run several minutes over the time specified for the meeting block. Often, when a meeting has already gone over, leaders compound the disobedience by allowing the closing song to be sung, followed by a prayer.

Fourth, LDS young people appear to feel it's OK with the Spirit for them to attend, view or participate in football games, despite specific counsel from church leaders not to attend, view or participate in anything that is violent “in any way.”  (See “For the Strength of Youth” pamphlet, p. 11.) They also routinely attend or view such movies as “Star Wars” that contain violence. (Give BYU credit for cutting back on football violence in 2017 thanks to many missed tackles and a 4-9 record.)  I recognize that this fourth reason is more a function of crappy wording in the “For the Strength of Youth” pamphlet.  Still, it's official and that's what it says.

Fifth, leaders have repeatedly counseled against repeating the name of Deity in prayers, but we constantly hear Father this and Father that.  (See “Father, Father, Father” on this site.)

A rather dramatic example of “Spirit-driven” disobedience happened a number of years ago in a previous ward that I attended.  During two sacrament meetings a couple of weeks apart, the first speakers went well over their allotted time, leaving no time for the final, main speakers.  In order to right this wrong, the bishopric invited the two speakers who had been jilted to speak in a sacrament meeting the following month.  This would have been a wonderful solution to the unfair treatment of these two brethren except for one thing—the first man proceeded to hog nearly all the time!

An approach to the Word of Wisdom

For years, a man named Cory entered the same bar every Tuesday night, sat at the end of the counter by himself, and ordered three small beers. On his latest visit, however, he ordered two large beers.

As he arose to leave, the bartender said, “Hold on just a second. I've gotta ask you something. You've been coming in here for years and drinking three small beers, but tonight you had two large ones. What's going on?”

Cory smiled, leaned against the bar, and said, “Here's the story. In Vietnam in 1968 I had two good buddies, Mike and Matt. We promised each other that if one of us didn't make it out of there alive, the other two would drink a beer every week in his memory. Well, we had a terrible firefight a month later, and Mike and Matt were killed. Since that time I've had one beer a week in memory of Mike, one in memory of Matt and the third one for myself. Tonight I drank one for Mike and one for Matt but none for me because last Saturday I joined the Mormon Church, and I'm not allowed to drink.”

Two glasses half full?

My wife and I attended a regional conference at the Conference Center in 2014 at which Elder Dallin H. Oaks was the final speaker.  The first of several speakers addressed the importance of family.  When Elder Oaks arose, he noted that no topics had been assigned.  However, because the speakers all independently chose to speak on the same topic, family, he observed that they had selected the message that the Lord wished to emphasize.

Elder Oaks comment brought to mind words that President Gordon B. Hinckley had spoken as the final speaker in the April 1995 general conference:

“My brethren and sisters, just a few words in conclusion.  First, I’d like to say that we have participated in a miracle.  As I have listened to all who have spoken, I have noted that there has been no duplication of treatment.  Every man and woman who has spoken has chosen his or her own theme to treat. There are no assignments made to any of the speakers concerning what they should say” (italics added).

We're not that rude

For decades, letters to the editor have popped up in Utah newspapers insisting that our state's drivers are the rudest in the country.  I never thought that was true.  Having driven in all of the Western states except New Mexico, my view is that, yes, our Utah drivers may be among the rudest, but saying we're No. 1 is a total guess.  In 2014, I was pleased to get support from an outfit called Insure.com.  They conducted surveys of 2,000 drivers nationwide, asking which state has the rudest drivers. I'm happy to say we Utahns got good news—we're only the ninth rudest!

Neither the Church News nor the Ensign bothered to inform their readers about this wonderful survey and its positive implications for Latter-day Saints.  After recently studying the numbers more closely, maybe it's best that they let that sleeping dog lie.  That's because the four states with the highest proportion of LDS residents—Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Nevada—all finished in the top 10.  Idaho was No. 1; Wyoming was 3; Nevada was 8 and Utah was 9.

Post script, Dec. 10, 2016: A study recently released by QuoteWizard reports that Utah's drivers are “the worst in the nation.”  (To be fair, worst doesn't necessarily mean rudest. It may merely reflect our competence or intelligence level.)

Who was that man?

An Idaho-raised, LDS college student related the following experience at a U.S. university.

“When [the speaker] strode onto the stage, I recall him first greeting invited guests, university leaders and dignitaries.  Then he turned, smiled and waved, and a powerful feeling washed over me.  I can only describe it as a presence of great virtue.  It was as though I felt a wave of goodness rush past me.  I recall being shocked by the experience. . . . his soul touched mine—no doubt through the virtue of a life of choosing good over evil.  I left inspired to be better.”

Perhaps most Latter-day Saints in reading this account by Matt Sanders would surmise the speaker was the president of the church or an apostle.  However, it actually tells of Nelson Mandela’s 1998 appearance at Harvard University.  (Deseret News, Dec. 13, 2013)

Kernels of truth

“The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the absence from Jerusalem of a lunatic asylum.”  --Thomas Paine

“If you, who are organized by Divine Providence for Spiritual communion, Refuse, & bury your Talent in the Earth, even tho’ you should want Natural Bread, Sorrow and Desperation pursues you thro’ life, & after death shame & confusion of face to eternity.”  --William Blake

“Here in America, we are descended in blood and spirit from revisionists and rebels—men and women who dared to dissent from accepted doctrine.”  --Dwight Eisenhower

“It is better not to have so much faith, than to have so much as to believe all the lies.” --Hyrum Smith

“It is when the hour of conflict is over that history comes to a right understanding of the strife and is ready to exclaim, ‘Lo, God is here, and we knew it not.’ ”  --George Bancroft

“I believe that with God it is such that all who loved each other on earth—genuinely loved each other—will remain together with God, for to love is part of God.”  --Dietrich Bonhoeffer

“The work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever.”  --Isaiah 32:17

“God is . . . a very present help in times of trouble.”  --Psalm 46:1

“The life of discipleship can only be maintained so long as nothing is allowed to come between Christ and ourselves . . . The disciple always looks only to his master, never to Christ and the law, Christ and religion, Christ and the world. He avoids all such notions like the plague.  Only by following Christ alone can he preserve a single eye. His eye rests wholly on the light that comes from Christ . . .”
  --Dietrich Bonhoeffer

“The tumult and the shouting dies;

The Captains and the Kings depart:

Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice” --Rudyard Kipling

The Bible is true—except for the false parts

On occasion I have said that I think it would be just fine if about 40 percent of the Bible and Doctrine and Covenants went missing.  In the Bible, I wouldn’t mind if many of God’s anger outbursts along with the tedious details on observing rituals and the law of Moses were deleted.  Also, I wouldn’t miss about half of the psalms and proverbs along with nearly all of the genealogies.  (Speaking of genealogy, Nephi makes a notable observation on the subject:  “And now I, Nephi, do not give the genealogy of my fathers in this part of my record; neither at any time shall I give it after upon these plates which I am writing . . . Wherefore, I shall give commandment unto my seed, that they shall not occupy these  plates with things which are not of worth unto the children of men.”  (1 Nephi 6:1,6)

Of course, the best parts to delete would be those that are simply false.  For example, I don’t believe:  “I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation  . . . ” (Exodus 20:5)  I suspect this passage was inserted by a crotchety old loser who was mad at someone.  Some people just need to lighten up.

Another reason I don’t believe the Exodus 20 passage is because it contradicts numerous other scriptures.  I’ll offer a few examples.  Speaking to Cain, the Lord said, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?”  (Gen. 4:7)  The Lord most assuredly did not say “if your parents mess up, I’ll punish you for their iniquity.”  Also: “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers” (Deut. 24:16) and “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” (Ezekiel 18:20). And there's something in the Articles of Faith about people being punished for their own sins.

One of the best ways to evaluate whether a scriptural passage is true is to ask whether it is in harmony with the attributes of God and whether it comports with the preponderance of scriptural passages on the subject in question.  (Speaking of the “attributes” of God, I believe God loves and desires joy for us all while encouraging—not compelling—the behaviors that lead to joy.)

Hastening

We often hear these days that the Lord is hastening his work.  Let us not assume, however, that in the past the Lord was dilly-dallying.

Didn’t President Kimball exhort us to lengthen our stride?  And President McKay said “every member a missionary” rather than “leave missionary work to the missionaries.”

On the other hand, Isaiah said, “Woe unto them that . . . say, Let him make speed and hasten his work, that we may see it.” (Isaiah 5:18, 19) 

P.S. It is now 2024, and “hastening his work” went out of style several years ago. Our go-to phrase today is “the covenant path.”  With the high percentages of active members who vote for the lying criminal Trump, let's be grateful it isn't “Make America Great Again.”

More revisions

One of the remarkable things about reading the printer’s manuscript of the Book of Mormon and comparing it to the current English edition and to an 1830 replica edition is how insignificant have been the changes in the text.  The “thousands upon thousands” of changes noted by the book’s critics almost entirely consist of adding punctuation (the printer’s manuscript had none), correcting spelling, changing terms such as “because that” to “because” and “which” to “who,” where appropriate, and adding verses and chapters.

Still, a few trivial errors remain.

Some were errors in the original (see “What in the World?”).  But the examples listed below are likely modern glitches.

“Wherefore, the wicked are rejected from the righteous . . . ”

(Rejected probably should be separated.  1 Nephi 15: 36)

“Nephite coinage set forth—”  (This is in the chapter heading for Alma 11, which makes no mention of coins.)

“And when she had said this, she clasped her hands, being filled with joy” (Clasped should probably be clapped.  Alma 19:30)

“and he plead with them that they would not slay him”  (Should be pleaded or pled.  Oliver Cowdery appears to have written pled correctly in the printer’s manuscript. Ether 8:6)

In the introduction, which isn’t part of the original book, the description of Lamanites as “the principal ancestors of the American Indians” was changed in 2007 to “are among the ancestors of the American Indians.”  In the Doctrine and Covenants, Lamanites remains as a synonym for Indians.

Why bother with Isaiah?

Although I far prefer the Book of Mormon and the New Testament to the Old Testament, I agree with those who say that Isaiah deserves our attention.

Here are seven reasons to give heed to Isaiah:

1. He is the Old Testament prophet most often cited in the New Testament.
2. Christ commenced his ministry by quoting Isaiah (Luke 4:17-19)
3. Isaiah saw Christ. (Isaiah 6:1; 2 Nephi 11:2)
4. Nephi twice tells us “my soul delighteth in the words of Isaiah.” (2 Nephi 25:5; 2 Nephi 11:2)
5. Moroni advises us to “search the prophecies of Isaiah.” (Mormon 8:23)
6. Christ twice instructs the Nephites to search the words of Isaiah. “Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah.”  (3 Nephi 23:1; 20:11)
7. The Book of Mormon, “the keystone of our religion,” includes many chapters of Isaiah’s writings—in fact, far more from Isaiah than from any other biblical prophet.

Emerson needed an editor

A number of times I have heard the following words of Ralph Waldo Emerson quoted in conference and other meetings:

“That which we persist in doing becomes easier—not that the nature of the task has changed but our ability to do has increased.”

OK, he was a great writer.  But in this instance, maybe he was being paid by the word.

Here’s what he could have said:  Practice makes perfect.

What I believe

I am a disciple of Jesus Christ who believes in the fundamentals of the restored church including the Book of Mormon and the divine mission of Joseph Smith. 

Among the various religions, I believe that the LDS faith, having authority from God, offers the best prospects for mortals to draw close to Christ.  But I also believe that certain doctrines, teachings, policies and practices in the church are questionable and, in some cases, incorrect and harmful. 

I believe Christ moves closer to us as we move from dogma toward truth and that he is merciful, patient and understanding, and is especially pleased with those who strive to live a good life, to put “love one another” into practice and to become better people.  His love extends fully to those who do not actively participate in organized religion.

Steve Warren

Sept. 22, 2014
(minor revisions, June 2016, July 2020)

Copy editor wanted

In one sentence, Mosiah 15:24 has two language inconsistencies.  Can you spot them?

“And these are those who have part in the first resurrection; and these are they that have died before Christ came . . . ”

First, there is no reason to say “these are those,” changing it a few words later to “these are they,” as both phrases refer to the same people.  Second, we first read “those who,”  then we read “they that.”  Who is preferable in both cases, as people, rather than inanimate objects or animals, are being referred to.

For those who would argue that keeping the original language is preferable, please read a few pages of the 1830 edition, which contains hundreds of grammatical mistakes that have been corrected.