Dear Reader,

A Latter-day Saint who believes that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its leaders are authorized of God doesn’t necessarily accept whatever the church puts forth as “gospel.” On the contrary, anyone who wants a better church tomorrow really ought to speak up today. We aren’t potted plants. Let's face it: Theological malarkey will continue to thrive in the church if members say “amen” to it all.

That is the main reason this site exists.

It also exists because I want to encourage wavering Latter-day Saints not to leave the Lord's restored church merely because of its flaws and the errors of its leaders.

Each article is listed below with a title, short synopsis and a link. They were written by Steve Warren (bio below). Articles by others may be added.

Keep the faith.

Steve Warren
West Valley City, Utah

“God is actually trying to create a much more profound relationship with us. We can only do that if we are actually wrestling with issues at hand.”
--Fiona Givens

Christ moves closer to us as we move from dogma toward truth.

Steve Warren was raised in Heppner, Oregon, and has lived in Utah for 44 years. He attended Ricks College for two years, served a mission to Colombia and Venezuela, and graduated from BYU in 1973 with a degree in communications. He and his wife, JaNiece, have two sons and a daughter. He wrote and published Drat! Mythed Again, Second Thoughts on Utah in 1986 and was a copy editor at the Deseret News from 1988-2008. He wrote and printed 100 copies of a novel, Beyond the Finish Line, but has yet to find a real publisher. (2018)
Knowing, believing, seeing Insights into our borderline dysfunctional LDS relationship with the word “know.”

Pathway to heaven The Scriptures show one sure way to return to God’s presence: possess a heart that pleases him.

Obedience gone awry Strictly following the prophet is an excellent idea—at least as long as he’s right.

Falling short, staying put Living prophets constantly err, but that’s not a good reason to leave the Lord’s church.

What in the world? Certain strange features of the Book of Mormon add to its credibility.

Some kind of miracle Fiction. An invitation to speak in sacrament meeting begins a Utah couple’s wild ride.

The cross = victory The cross is a worthy, positive symbol because it reminds us that it is the dying Christ who saves us.

Pilate tried Jewish religious leaders sought to kill Jesus; Pontius Pilate sought to set him free, so let’s give the man a break.

Father, Father, Father Why do we repeat the name of Deity so often in prayers these days?

Witnesses Multiple witnesses provide a compelling reason for anyone to ponder the claims of Mormonism.

Who is God? The Book of Mormon and other scriptures clearly teach that Jesus Christ is God and that Heavenly Father is God the Father.

In the beginning If we didn't allow speculation and guesswork in lessons on the Creation and Adam and Eve, classes would be really short.

Short takes Brief quotes, comments and reflections on a variety of gospel topics.
A few heresies... that would make for a more interesting sacrament meeting.
Oopsy-daisy 40 foul-ups by top LDS authorities.
Appreciating Christ

Thursday, March 16, 2017


As I have noted elsewhere on this site, I believe that prophets, seers and revelators are authorized of God and deserve our prayers and support.  As I have also noted, they aren't infallible and don't claim to bealthough claims made in their behalf often tiptoe along the borders of infallibility.  The prophet-related errors listed below underscore that we should prayerfully consider whether to follow their counsel, then do what we believe is right.

Twenty of the more significant foul-ups are listed under the heading Oopsy.  They are followed by an Oops list that contains another 20 items that may be less serious but that are also either incorrect, highly questionable and/or contrary to what is widely believed in the church today.  (Naturally, just because something is not widely believed today doesn't automatically make it false.)

In the mid-1830s, Joseph Smith predicted a bright economic future for Kirtland, Ohio, and promised members that if they continued to build up and invest in Kirtland, they should be rich. Instead, the panic of 1837 devastated the area, the church's undercapitalized quasi-banking enterprise collapsed and many who lost money viewed Joseph as a fallen prophet.

In an April 1843 conference, Joseph Smith said, There are those of the rising generation who shall not taste death till Christ comes.

Before the 1890 Manifesto revoking plural marriage, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff and Lorenzo Snow, all of whom served as church president, stated that God would never revoke the law of plural marriage.  Brigham Young observed that “the only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy.”

Many LDS leaders taught in the early decades of the church that the earth was created 6,000 to 7,000 years ago and that there was no death on the planet until after Adam and Eve partook of the fruit.  Doctrine and Covenants 77:6 puts the temporal existence of the earth at 7,000 years.  Even our current Bible Dictionary states: Latter-day revelation teaches that there was no death on the earth for any forms of life before the fall of Adam.” (In other words, our temple films would reflect latter-day revelationand would be more excitingif they showed dinosaurs in the Garden of Eden.  And we are also left to wonder whether creatures in the Garden were prohibited from eating fruits and vegetables, which are forms of life.)  

We now accept that the 126-year prohibition of black males holding the priesthood was wrong from day one.  However, the prohibition was more than a policy.  Church presidents called it a doctrine and a commandment.  In addition to preventing males from holding the priesthood, it kept black families from participating in temple ordinances that the church says are necessary for exaltation.

Brigham Young declared that if whites marry blacks, the penalty under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.  (He likely was speaking of spiritual death rather than physical death, because there are no reports of brides or grooms dropping dead after saying I do” nor of 2nd Amendment-loving Utahns immediately gunning them down.)  Until the mid-20th Century, subsequent church presidents agreed that interracial marriage was forbidden by God.  Presidents of the church also supported racial segregation in public places including a policy that required blacks to ride freight elevators in the Hotel Utah.

—In 1979, the First Presidency declared, The Lord will never allow the president of the church to teach us false doctrine.” (Gospel Principles, p. 46. This statement came just a year after a revelation that, in effect, asserted that many presidents of the church had taught false doctrine related to blacks and the priesthood.)  

On May 6, 1843, Joseph Smith said: I prophecy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left for their wickedness . . .  (The U.S. government did not redress the wrongs, did not punish Missouri officials and was not utterly overthrown in a few years.)

Brigham Young stated on multiple occasions that Adam and God the Father were the same person.  

Elder Orson Pratt said, “it will be seen that the great Messiah who was the founder of the Christian religion was a polygamist . . . the Messiah chose . . . by marrying many honorable wives himself, to show to all future generations that he approbated the plurality of wives . . . ”

In 1862, perhaps frustrated at the slow pace of construction on the Salt Lake Temple, Brigham Young said: There will not be any temple finished until the one is finished in Jackson County, Missouri, pointed out by Joseph Smith.

On Nov, 7, 1900, President Lorenzo Snow said, There are many people now under the sound of my voice, probably a majority, who will go back to Jackson County and assist in building the temple.”  (As of 2018, the  church has no temple in Jackson County, but the Kansas City Missouri Temple in nearby Clay County was dedicated in 2012. It is the church's 137th temple.  The Community of Christ, formerly the Reorganized LDS Church, dedicated a temple in 1994 in Independence, Jackson County.)

—Oliver B. Huntington recorded in his journal that as far back as 1837, I know that he [Joseph Smith] said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we dothat they live generally to the age of 1,000 years. The Journal of Discourses records that Brigham Young believed the sun was also inhabited: 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.

Brigham Young, Joseph Fielding Smith, Elder Bruce R. McConkie and others taught that Mary became pregnant with Jesus as a result of sexual relations with God the Father.  (Begotten means begotten; and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers, wrote McConkie.)

—Joseph Smith and others traveled to Salem, Massachusetts, in 1836 after he reported receiving a revelation that large amounts of money would become available there. And it shall come to pass in due time that I shall give the city unto your hands, that you shall have power over it . . . and its wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours. (D&C 111:4)  When no money was forthcoming, they returned to Kirtland. (Unlike the journeys involving Zion's Camp and the Martin-Willie handcart tragedy, the spin doctors at church headquarters haven't yet seen fit to apply their talents to the Salem trek.)

In 1838, Elder Parley P. Pratt said, I will state as a prophecy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false.

President David O. McKay called the Roman Catholic Church one of the two great anti-Christs in the world. Communism was the other.  (David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, p. 120.) Elder Bruce R. McConkie wrote in Mormon Doctrine that the Roman Catholic Church was the great and abominable church.” Today's Latter-day Saints use neither great nor abominable in describing the Catholic Church, although false is acceptable. 

At least three church presidents have said it would be better for females to be killed by an attacker rather than to be raped by him.

—Wickedness. A crime. An evil practice worthy of punishment.  Until the 1980s, these terms were used by church presidents to describe birth control and limiting family size.  In 1998, however, the Church Handbook stated, The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is  extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord.  Prophets have reversed or revised their position on other women's issues such as women in the workplace, dress standards and certain limits on female participation in church meetings. For example, women didn't offer a prayer in General Conference until 2013.

—Many top authorities, including Presidents Wilford Woodruff and Joseph F. Smith, knowingly made false statements (sometimes under oath) relating to the continued practice of plural marriage after the 1890 Manifesto. (See Plural Marriages after the 1890 Manifesto, by D. Michael Quinn.)


Joseph Smith and subsequent prophets believed that all American Indians were Lamanites.  However, the introduction to the Book of Mormon was revised in 2007 to say that the Lamanites are among the ancestors of the American Indians.  In the Doctrine and Covenants, American Indians are still referred to as Lamanites. 

—Today's church does not believe Brigham Young's statement that God the Father is a developing being and is still progressing in knowledge and wisdom.

Elder Orson Hyde taught that Jesus was the bridegroom in the marriage of Cana and that his wife later bore him natural children.”  (In ancient Israel, couples married young.  If Hyde is right and Jesus did indeed have children, it is likely those children were entering their teen years during his ministry.  This may partly explain why the Lord spent long periods of time away from home and was known to be a winebibber.) 

President Lorenzo Snow's teaching, As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be,” has fallen on hard times and today is often greeted with roughly the same enthusiasm as poor relatives who show up unannounced at the front door. (The lack of enthusiasm may be related to scriptures saying that God is unchanging.)
Similarly, Joseph Smith taught that God the Father is an exalted man who once dwelled on a planet as we do now. 

—The church allowed multiple members to drink from the same large cup in sacrament meetings. When health problems arose, the practice was discontinued.

President Heber J. Grant and other leaders supported Prohibition in 1919, opposed Repeal of Prohibition in 1933, and opposed Social Security and other New Deal programs.

While European nations and Jews were under assault by Nazi Germany, the First Presidency supported isolationism.

President Anthony R. Ivins of the First Presidency said that the lost Ten Tribes were in the British Isles, where we have always known them to be.

—Authorities have taught that children who die in infancy will be reared to adulthood in the celestial kingdom. (This teaching is greatly complicated by the fact that the church also teaches that most earthly parents are not bound for celestial glory and by the fact that some worthy parents do not die until 90 years or more after their child died, leaving us to wonder if the child remained a child for all those decades.)

President David O. McKay told a 1961 general conference audience that the church was grieved and shocked that the U.S. Supreme Court refused to allow federal and state governments to make belief in God a requirement for all officeholders. He and others favored requiring prayer in public schools.

Church leaders have called homosexuality a crime, a mental illness and learned behavior.  They have approved the use at BYU of weird aversion-therapy techniques to cure gays of their gayness.

Church leaders have supported very strange Utah liquor laws and later opposed (or declined to support) the same laws.

In general conference addresses, President Harold B. Lee, President Spencer W. Kimball and Elder David A. Bednar have declared that Jesus was born on April 6.  (Note: Their assertions were based on a single verse of scripture, D&C 20:1. The Joseph Smith Papers Project has recently shown that this verse was not revealed to Joseph Smith as part of the original Section 20 but was added merely to preserve the date of the church's organization.)

Elder Joseph Fielding Smith predicted in 1958 that it is doubtful that man will ever be permitted to make any instrument or ship to travel through space and visit the moon or any distant planet. . . . All this talk about space travel and the visiting of other worlds brings to mind vividly an attempt long ago made by foolish men who tried to build to heaven.

First Presidency declaration of Jan. 5, 1982, described oral sex as “an unholy and impure practice.”

In conference, Elder Gordon B. Hinckley said that it is a negative thing to be reminded of the dying Christ. He observed that Latter-day Saints do not use the cross as a symbol of our faith because  “for us, the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the living Christ.”  However, the sacrament hymns and the Scriptures repeatedly remind us that the death and suffering of Christ achieved victory over death and opened the doors of heaven to us.  See The cross = victory on this site.

In general conference, President Hinckley supported the 2003 Iraq War: “Those of us who are American citizens stand solidly with the president of our nation.”

—Church leaders supported three anti-gay marriage laws that likely contributed to the eventual legalization of same-sex marriage in all 50 states.  In 1996, LDS leaders backed the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was ruled unconstitutional in 2013.  In December 2013, Judge Robert J. Shelby ruled that Utah's Amendment 3 outlawing same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.  Two years after Shelby's ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court made gay marriages legal throughout the nation in 2015. The court's ruling cited California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage and had been strongly supported by the church.  It can be argued that the passage of DOMA, Amendment 3 and Proposition 8 all contributed to the momentum to legalize same-sex marriage in all 50 states that occurred with the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling. With Republicans in 2018 in control of the White House and Congress and with two right-wing justices joining the Supreme Court since the election of President Donald Trump, same-sex marriage might still be illegal in many states had the court not acted in 2015.

—Many of today's church members likely disagree with an Aug. 18, 1894, First Presidency recommendation that Latter-day Saints faithfully devote their energy and influence to the University of Utah rather than to BYU because they expected that the U. would become the great intermountain center for the diffusion of knowledge.

Last but not least is a well-intentioned whopper by President Thomas S. Monson in which he stated that in the all-church basketball tournament the most coveted prize was not to be adjudged first-place winner but rather to receive the sportsmanship award.

Related articles on this site: Obedience gone awry,” Falling short, staying put

Failed to make the top 40:

Although the church supported the execution of John D. Lee for the Mountain Meadows Massacre, it did not push for the execution of other members who participated in the killing of 120 emigrants.  Lee said he killed no one.

President David O. McKay sought to invite FBI director J. Edgar Hoover to speak in general conference but received little support.  (Hoover eventually became known for his secretive abuses of power, which led Congress to limit terms of future directors to 10 years.) 

Friday, February 24, 2017

A few heresies

Dressing for the last time

Having an earthly burial has never been a requirement for a heavenly resurrection. Therefore, the type of clothing placed on our corpse will have zero impact on our prospects for heavenly glory.  Still, most active, temple-endowed Latter-day Saints prefer to be attired in temple clothing in their coffins.  Here are 10 thoughts about why there is no need to dress the dead in temple clothing.

1.  Jesus was not buried in temple clothing, nor were virtually all of the great prophets.  Enoch, Elijah, Moses and Alma apparently weren't buried at all but went directly to heaven. 
2.  In the unlikely event that temple clothes are actually required on the other side, every worthy person will receive them.  Being buried in regular clothing won't hurt the worthy, and being buried in temple clothing won't help the unworthy.  It simply doesn't matter to a just God whether someone's body was buried in a clown suit or whether it re-entered the food chain after it was cremated, lost at sea, eaten by wolves or blown to smithereens.
3.  Any temple clothing provided in the next life will be superior to what was produced on earth and will not wear out.
4.  Any temple clothing made on the other side will be in the correct heavenly style.  (Most temple-goers today wouldn't be caught dead in the styles of the late 1800s.)
5.  We anticipate that in the Resurrection our bodies will be in the prime of life.  If this is indeed the case, earthly temple clothing (or any other clothing) that fits the bodies of worn-out, creaky old dead people is unlikely to fit the body of a vibrant resurrected being.  It will need to be replaced.
6. When Peter and John arrived in the tomb, they discovered that Christ had left behind his burial clothing.  Yet, when he later appeared to Magdalene and to other disciples, the risen Lord was clothed.  By discarding burial clothing made in this world, Jesus was perhaps telling us that clothing made on earth stays on earth.  He was also telling us that clothing (temple or otherwise) is available on the other side.  
7. The Doctrine and Covenants says that children who die before the age of 8 go directly to the celestial kingdomand not a one of them ever wore temple clothing. 
8.  Temple clothing made in heaven will not have been exposed to a corpse for an extended period of time. 
9.  Instead of adorning the dead, maybe temple clothing would better be donated for use by the living.  For Latter-day Saints who feel uneasy about using clothing left behind by a person who has died, be assured that such clothing is completely decoffinated.
10. Familial conflicts over whether to dress the deceased in temple clothing would be eliminated if everyone recognized that the clothing worn by the dead makes no more difference in the next life than whether the dead person was buried at all.

Putting temple clothing on corpses is nothing more than an unexamined tradition that we Latter-day Saints have become comfortable with. 

It is also good to keep in mind that the Scriptures say our bodies came from the dust of the earth and unto the dust they return. (Gen. 3:19, Eccl. 3:20, etc.) The one clear exception, of course, was Christthe only sinless adult to dwell on earth.   Despite scriptures that appear to say that our mortal bodies undergo change and resurrect, these temporary bodies partly consist of matter from plants and other animals (including long-dead humans whose remains had returned to the food chain). Our resurrected physical bodies, therefore, will surely consist of a new, nonperishable substance.

Isaiah said zero about the Book of Mormon

We Latter-day Saints routinely assert that Isaiah prophesied the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.

However, a closer look at Isaiah 29 reveals that the prophet most likely was speaking specifically about the Jerusalem of his era rather than about a latter-day people.  In 29:11, when he writes And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed his vision of all seems to refer to the existing spiritual blindness of both the learned and unlearned.  The marvellous work and a wonder mentioned in verse 14 most likely refers to the ending of this sorry state of affairs when Jerusalem's meek and humble turn to the Lord, perhaps a reference to the Christ's earthly ministry.

Writings in ancient times were routinely sealed (1 Kings 21:8), so the metaphorical learned man saying he couldn't read a sealed book (scroll) may merely point to his lack of interest in spiritual things; he apparently makes no effort to unseal the scroll.

In saying the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book, the word as tips us off that Isaiah is not speaking about an actual event but rather that he has made up a short parable to illustrate his point that the inhabitants of Ariel (Jerusalem) have departed from the Lord.  Yes, there are significant similarities in Isaiah 29: 11,12 to the modern experiences of Professor Anthon and Joseph Smith, but there are also significant dissimilarities. 

Nephi himself provides the best evidence that Isaiah was not speaking of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.  In borrowing from Isaiah 29, Nephi never says that Isaiah prophesied about a latter-day book. Instead, Nephi tells us that he has turned Isaiah's words into mine own prophecy (2 Nephi 25:7; see also 28:1; 30:3; 31:1).

It was Nephi, not Isaiah, who prophesied about the latter-day coming forth of the Book of Mormon.

An impression from above—or below

I was gazing toward heaven not long ago while pondering the words “following the prophet is always right, when a 121-word sentence distilled upon my mind as dew from heaven.  (Actually, I was in my recliner and bored, and there are plenty of English teachers who will insist that any sentence over 100 words sure as hell never came from heaven.)  Here’s what popped into my head:

“Proclaiming it is always right to follow another mortal is a concept hatched in the darkest corner of hell—in fact, not far from Donald Trump's summer residence—and was sent forth by Lucifer himself in the form of a putrid vapor that wafted through perdition’s borders and eventually distilled on the lobby floor at LDS Church headquarters where a custodian fully intended to wipe up the foul mess but became distracted by a perky young thing in a sleeveless T-shirt, thereby allowing it to ooze into the curriculum, correlation and publications areas where it spread like manure upon a pasture and has remained to this day although without the benefit of gentle breezes that often make manure-covered pastures more bearable.”

Heavenly Mother

We may have one or more heavenly mothers.  Or not.

Consider this:  Canonized, revealed LDS scripture deals with such lower-end topics as whether Jared Carter and George James should be ordained priests and whether a few missionaries should ride horses or mules.  (D&C 52:38; 62:7)  Yet, on the subject of Heavenly Mother, not a single word.  Surely the silence from God on such a major issue ought to be sufficient reason for the church to take a “we don't know” position on the subject.

Anyone who says that we have a heavenly mother is simply engaging in uncanonized speculation.  There is simply no scriptural evidence that either the Father or Christ have ever had a  wife.

Frankly, when Eliza R. Snow wrote “In the heavens are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare!” she was not issuing a revelation for the church but was merely engaging in deductive reasoning.  What Joseph Smith might have said on the subject may not be heresy, but it is certainly hearsay.  Yes, the Heavenly Mother teaching has a comfortable feel, it harmonizes well with other LDS doctrines, and other prophets have embraced the concept.  But that doesn't make it revelation nor does it make it true.

And we shouldn't rush to embrace the nonsense about Heavenly Father declining to reveal anything about his heavenly companion(s) because he didn't want foul-talking rascals here on earth to profane her name.  Such a view has at least two problems.  First, he could have revealed her existence without revealing her name.  After all, the Holy Ghost is a god, yet his name hasn't been revealed.  Second, if Mother in Heaven is so sensitive that her tender feelings would be hurt if mortals misused her name, we are forced to conclude that she isn't much of a goddess, because an omniscient goddess would be fully aware of despicable deeds that her spirit children commit that are far worse than misusing her name.

It is also a good idea to ask ourselves how the church can be sure that there is one Mother in Heaven when it seems entirely unsure about whether there is more than one.

Let's keep in mind that the God of the scriptures seems strong and decisive as well as kind, gentle, loving, patient and merciful.  In other words, a whole person, male and female.

In the event that there is no Mother in Heaven, what does tell us about sex in heaven?  Keep reading. 

The future of sex

A common LDS assumption about immortal beings is that it takes male and female—and probably sexual relations—to produce children.  In the Doctrine and Covenants, for example, we are told that a couple must be sealed as man and wife in order to have “an increase” in the next life. (D&C 131:4)  An inference is that “an increase” refers to offspring and is achieved through sex.  (Some Muslim men believe that if they die for their religion, they will be rewarded with 72 virgins who, presumably, would lose their virginity rather quickly after meeting up with the virile martyr to whom they were assigned. This isn’t taught in the Quran.  It may simply be a tool to get Muslim men to do their home teaching. If they're anything like a lot of LDS men, they'd probably settle for 36 virgins if they were permitted to skip the home teaching.)

A strong scriptural case can be made that sexual relations may not be the way of the gods.  We believe that circulatory, digestive and other bodily systems undergo major change in the next life.  (It is hard to conceive of Bandaids, indigestion, root canals and restrooms in the Celestial Kingdom.)  Consequently, we may discover that reproductive systems will also become distant memories.  Indeed, at some future day we may all enjoy a good chuckle if it turns out that the very God who gave us a powerful sex drive deliberately placed our sexual organs near organs of excretion merely to demonstrate that a heavenly being can have a down-to-earth sense of humor.

It is a virtual certainty that God the Father did not produce his trillions of spirit children in the way mortals produce their children.  Otherwise, his newborn children, would have possessed physical bodies just as he does.  It's a natural-law thing.  Imagine the shock in a local maternity ward if a woman gave birth to a spirit child!  Pity the poor nurse who must explain to her supervisor why she recorded zero as the birth weight.

Likewise, when Christ tells the brother of Jared “man have I created after the body of my spirit,” we can be sure the creation process used by Christ, a spirit at the time, was not a sexual one.  Otherwise, “man” (Adam and Eve and their descendants) would also have been born on earth as spirits.

Also, Mary was told that “the Holy Ghost shall come unto thee” (Luke 1:35) and “that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”  Again, the creation process is clearly not intercourse—the Father isn’t even present.

If we presume that God needed to interact sexually with one or more wives in order to create his spirit children, we put ourselves in the rather awkward position of wondering how he “interacted” to create animals.  We have laws against that sort of thing.

For those who speculate that immortals reproduce through sexual relations, it may be advisable to keep in mind that “as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than yours.”  (Isaiah 55:9)  In her experience with dying, LDS poet Emma Lou Thayne glimpsed “that world beyond bliss, beyond joy, beyond ecstasy,” which hints at something “higher” than any mortal ecstasy, including that associated with sexual relations.  It may also be useful to keep in mind that if all resurrected beings have physical bodies, children produced through sexual relations would also have physical bodies and would not need to dwell on an earth to obtain such a body, clearly contrary to the Plan of Salvation.  (And speaking of resurrected beings, the Scriptures suggest we all will live as adults and that the traditional family—babies, children, parents, grandparents, etc.—will be merely a relic from our earthling era. Of course, if we become gods and somehow produce spirit children, they presumably would inhabit an earth and temporarily experience the same baby, child, parent, grandparent thing that we went through.) 

If the idea of no male-female sex in the hereafter seems depressing, this essay does not assert there is no sex in heaven.  It only suggests that when it comes to either a Mother in Heaven or sex in heaven, we should not present opinions, belief or speculation as knowledge or doctrine.  Heaven may have a way of creating children that does not require male and female gods to get all hot and bothered.  And I wouldn't blame a gay person for viewing this essay as confirmation that the male-female thing is way overrated. 

Cutting in line

Perhaps more than any other well-intentioned endeavor in human history, latter-day temple work and family history appears to be based on cutting in line.

Here's how it works. Only a tiny fraction of those who have dwelled on earth over the past 6,000 years or so have received the ordinances that the church teaches are necessary to live again with God. These long-dead folks are still waiting.  However, if you are alive and have joined the church, you may very well have already been temple-endowed.  In other words, you went to the front of the line. 

Of course, we haven't neglected the dead entirely. We are constantly doing ordinances of salvation vicariously for them. If you died in the past 250 years and are related to a living LDS family, chances are good that someone has researched your connection to them and has submitted your name for ordinance work.  Alas, those who have been dead the longestfor thousands of yearsare still waiting.  In other words, we living people have been joined by our recently dead relatives in cutting in line.

God is fair.  Perhaps the church could take a new approach, with the First Presidency offering a statement such as:

In the interest of fairness, vicarious temple ordinances in the future will be performed first for those who have been dead the longest. Those who are now performing ordinance work in temples will immediately be asked to stop attending temples and instead concentrate their efforts on searching out the lines of their own family until they can certify that they have exhausted every avenue of research. Then, they will be asked to join others in searching out all other lines in the human family. When all options have been exhausted, performing of vicarious ordinances will resume but with one key difference: The work for those who have been dead the longest will be performed first.

When it comes to temple and family history work, as in any other endeavors that may occupy large amounts of our time, it is wise to live an examined life in which we are constantly watchful to ensure that doing something good doesn't cause us to neglect something better.  This is particularly true in a world where so many are poverty-stricken, homeless, hungry and suffering in other ways.  If the parable of the Good Samaritan had been given in our day, we must ask ourselves if the priest and Levite who pass by the injured man might have been described as people on their way to a temple or family history center. (I'm not saying this is, in fact, the case. I am merely saying it is something worth considering when one considers what to do with the time we are allotted in this life.) 

P.S. There is little evidence that Christ, Mary and most of the great prophets have ever had temple ordinances done on earth in their behalf, but we assume they have inherited the celestial kingdom already.  Indeed, Christ was the Lord God Almighty long before he was a mortal and remains the God who possesses all power over the earth.

Lest it appear from these thoughts under Cutting in line that I believe work for the dead is intrinsically unfair and isn't worth the effort, I would like to offer an idea on how our current approach to temple work may indeed be entirely fair.  It goes like this:  We know that the Atonement of Christ was retroactive and that people who lived on earth repented and were forgiven long before Christ atoned for their sins.  Therefore, instead of assuming that righteous people who lived on earth before Christ remain in limbo because their temple work remains undone, perhaps the ordinances that will eventually be performed are already in effect for those who will accept them.  This may explain why Joseph Smith saw that his deceased brother Alvin was dwelling in the Celestial Kingdom although no temple ordinances had been performed in his behalf.

Pity the poor teacher

In relief society and priesthood classes, the course of instruction since 1998 has been Teachings of Presidents of the Church.  The 2017 manual features President Gordon B. Hinckley.  We instructors understand that we are expected to teach in a way that invites the Spirit and that builds confidence in leaders of the church.  Unfortunately, the manuals often make that tricky.

What is a teacher to do when he disagrees with the theology taught in a key section of the lesson? An example:  In Chapter 8 of the Hinckley manual, the first page and a half imply that it’s a negative thing to be reminded of the death and sufferings of Christ.  (See “The cross = victory” on this site.)

Or, what were teachers to do when Lesson 11 on following the living prophet in the Ezra Taft Benson manual in 2015 was based heavily on a Benson talk that was not well-received by then President Spencer W. Kimball?  Naturally, this would be especially difficult when the teacher totally agrees with President Kimball.

Or, how comfortable would a teacher be testifying to the truthfulness of a lesson that contains internal contradictions as well as teachings that aren’t accepted today?  On this final conundrum, I offer six problems below from Chapter 2, “God the Eternal Father,” from the 2011 Joseph Smith manual.

1.  Joseph Smith is quoted as saying, “I learned in the scriptures that God was the same yesterday, today, and forever.”  He also refers to the Father as the God “who was and is and will be from all eternity to eternity.”  Later, however, the manual quotes Joseph as saying, “God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man.” 

2.  The lesson says Joseph Smith believed that God the Father was “the Great Parent of the universe” and that “the Great Parent of the universe looks upon the whole of the human family with a fatherly care and paternal regard; He views them as His offspring.” (Italics added)  The Heavenly Father described by Joseph Smith seems to be a single parent; no mention is made of a Heavenly Mother.  This, of course, does not mean Joseph was wrong; it’s simply different from what the church teaches today.

3.  Referring to God the Father, the manual quotes Joseph Smith:  “Adam  . . . received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with Him.”  LDS scripture teaches that Christ was the God who created the earth, who created the physical bodies of Adam and Eve, and who interacts with mortals.  The only scriptural account of the Father appearing to man is his 1820 appearance to Joseph Smith. 

4.  The prophet Joseph instructs us to come to the Father: “When we understand the character of God and know how to come to Him, He begins to unfold the heavens to us, and to tell us all about it. When we are ready to come to Him, He is ready to come to us.”   The Scriptures repeatedly and emphatically teach that man is to come to Christ.  The Father commands: “whosoever will not repent and come unto my Beloved Son, them will I cut off . . . ” (3 Nephi 21:20)   The Son is the God who has been revealed to us and is the revelator authorized “to unfold the heavens to us.”  In the January 1976 Ensign, Elder Bruce R. McConkie noted that whenever Joseph Smith asked the Father, in the name of the Son, for answers to questions, “the answering voice was not that of the Father but of the Son.”

5.  Speaking of the Godhead, Joseph Smith observes that “the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones but is a personage of Spirit.”  A few lines later, he is quoted as saying that any being “without body or parts is nothing.”

6.  The manual cites secondhand sources who say they heard Joseph Smith say that God the Father “presides” in heaven in the role of “President.”   For purposes of understanding our relationship with the Godhead, however, it would have been helpful to mention that when it comes to man on earth, the Scriptures say that Christ is both Father and Son, that the fulness of the Godhead resides in him and that he possesses all power over the earth and, like the Father, has all knowledge.  As God of the whole earth, he simply does not need to be “presided over” or to be “under the direction” of someone else.  Whatever he says or does is automatically the mind and will of the Father.  Christ is a full-fledged god, not a counselor in a presidency or bishopric.  Indeed, Elder Bruce R. McConkie says Christ’s role as Father is “over, above and in addition to” that of God the Father and that Christ is “God of Gods.”

Note:  Thankfully, the manual writers didn’t include Joseph Smith’s statements that Jehovah is God the Father, a viewpoint that pops up often in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. (The church says Jehovah is Christ.)  For what it’s worth, the fact that Joseph Smith misidentified Jehovah (at least for a while) shouldn't bother anyone.  It only confirms his less-educated status and his need to rely on “the gift and power of God” in translating the Book of Mormon.

By the way, I’m not saying that I know my views on the Godhead, Mother in Heaven, etc., are more accurate than prevailing teachings in the church, but I think there’s a fine chance that some of them are.  Frankly, I’d like to hear less of “we know” in the church and more of “we believe”or “we don't know.