Never Glorify Murder or Violence

/in /by

reform-banners23

In LDS theology, it’s quite common for leaders and teachers to use biblical examples of murder and genocide as example’s of the faithfulness of individuals in scripture[1]. Scriptural stories such as Abraham’s attempted murder of his son, the Levites’ murders at Sinai, Nephi’s murder of Laban, or the Israelite’s genocidal campaign during the conquest of Palestine are constantly used as examples of how obedience to “god” is more important than the sixth commandment or teachings of Jesus.

These types of teaching are common among radicalized Islam and Christian fundamentalist sects and have served as the basis for numberless heinous acts of violence and brutality from the Mountain Meadows Massacre, to the Crusades and Inquisition to the current violence of Islamic Terrorism.

I believe it should be taught that all such teaching are based on distorted biblical theology. I think instead of properly viewing Old Testament violence as part of a “lower law” given to ancient Israel according to their own desires for wickedness, and done away with by Christ and the higher law of love and mercy— LDS have too often supported or even glorified the violence and brutality of the Old Testament as a way to promote obedience to religious authority at all costs.

14 But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble. (Jacob 4:14)

23 Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God; 24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory. 25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also; 26 And the lesser priesthood continued… (D&C 84:23–26)

Reasoning

Stories from the Old Testament should not be used to justify violent, archaic and conscionably wrong practices. The Old Covenant, according to most LDS and New Testament theology, was a lower law given to individuals too evil and selfish to live the higher law brought by Christ. Thus it is not to be followed by those professing Christ’s higher law.

Perhaps one of the best examples that I’m glad I’ve never heard in Sunday School as an example of how to diligently follow the Lord or His priesthood is Exodus 32:27–29

27 Moses told them, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: Each of you, take your swords and go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other. Kill everyone—even your brothers, friends, and neighbors.” 28 The Levites obeyed Moses’ command, and about 3,000 people died that day.  29 Then Moses told the Levites, “Today you have ordained yourselves for the service of the Lord, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Today you have earned a blessing.” (Ex 32:27-29)

D&C 84:23–27 teaches that because of the wickedness of the ancient Israelites, God took the Higher law away from them, and “in his wrath and anger” gave them a lower, preparatory gospel that they might actually be able to live. Christ echoes this same principle when he tells the Pharisees that certain dictates of the Mosaic law were given “because of the hardness of your hearts” (Matt 19:8, Mark 10:5). David puts forward this same logic in Psalms 81:10–12, stating that because the ancient Israelites “would not harken to my voice”, “I gave them up to their own hearts lust: and they walked in their own counsels”. Stephan went as far as to say that “God turned, and gave [Israel] up to worship the hosts of heaven” after their sin at Sinai (Acts 7:42). Paul echos the same teaching saying that after Israel “changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man”, God “gave them up to uncleanness though the lusts of their own hearts” (Romans 1:21–25).

The Book of Mormon states that because the ancient Jews were such a “stiffnecked”, “blind” and murdering people, God took “away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble.” (Jacob 4:14)

Instead of glorifying Old Testament acts of violence, or using them as examples of righteousness, these acts should be seen as examples of how Old Testament prophets and people’s were given instructions to help them accomplish “their own heart’s lusts” (psalms 81:12). Instead of pretending that Old Testament Jews were blessed for their murders and genocide, we should look for ways that they were cursed.

Nephi’s Murder as a Curse

Nephi’s murder of Laban is a perfect example. If we are to hold to the historicity of this account, instead of using this murder of an unconscious man as an example of how Nephi was obedient, heroic, righteous and made the best choice, we should consider that “the Lord delivering Laban into [Nephi’s] hands” (1 Ne 3:29) was either an instruction from a lower angel (see D&C 76:86–88) or a test which Nephi failed.

Even though the text suggests Laban was a murderous thief who not only stole Nephi’s family property, but sent his servants to kill Nephi and his brothers, Nephi should have supposed that if his God was strong enough deliver Israel from the army of the Egyptians by miracles, he would be strong enough to deliver Nephi and the plates to the promised land in a way that did not require cold-blooded murder of a pathetic, wicked man as a sign of obedience. If God’s Justice called for the death of Laban, God could have accomplished this himself by illness or any one of many divine means. Does it not make more sense to teach that Nephi was being tested as to whether he would obey God’s Higher law which says, “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay?” (Deut 32:35, Romans 12:19,  Mormon 3:15; 8:20,  D&C 82: 23.) What does the following scripture say about Nephi’s murder or Israel’s genocidal takeover of the promised land?

5 But, behold, the judgments of God will overtake the wicked; and it is by the wicked that the wicked are punished; (Mormon 4:5)

Christ’s higher law given to deal with those who seek our lives is this: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matt 5:38–39)  Perhaps had Nephi passed this text he may have won the hearts of his brothers instead of simply exacerbating the already growing divide between them. A valid case can be made in the Book of Mormon text that continual warfare between the people of Nephi and the Lamanites was a curse or karmaic retribution that may have been avoided had Nephi been progressed enough to live the higher law and show an example of love to his brothers. Nephi murdered Laban and then his brother’s sought to murder him. Nephi’s murder is the start of long cycle of violence perpetuated in his posterity. Nephi goes to great lengths in his text to justify his killing of Laban, suggesting it was an act which constantly pricked his conscience.  And it is certainly conceivable to imagine the destruction and curse which comes upon Nephi’s people as a result of the divide between him and his brothers, was a lesson which God used to try and show Nephi the fruits of the lower law of justice verses the higher law of mercy and love. Nephi’s focus on God’s justice instead of his mercy comes back to bite him as it proves the complete destruction of his seed.

“7 O the pain, and the anguish of my soul for the loss of the slain of my people! For I, Nephi, have seen it, and it well nigh consumeth me before the presence of the Lord; but I must cry unto my God: Thy ways are just…. 10 And when these things have passed away a speedy destruction cometh unto my people; for, notwithstanding the pains of my soul, I have seen it” (2 Ne 26:1–10)

Contrast Nephi’s story with that of Jesus and the people of Ammon, who chose the higher law of laying down their own lives instead of lifting the sword to defend themselves.  As a result of these individual’s self-sacrifices, divides are healed and unified, while those who seek justice instead of mercy, tend to simply exacerbate growing divides.

In fact, note how ironic it is that the exact rationalization that Nephi received from the “Spirit” when directed to kill Laben that “it is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief” (1 Nephi 4:13), is almost word-for-word the rationalization used by Caiaphas to kill Jesus. In John 11:40 it gives Caiaphas’ rationalizations saying, “then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, ‘You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.’” (NIV John 11:49–50)

The Murder of the Levites & Conquest of Palestine (Genocide)

Take as another example the account of murder associated with the Golden Calf in Exodus 32. After coming down from Mount Sinai with the law from God which commands Israel not to kill or to make and worship human-conceived gods, Moses finds his brother Aaron is already making the people an Egyptian calf idol to worship. The text then states, that Moses, in his anger, “threw the stone tablets to the ground, smashing them at the foot of the mountain”. After this he takes the calf they made “and burned it, then ground it into powder… and forces the people to drink it” (v. 20). Finally he commands his tribe of Levites to,

Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.”  (Ex 32:27)

Moses was likely so angry because he had just finished pleading for mercy on behalf of his people to a Lord who was threatening to destroy them (Ex 32:11–14; Deut 9:9–14, Num 16:43). In his wrath, Moses’ commands Aaron and the Levites to mercilessly slaughter everyone involved in making the calf (even though Aaron and the Levites were apparently just as at fault for the episode), after which he ordains Aaron and the Levites to the “service of the Lord” because they “obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. [for which] Today you have earned a blessing.” (Exodus 32:29)

This story serves as a segue to the conquest of Palestine, wherein Israel’s “god” essentially “commands” his people to racially cleanse the land in a genocidal conquest for territory. (Deut 20:16–18; Deut 13:7–12; Num 31:17–21; Ezekiel 9:5–6 )

For those looking for a scriptural excuse to be violent, or for leaders looking for ways to teach unquestioning obedience, these violent murders and conquests can be used as examples of obedient, righteous desirable behavior. (As it is used by LDS Apostle Jeffery R Holland in #3 of this article for instance). But for those who subscribe to Christ’s higher law of mercy, there are more consistent explanations.

We’ve already gone over how Jacob 4:14, D&C 84:23–27, Matt 19:8, Mark 10:5, Romans 1:21–25, Acts 7:42 and other scriptures paint Old Testament acts which conflict with Christ’s higher law NOT as examples of righteousness, or obedience to a violent god who later “changes” because of Christ’s atonement, but as examples of an ancient people who rejected the higher law and were thus allowed to build for themselves a god largely of their own creation (a temple or idol fashioned by human hands. see Acts 17:24, Heb 9:11,24). Twice in the New Testament, God and His revelations are compared to a mirror (see 1 Cor 13:12, James 1:23) which somehow reflect only the “part” of God’s glory that we are currenly ready for according to our own desires for wickedness or righteousness (see also Jacob 4:14).  Is it not likely that Moses and Aaron were not allowed to enter the “promised land” as a symbolic gesture showing how they, like Israel itself, failed God’s tests and reflected their own wickedness and thirst for vengeance on God? In fact, the scriptures suggest that ONLY JESUS passed all of God’s tests— symbolized by the three temptations of Jesus for food, religious prestige and political power (Matt 4:1–11).  Christ teaches the higher law by passing up ALL THREE OF THESE, choosing martyrdom before all worldly rewards.

Is it not possible that the God’s of human religion and the archetypes of religious scripture are mirrors which reveal what lies in our own human hearts more than the actual councils of an omnipresent superuniversal being?

We should be more careful in the ways we glorify violence, and use the Book of Mormon & D&C’s sound advice showing that the higher law is sacrifice and martyrdom (people of Ammon, Jesus). And through the lower law, violence and killing in self defense is permissible (Alma 43:9–15). Whereas preemptive violence is only permissible under the lower law once several attempts and mercy and peace have been made (D&C 105:38–40, 98:34-36).

34 And if any nation, tongue, or people should proclaim war against them, they should first lift a standard of peace unto that people, nation, or tongue;

35 And if that people did not accept the offering of peace, neither the second nor the third time, they should bring these testimonies before the Lord;

36 Then I, the Lord, would give unto them a commandment, and justify them in going out to battle against that nation, tongue, or people. (D&C 98:34–36)

Abraham’s attempted sacrifice of Isaac

In closing, consider John B. Newbrough’s version of the story of Abraham’s attempted sacrifice of Issac. Like the Book of Mormon it’s one of many of New England’s 17th century channeled spiritualist texts.

24/9.10. Now after Abraham and his people had returned to Jireh, his camp, and it was night, God said to Abraham: Be steadfast, and show your people so that they may understand my words.
24/9.11. And while they were still praying before the altar, God withdrew from Abraham, and allowed the evil angels, who had followed them from Sodom and Gomorrah, to draw near the altar. And one of the angels clothed himself in a great light, and, adorned with sparkling gems and a crown, he appeared, so all the multitude of people could look upon him.
24/9.12. Abraham said: Who are you? And the spirit said: I am your God, ruler of heaven and earth! Abraham said: I am your servant; what may I do for you? And the spirit said: You shall take your only son, Isaac, and your hosts who were with you at Sodom and Gomorrah, and go with me where I will lead you, for I have a great work for you.
24/9.13. Abraham said: I will do whatever you put upon me to do.
24/9.14. So in the morning Abraham and his son Isaac, and the hosts who had been with Abraham to Sodom and Gomorrah, assembled together. And Abraham spoke, saying: Where to, O God?
24/9.15. The spirit answered, saying: Take sticks and a firebrand (torch) and come to the summit of the hill over there, for you shall restore the rites of burnt offerings. || Abraham told the people what God had said, so they began, and Isaac carried the bundle of willows, such as basket-makers use, saying: This will light the large pieces; but what will you burn for an offering, O father? And Abraham said: God will provide.
24/9.16. And when they ascended to the place, Abraham gathered logs and heaped them up, and Isaac placed the willows.
24/9.17. Then the spirit spoke, saying: What shall a man love above all things in the world? And Abraham said: God. And the spirit said: For which reason you shall offer your only son, Isaac, as a burnt offering. And it shall be testimony before your people that you will obey God even to the sacrifice of your own flesh and kin.
24/9.18. Abraham said: Show me that you are God, so that I may not err; for I have been commanded not to kill!
24/9.19. And the spirit departed away from Abraham, perceiving that he knew the higher law. And Isaac was grieved at heart, for he desired to witness what a sacrifice was. And the people, seeing a ram near at hand, went and caught it, and slaughtered it, and sprinkled the blood on the sacrifice, and they lit the fire, roasted the flesh, then took it and gave it to the poor.
24/9.20. And Abraham called the place Jehovah-Jireh, and they returned to the camp; and Abraham, being moved by God, spoke before the people.

24/10.1. Abraham said: This testimony I declare to you, regarding which, your own brethren are witnesses, that even the chosen of God can be deceived by evil angels; for they can take any name and form; and, having no fear of God before them, declare falsehood for truth and darkness for light.
24/10.2. And also, as you have seen, the evilest of cities, even as well as the purest, may be the abiding place of angels.
24/10.3. For which reason you shall not seek signs and miracles, for these may be from evil spirits, even though they show their bodies or converse learnedly. It is not in the power of man to know by words and signs, or by oaths or promises, what is truth.
24/10.4. But the Father has created one thing besides, which is His Own Light. For which reason be believing toward men and angels; and when they teach you according to Jehovah, which is life to all, and happiness to all, without sacrifice to any, they are holy.
24/10.5. If man or angel says: Visit the sick, and administer to the distressed, || follow his advice, for it is of the Father.
24/10.6. But if man or angel says: Do this, and you shall have profit, or glory, or applause, || do not obey him, for he advises for yourself and not for the brotherhood of man. He is not of God.
24/10.7. For spirits will come disguised as your fathers and mothers who are dead, professing love and profit to you. Do not believe them, except when they teach you to sacrifice self for the good of others.
24/10.8. The wicked in heart, having profited in herds, and in gold and silver, say: Behold, God has blessed me! But I say to you, they are cursed, and not of God. Has he gathered you together here because you were rich? You were slaves, and in poverty; sick, and in bondage. And he came and delivered you. Be like him, and he will abide with you.
24/10.9. If a man comes to you, saying: Behold, this is my coat; give it to me! You shall say: Prove yourself as to who you are. But if a man comes to you, saying: Your herd has gone astray; you shall not say to him: Prove yourself as to who you are. But go, and see after your herd.
24/10.10. If a spirit says: Behold, I am your father, say to him: It is well; what do you want? And when he answers you, consider if his words are of God, which are for the glory of the Creator. And if his words are not of God, you shall challenge him to prove himself.
24/10.11. As God is captain of heaven and earth to all righteous souls, so is there a satan who is captain over evil spirits.
24/10.12. And to the extent that the kings’ peoples do not have faith in the Father, so do their souls fall prey to satan and his hosts.
24/10.13. Yet, neither shall man flatter himself by saying: Behold, I have joined the Believers; my soul shall escape hell. || For in that day and hour God may be putting him to the test, to see if his heart is for good works and holiness. || For, because you profess God, you are doubly bound to practice godliness in your behavior toward men and angels. (Oahspe 24/9:10 – 10:13)

Disavow Priesthood Racism

/in /by

reform-banners17

With the recent Church Essay regarding Blacks and the Priesthood, this reform is now done! (although the church still needs to apologize and explain the incorrect scriptural interpretations which were used to justify the racism)

The LDS Church needs to completely disavow it’s historically preached doctrines concerning priesthood racism. Excluding “Blacks” from the priesthood is based on several very faulty assumptions.

  1. That Blacks of African decent are descended directly from the biblical Cain, Ham or Egyptus.
  2. That Christ did not open the doors for the priesthood to be given to all the worthy races of the earth instead of just the tribe of Levi.

The official position and doctrine of the church going from Brigham Young to Spencer W. Kimball, can be summed up in the following letter from the First Presidency in the 1960’s.

LDS first presidency letter and policy concerning blacks and the priesthood.

LDS first presidency letter and policy concerning blacks and the priesthood.

This attitude was based on a particular interpretation of both LDS, Christian and Jewish Scripture.  It was the official “doctrine” of the church, and was based on many quotes spoken “as a prophet” such as this one from Brigham Young.

If there never was a prophet, or apostle of Jesus Christ spoke it before, I tell you, this people that are commonly called Negroes are the children of old Cain. I know they are, I know that they cannot bear rule in the priesthood, for the curse on them was to remain upon them, until the residue of the posterity of Michal and his wife receive the blessings, the seed of Cain would have received had they not been cursed; and hold the keys of the priesthood, until the times of the restitution shall come, and the curse be wiped off from the earth, and from Michael’s seed. — Brigham Young, Feb, 5, 1852

After listening to a Brigham Young speech in the Tabernacle, Wilford Woodruff records the following Brigham Young quote in his journal:

“If any man mingles his seed with the seed of Cane the only way he Could get rid of it or have salvation would be to Come forward & have his head Cut off & spill his Blood upon the ground. It would also take the life of his Children.”
-Brigham Young  (1852, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 4, p. 97)

These attitudes were likely derived and certainly upheld by an incorrect interpretation of LDS scripture. LDS leaders did not recognize that accounts in the pearl of Great Price describing the curse of Cain & Ham were not revealed in order to justify some kind of continued belief in this curse, but as a needed backstory to help modern people understand the basis for ancient Jewish racism.

The truth is, that ancient Jews, along with many ancient peoples were racist.  Galatians 2, is only one of many examples showing the feelings of racial superiority of Jews over gentiles. The entirety of the Old Testament is an account of the Jews rejecting Moses invitation to be reconciled to God on Mount Horeb, and instead being given up to a “lower law” and “preparatory priesthood” run by lower rulers and lower rules of conduct.

23 Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God;

24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.

25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;

26 And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;

In my article “Oh ye fair ones: The implications of racism and genocide on Book of Mormon DNA evidence“, I show how the entirety of the Bible and Book of Mormon are history lessons, showing modern Israel the errors of the past, and exhorting us not to make those same mistakes.  I show how it was the systemic continued racism of the Nephites against the darker skinned Lamanites which eventually led to the wholesale genocide of the whiter Nephite people (largely Nephites who held to Israeli purist doctrine, maintaining their “fair” complexion) by the darker Lamanites (compose largely of darker skinned natives wrongly thought to be “cursed” Lamanites along with a smaller faction of mixed-race Lehite decedents and dissenters).

But instead of seeing and learning from the important lessons being taught in the Book of Mormon racism along with its explained racist foundations revealed in the Pearl of Great Price. Early LDS leaders simply fell into the same mistaken sins as these ancient Jewish people.  And, of course, the Book of Mormon explains this is part of the test given to the latter-day Gentiles.

9 And when they shall have received this, which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them.

10 And if it so be that they will not believe these things, then shall the greater things be withheld from them, unto their condemnation.

However, the invitation is extended to repent of this wickedness and work to restore the wrongs of the past in order to be numbered with Israel at the end of the Times of the Gentiles, when the gospel is taken from the fair skinned Gentiles of Europe and its colonial outposts, and is returned to the Muslims of the Middle East, the Latins of the America’s and of course the elect of Israel scattered densely among those of African heritage.

Make Women Truly Equal

/in /by

Reform Action #7 of 20   (see all reforms)

This is a difficult topic and I need more revelation to treat it properly. As I’ve written and re-written these reform ideas, the Spirit has continually impressed upon the idea that there are deep mysteries concerning the true nature of female priesthood (as intimated in the temple) unknown to most which keep this topic in a state of misunderstanding. It may boil down to the fact that women lead in the spirit world and men lead in the physical world & the way in which women are treated by ‘those in authority’ in the church is the greatest single test of righteousness in this probationary period.

I still believe that somehow the LDS church should follow the temple’s lead of making the women priestesses with their own priestess organization (not sure how this would be implemented). Also women should be the primary healers in priesthood blessings (see this LDS living article about how LDS women used to do this). I think this was the idea from the beginning and why it’s intertwined the temple ceremony (especially in the woman’s part in the second anointing). Joseph Smith was incredibly progressive, and perhaps now the the church might be ready for what he envisioned, we should take some leaps. Women should be allowed to ordain their youth into that female priestess organization (doesn’t necessarily even need to be in the same way with laying on of hands… in the BOM it seems they had a tradition of ‘clapping backs’ to ordain).  And their leadership structure should be equal to men’s (at least in developed areas of the church).  I’m sure if the church would simply open their hearts to the justice of equality, the Spirit would lead us to a structure & label that would satisfy everyone, in the same way the spirit slowly led the church to give those of African decent the priesthood (something which was wrong to bar them from in the first place–even if the demand for black priesthood holders was minuscule during that time period).

As one looks at the history of brutal warfare that marked the advance of civilization it’s fairly obvious why the physically strong ended up being ‘naturally selected’ to rule and hold power. It’s also obvious why social leaders, religious leaders and the divine would have had men start and run religions in their formative periods. As also why it was so important to shelter women to assure the survival of a clan’s future generations. But that time has past in the civilized world and the church needs to heed the Spirit which has pervaded the nations in showing that today is a time for complete gender equality in civilized regions of the world. The church would do well to understand the meaning of the following scripture and work to assure its fulfillment before God steps in and fulfills it in ways we do not like.

26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; 27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: 28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

30 But remember that all my judgments are not given unto men; and as the words have gone forth out of my mouth even so shall they be fulfilled, that the first shall be last, and that the last shall be first in all things whatsoever I have created. (D&C 29:30, Matt. 20:16; Luke 13:30; 1 Ne. 13:42; Ether 13:12; )

Create a system to promote activism and unsolicited volunteerism

/in /by

reform-banners18

Create a system of activism and unsolicited volunteerism. Perhaps a system of self appointed callings? (or something to this effect).

Reasoning:

For any free system to work people need to feel like they have a voice, and a system or avenue to effectuate change. There are many people with passion burning inside of them who have not yet decided whether they are going to focus that energy on selfishness, selflessness, unity or division. One of the church’s most important jobs in society is to lead people to focus their energy/passion on selfless work which leads to unity. This is one reason why “every member needs a calling.” But more than this the system must allow for advocacy where people can direct their energy toward the things God puts in their heart.

The evangelical community tends to be more effective at starting non-profit service organizations than Mormonism or Catholicism. I believe this has to do with a culture of activism stemming from the lack of centralized authority. In Mormonism, members often feel like they are not authorized to start a radio ministry or an organization which promotes activism in teaching the public.  Because religious activism has the potential to spur divisive (apostate) groups, church leadership has almost ubiquitously shut down such activities. Forbidding members to meet in their homes and talk about church topics or start organizations that might threaten church authority.  This then create an atmosphere of fear and dependence among church members. I believe such a climate does more harm than good.

Reform Monetary Policy

/in /by

reform-banners19

Create transparency in Church monetary policy. Take steps to decentralize the monetary system and allow stakes far greater latitude in deciding how much money to spend on structures (meeting houses, temples, etc) & programs. Do a better job of separating “for-profit” arms of the Church. The presiding bishopric, not the traveling twelve should be involved in these “temporal matters”.
NOTE: I believe this reform will occur naturally as political persecution ramps up in the coming decades during the final decline of the US government. (and subsequent rise of Zion.) I also believe the monetary centralization has & will play an important role in future events as the church becomes one of the richest organizations on the planet through means nearly identical to the US Corporatism, only to eventually have much of that wealth stolen/confiscated by its corporate competitors. Only to eventually have it’s wealth and right to rule restored by dictates of divine justice in the coming cycle.

Reasoning:

The basis of the problems the church experiences in this area are our laziness in separating the functions of the lower Aaronic & higher Melchezidek priesthoods.  Only the Aaronic priesthood is to deal with the main ‘temporal affairs of the church. The head of the Aaronic priesthood and presiding bishopric was and is to control the church’s “storehouse” and monetary matters in the church. This allows the High Priesthood of the church to fulfill their mandate of complete focus on the spiritual affairs of the church.  By breaking this order of things, the church has fallen under condemnation.

19 And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. 20 Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. 26 And the lesser priesthood… holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel; 27 Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments, (D&C 84:19–27)

I believe the church looses many members because of what is perceived to be a direct violation of the scriptural warnings in 2 Ne. 28:13

12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up. (2 Nephi 28:12–13)

We have a whole lot of work to do in this arena. Get members and ex-members together to find solutions. One idea is to make a habit of attaching some type of halfway house, soup kitchens or homeless shelters to ward buildings or temples. If the building is put to true humanitarian use, we won’t lose so many people who sense the inherent wrongness of spending so much money on buildings built exclusively to “worship God”, which are only occupied twice a week and do nothing for the poor. In general we need to stop spending so much money on temples and the “fine or precious things” of the world. There is value in having beautiful and uplifting places of worship which everyone has claim to, but our current temples are often flagrant, exclusive and elitist. Spending 100 million dollars on a structure for only “worthy members”, when there are starving people living around the building is pure wickedness.  Do we apply the words of Jesus to ourselves as an organization?

21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. (Matthew 19:21–22)

The church must never let the City Creek Center happen again. The traveling twelve and Melchizedek Priesthood of the church is to administer over the “spiritual affairs of the church”.  They must not be intimately involved in the temporal affairs of the Church (ie. for profit arms) which responsibility belongs to the Presiding Bishopric (the lower or Aaronic priesthood). They should not be involved in planning, announcing, building or ribbon cutting ceremonies to shopping malls, etc..  This unscriptural behavior has destroyed literally thousands of testimonies.  It gives the appearence of a church in love with money and prestige…

For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. (1 Timothy 6:10)

14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld. (D&C 70:14)

33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:33)

Reform the teachings and strictures concerning sexuality, health and substance abuse

/in /by

reform-banners12

Reform Action #12 of 20   (see all reforms)

Greatly reform the teachings and strictures concerning sexuality, health and substance abuse in the Church by being more clear between the “commandments” (governed by the Aaronic Priesthood) of the lower law — and standards (epitomized by Christ & His perfect Character) of the higher/Melchezidek law. We need to be more careful not to add or takeaway from the commandments, like the Pharisees of old. Leave the specifics to the patriarchal order where they belong.

68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.

Reasoning:

The Church has confused the important differentiation between a “standard” and a “commandment”.  A standard is a suggestion. It is goal or ideal toward which all are encouraged to strive. In the Gospel our standard is to attain the Perfect character of our example Jesus Christ (D&C 92:12). Creating high standards is good for society and good for individuals. But our church has changed religious moral standards into commandments which manipulate, enslave and divide the church more than perhaps any other aspect of our theology.

One classic example is the Word of Wisdom. This standard was specifically commanded not to be given to the saints by “by commandment or constraint.” (D&C 89:2)  However, church leaders “declared more or less” than the revelation and turned the standard into a commandment much like the Pharisees did to the Mosaic Law in Christ’s day. They even pushed this standard onto mature members of the Higher Priesthood who should not be governed by lower law of Carnal commandments anyway–but by divine principle and Jesus example (D&C 84:18. See reform ‘Teach the Higher Law’), fully disregarding Christ & Paul’s words.

And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. (Matt 15:10)

The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ (Luke 7:34)

God’s kingdom does not consist of what a person eats or drinks. Rather, God’s kingdom consists of God’s approval and peace, as well as the joy that the Holy Spirit gives. (Romans 14:17)

Outside of the abolished Mosaic law, neither Christ nor the scriptures gave many commandments for sexuality either. In fact, there are basically two– Do not lust and do not commit adultery. We must remember that Christ did away with the Mosaic Law, those able to live the higher law are no longer bound by the strictures of the old covenant–even though they follow Christ’s example of submitting to these laws to be good examples to others. (2 N 31:7-9, 1 Cor 6:12) In contrast, in the church today there are simply too many distorted principles concerning LDS morality and cultural strictures which appear to be more “commandments of men” which have “added to” and “taken away” from God’s law (Deut 4:2, D&C 10:68, read JST Col 2:21-22, NLT Col 2:21-22, Mark 7:7–8, JS-H 1:19 ). Just as occurred with the Catholic Medieval church, the suggestions and standards have become commandments because of our over-centralization of authority, and our beliefs that the “brethren” can establish commandments instead of simple non-doctrinal standards under the law of common voice & common consent.

Contrary to God’s law or standard, we are too often “commanded in all things” (which is why so many consider us a cult… we act too much like Jews who haven’t been redeemed from the old covenant by Christ). The Church hand-book of instruction has created an environment of commandment dictating every aspect of the average church members lives. Words of Wisdom have become commandment (D&C 89:2, 28:4-5). Our youth worthiness interviews and temple recommend interview process have “added to” God’s commandments in virtually every aspect of members lives, from our food, our dress, our income, to the minutia of our sexuality. As non-binding standards these suggestions on living can be good for society, but only if they are not pushed as the will of God or something that makes individuals feel spiritually damned for “transgressing”.

Our law of Chastity is another example of “adding and taking away” from scripture by creating a Pharisee-like system of commandments in lieu of a standard.

[I need to fully rewrite the following sections to flesh out the concepts I’m getting out].  Parents and those under the Aaronic (local leaders) priesthood have every right to make whatever rules they feel will guide their sheep.  This is the purpose of the lower priesthood and the ward/parish level.  But at some point every disciple is to graduate to the higher law of Christ. These are no longer bound by the lower laws. If they live them, they do so in sacrifice just to show a good example.  But their salvation and church standing are detached from obeying the commandments of the lower law. ie. “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. — 1 Cor 10:23”]

There is very, very little by way of specific commandments concerning these topics in the scriptures for a reason. Even the ten commandment’s simply say “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”  Not even the Mosaic law gave harsh penalties to sex out of wedlock, and it was in most cases far more strict than the law Christ replaced it with.  Scripture clearly calls sex out of wedlock sin, but to make it into a “sin next to murder” as Mormonism has, is drive the millions of youth who experiment with premarital sex away from God. (see the article The Sin Next to Murder)  The specifics of how to be sexually “chaste” or physically healthy are highly personal and difficult to define with blanket prohibitions (see this article on moral purity). Much like dietary fads, cultural religious proscription on sexuality rarely take into account the uniqueness of each individual’s different physical background and spiritual makeup. Priesthood overreach has caused many “words of wisdom” to become strictures, dogma, and commandments. Unwisely “adding to and taking away from” the standards of righteousness God has given to men. God’s loving standard has been made into a self-righteous burden.

Only very generalized dietary guidelines of balance can be made to apply to both a 350 lb Samoan and a 90 lb Tibetan. Likewise only very generalized guidelines of sexuality can be made to apply to individuals along the diverse spectrum of human sexuality and passion. It is unreasonable and unrighteous to create overly-specific and idealistic strictures concerning masturbation, self-stimulation, gender identity, minutiae in sexual media consumption, kissing, dress and many aspects of sex (again, standards are good for society, strictures are highly divisive). To take God’s name and draw a line which says if you do X, you are righteous and approved by God but if you do Y, you are wicked and condemned by God is the most solemn and awful of responsibilities. Any individual who does this becomes karmically responsibility for those they make to feel evil and demonized. There are far too many who leave the church because the churches blanket prescriptions on sexual practice are unreasonable and demonizing because they often are. When they realize how unreasonable they are… they then lose faith in God because how could “god” make a commandment that they are literally incapable of keeping?  When in truth it wasn’t god, it was a man unjustly using god’s name to make a needed social standard into a divine commandment. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ himself chastised Israel for turning the trivial standards and minutia of the Mosaic “law” into divine commandments.

Almost universally, everyone understands that cheating on a committed relationship (adultery) is wrong–this is why it is specifically forbidden in scripture. God didn’t just write this law on stone, he wrote it in the human heart. Everyone is capable of keeping this divine law which is written in human conscience by God. But nothing is said in scripture of dating, kissing, masturbation for a reason, and little is said of fornication for the same reason—because the “rightness or wrongness” of these things is complex. God’s goal is the happiness of each individual—and when religious prohibitions & demonization cause more pain than the personal & social consequences of the “sin” itself, then you know something is wrong. “Sin” is by definition a thing which has negative or destructive consequences for an individual and society, and strictures tend to befuddle that principle and turn people into pharisees who call good evil and evil good.

Whenever possible, specific regulations should be withheld in lieu of words of wisdom which point to “scientific” studies and examples which teach people which actions most often lead to which consequences without generalizing, demonizing or spiritualizing the matter. Avoiding as much as possible taking the name of God in vain. (wrongly speaking by God’s authority.)

Continue to greatly reform the for strength of youth pamphlet to teach principles and not proscriptions. Standards, not commandments.  Great division comes from trying to “add” to the scriptures or law on matters of sexual morality. Great evil comes from demonizing sexuality. It is better to teach people how to pray and how to listen to their heart and mind (emotions and logic) on details of sexual morality. Hold up the standard, which is healthy lasting marriage between a husband and wife, but be more careful about telling people how to achieve that standard. Never insinuate a person is “evil” for inability or lack of desire to live the standard. Focus on what is right and desired, instead on what is wrong, bad or “contrary to God’s will”.

Sexual morality should be handled locally. First by parents, then by Bishops/Stake Presidents, and seldom by General Authorities. Give correct “principles” (not rules) and let people govern themselves. Create and sustain forums where parents can get and exchange information. Religious dogma and over-controlling strictures surrounding sexual morality and the Word of Wisdom are in my estimation among the number one reason for apostasy and division. Members have not been allowed to follow the Spirit in this highly personal issue because of the priesthood overstepping its bounds. Youth are inundated with rules and individually unrealistic standards but rarely actually get taught meaningful information about human sexuality. Demonizing human sexuality in any degree is the surest way to divide & destroy the Church. As warned in D&C 121, it creates many “anti-Mormons” who esteem the church “as their enemy” (D&C 121:43), as well as creating a class of religiously active hypocrites and self-righteous sycophants. (This author was one of them… thinking he was so much ‘more righteous’ than those he knew who had sex before marriage.)

Given the information we have on Joseph Smith’s sexual difficulties and the law of Polygamy given to the saints (because they wanted it), the current proscriptive tenets which rule LDS sexuality are completely hypocritical, contradictory and idolatrous.

-use the patriarchal order as much as possible in matters of legalism and discipline.

Reform institutionalized temple worship & especially temple preparation

/in /by

Reform Action #12 of 20   (see overview page)

Reform over-institutionalized aspects of temple worship. Especially reforming temple weddings in my opinion. (To accord with the doctrine of sealing’s.) In my view, sealing and endowments should not be performed until an initiate is ready to graduate from the lower preparatory law of carnal commandments (administered by the Aaronic/Ward Priesthood) to the higher and freer law of Christ & love later in life (administered by the Melchezidek/Stake priesthood). See reform ‘#Teach The Higher Law’ for details. The current “assembly line” system of essentially making LDS temple’s into wedding Chapels for ‘members only’ by pressuring young adults into temple initiation, covenant making & endowment all at young ages before marriage without even knowing beforehand the full idea of what covenants they will be making, can be highly detrimental and should be somehow changed. (I think Temple sealing’s should happen at minimum one year AFTER a civil ceremony.)

18 The power and authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood, is to hold the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church—

19 To have the privilege of receiving the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, to have the heavens opened unto them, to commune with the general assembly and church of the Firstborn, and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father, and Jesus the mediator of the new covenant.

20 The power and authority of the lesser, or Aaronic Priesthood, is to hold the keys of the ministering of angels, and to administer in outward ordinances, the letter of the gospel, the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, agreeable to the covenants and commandments. (D&C 107:18–20)

Reasoning:

Simply put, the LDS temple rites often come across as an assembly-line ritual. Take a number, and “next“….

I believe the temples will soon be the location where the church communes with the “general assembly of the first born” or heavenly church.  This will and cannot happen until we adequately reform our hearts, our doctrines, and our church in general. (The Book Oahspe explains in detail how this has worked in past dispensations, and will work in the coming dispensation).

The temple is meant to be highly esoteric and mystical. Shortly after the coming harvest, “tribulation of Israel” in Mathew 24, restoration of the Jewish Temple (70+ years from now) and accompanying changes in the earth’s magnetic field the temple will be a place where visible communion with spirit emissaries of the Heavenly Church occurs regularly within the Prayer Circle. (Which should actually be formed in the shape of a horseshoe magnet — NOT a circle — in order to provide the needed materialization energy for the visiting Spirits to be visible to all those in the room.)

Spiritual initiation literally leads a person through the symbolic and literal veils, so they can commune with the spirit world. The key in this process is desire.  The candidate must desire initiation or no change in consciousness can occur.  The current system places social pressure for people to go through the temple to be married  & “initiated” when, in many cases, they couldn’t care less about the outcome. The current system is no better than a club, and no different than the base aspect of our religion itself.

I believe initiation should not be done assembly-line style at 14 or 19 before a mission, but instead it should be a completely a personal matter which happens in small steps over the years. Like a Buddhist system of apprentice/pupil and master/guide, an applicant should desire these spiritual rituals and seek them out without social pressure. They should be assigned a permanent escort who has proven they “see” the truth behind the symbolism. The apprentice should interview with parents (according to the patriarchal order) as well as with Bishops (for the first two step of baptism & initiation in the first two levels of the temple), and then Stake Presidents (for the last two step of endowment & sealing in the upper two levels). Each applicant or apprentice should have specific “masters” and these adepts should be the temple escorts who guide them through the initiation process. There should not be set “interview” questions but an open discussion where each applicant’s understanding & readiness (not so much “worthiness”—as we are all unworthy) is assessed. If they grasp through word & deed the spiritual meaning behind each ordinance, they are ready to receive the spiritual ordinance. Once an adult is a high priest there should be no “readiness” discussion at all. If members are “unworthy” let them be accused according to the system given in D&C 102.

Once initiation has taken place, candidates can enter a school of the prophets in the instruction rooms of the temple. Here they learn to hone spiritual gifts such as the gift of prophecy, gift of revelation, gift of healing, power of group consciousness/true order of prayer, mediumship, this includes communion with the righteous dead through the veil.

Used properly, the temple ceremony is meant to teach mature members the true order of the priesthood (patriarchal order), the true order of prayer (group consciousness), and the true order of organized religion (as a lower man-made law pointing to the higher natural law). Practiced effectively, it will keep mature spiritualists from apostatizing, withdrawing or going inactive from church participation. It is meant to be a personal experience where those who “see”, lead those who are blind.

Stop excommunicating or marginalizing dissidents

/1 Comment/in /by

reform-banners20

Stop excommunicating or marginalizing dissidents. Excommunication should conform strictly with the principles delineated in D&C 42:20–28 and D&C 102. Public or private differences of opinion are not grounds for excommunication. Witch-hunts should be avoided at all costs. The church is meant to be a ‘type’ or example of perfect government, there must be effective channels for group secession and re-absorption to and from the ecumenical union.

Reasoning:

Jesus did not excommunicate Judas, even though he knew he would betray him to be murdered. The excommunication of the September Six and countless other dissidents in the LDS church is among the greatest causes of division.  When we as a church excommunicate those with strong dissenting opinion we crucify Christ afresh (Heb 6:6). This cult-like behavior only restricts and shows the inadequacy of our own priesthood. Strong differences of opinion are an opportunity for leadership to show their superior wisdom. Excommunication simply shows members that the priesthood lacks the superior wisdom needed to harmonize the difference of opinion or false conception. D&C 42:20–28 and D&C 102 delineate that excommunication must follow an accusation of breaking major moral commandments (see Alma 1:17).

Having channels for willing group secession when differences of opinion cannot be reconciled (and later re-absorption) is subtly taught in the LDS temple endowment as the order of heaven. Nearly all popular religion, nations and scientific breakthroughs are started by ego filled humans who are influenced by both good/unselfish and bad/selfish forces to branch off from the mainstream. Whether it be Peter or Paul, Joseph Smith, John Calvin, Martin Luther or John Wesley– reformers and apostates need to be free to create offshoots and righteous branches. It is a dangerous practice for priesthood hierarchy to reject these stones (Matt 21:42). It is not the place of Church hierarchy to use their “position, power or influence” to prevent branches of thought. It is their job to maintain the unity of the faith (Eph 4:11–14) through loving & Christ-like wisdom & persuasion (D&C 121). We might take a lesson from the academic community which has learned how to deal with rogue ideas; dissident thought is not forcefully expelled by the institution, but combatted with truth and evidence. (Even wrongly sometimes, but eventually truth prevails!) We should follow the examples of the scientific community, which has learned branches of thought are healthy to the pursuit of truth, even if they come across a bit antagonistic. They do not need to be shunned or thrown out, because consensus will eventually prove whose views “have God’s Spirit” or are best at describing and mimicking God and his natural law (Acts 5:38–39).

An effective method of dealing with these issues can come from an understanding of the way the “lower” and “higher” priesthoods work in heaven. (see this article)

Create a process where apostates or reformers are allowed to gain converts and form their own church “branches”, schools of thought/monasteries or congregations. By the same process, these groups need an avenue to be reabsorbed or grafted back into the mother church’s priesthood structure, once the leaders have achieved their dissenting egoic desires to lead others according to their own understanding. Almost like a combination and harmonization of Catholic & Protestant Christian systems. A rigid “by ordination only” Catholic-like priesthood and hierarchical structure exists, but a “self-ordained” or ordination by the Spirit system is also allowed. The travelling twelve constantly and actively court these “priesthood of all believers” types systems for reabsorption back into the central communion.

Emphasize that ordinances are symbols, not ends of themselves

/in , /by

reform-banners21

Stop teaching that LDS temple and ordinances are required to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and start emphasizing that these things are important symbols which aid in salvation and eternal union but are not a requirement for it per se.

Reasoning:

In Joseph Smith’s vision of the Celestial Kingdom given in D&C 137:1–10, Joseph sees his brother Alvin (who was never baptized) in the celestial kingdom, with Adam, Abraham, Christ, God and Joseph’s parents. He marvels how his brother could be in the Celestial Kingdom seeing he was not baptised— and is told essentially that God knows people’s hearts and that all with good works and desires go to the Celestial Kingdom regardless of religion or ordinances.  D&C 128:13–18 teaches that temple ordinances (specifically baptisms for the dead are made in “similitude” or symbols of heavenly things, “that which is earthly conforming to that which is heavenly” (v.15).  My article Eternal Progression, Degrees of Glory, and the Resurrection: A Comparative Cosmology, correlates the work of many modern mystics who give similar descriptions of the afterlife/resurrection and detail how our placement is not dependant on physical ordinances. Common sense & conscience dictate that D&C 76:51 & John 3:5 are speaking of the principles of which baptism symbolizes as a necesity to entering the kingdom of God. (Death of the Mortal Body and carnal nature are needed to enter the kingdom of God. See the gnostic pearl for insight into the deep symbolism involved in the “water” of immersion, as a symbol of cleansing and re-entering the womb of creation.)  Nowhere in our scripture is it taught that temple sealings are needed to exclusively save our dead, but that a “welding link of some kind or other” (or sealing) is needed in order for us to be perfected as a group. (“For we without them cannot be made perfect, neither them without us” v.18).  Our current teachings have created a multitude of conference talks, songs, plays and anecdotal experiences which suggest that God keeps the righteous (and all non-mormons) out of the celestial kingdom until Mormon’s do their temple work. They also often senselessly believe that God somehow keeps families and couples apart in heaven. (As if some invisible being or force restricts them from being together or forbids them from being considered a couple or family?)  This irrational and unscriptural belief drives many from Mormonism. Our traditions also lead people to believe that baptizing infants is blasphemy, but yet baptising 8 year olds (who are also quite ignorant and innocent compared to an adult) is the difference between being able to enter the Celestial Kingdom (unless temple work is done for them). These silly beliefs and practices come from the inability of the lower (temporal) priesthood to see the deep symbolic principles of the higher (spiritual) priesthood which these “outward ordinances” point to.

Most religions have some sort of ancestor veneration and worship. Most religions as well as LDS scripture teaches that the dead are aware of the living and in fact influenced by our actions. LDS temple worship provides a venue for deeply spiritual ancestor veneration. LDS people believe our family history work aids in identifying and tying family lines together for both this life and the next. This richly rewarding spiritual experience is what should be taught and emphasized. Teachings which suggest temple sealings are “required” for heavenly reward go against scripture and conscience and should be eradicated.

Stop being dishonest concerning a witness of Jesus Christ

/4 Comments/in /by

reform-banners8

LDS members (and even leadership) need to stop bearing false witness or being subtly dishonest concerning the particulars of their witness of Jesus Christ, God and the truth of the church. When someone is called as a ‘witness’, their job is to witness what they have seen, felt and experienced — clearly and unambiguously, honestly and without misleading innuendo.

Reasoning:

The purpose and calling of a witness o an Apostle was according to the Bible, and is according to modern scripture, to be a special witness of the Resurrected Lord Jesus Christ to all the earth. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were given this title early in church history, because they witnessed that they saw Christ in vision (see D&C 76). Which they proclaimed and wrote about unambiguously. In the case of our present “apostles”, if that witness is a first hand visual witness as was the case for Christ’s original apostles they need to proclaim that witness clearly and honestly. If it is a witness only by the Holy Ghost, this also needs to be proclaimed clearly and honestly.

I have observed first hand many leaders and members of the church (including apostles). Talk about their ‘witness’ of Jesus Christ in a manner which led us to believe that they had maybe perhaps possibly seen Christ in vision, but then say the experience was ‘too sacred to share’. (I’m sure most seasoned members have experienced this type of ‘testimony’ from random members in ways that make us feel uncomfortable when we don’t trust the member, but perhaps in awe when its a leader we trust) This is dishonest, and we should have none of this mysterious and deceptive language. If God is a completely honest God as we believe him to be, then when he calls someone as witness of Him, he NEVER would then swear them to secrecy or tell them to speak in hushed muted terms concerning the experience. That’s not a witness. It is an absolute contradiction to call oneself a witness of Christ and then not proclaim the specifics of that witness while pretending that somehow the experience was too sacred to talk about or that you are sworn to secrecy after “being called” to be a witness! If you are called as a witness… witness! The current practices of LDS apostles in this regard tend toward evil and need to be reformed to accord with complete openness and honesty.

The same goes for the testimonies of church members.  We have a cultural practice of hinting at our experiences in testimony meeting in ways that lead others to believe they were more than they were. We also have developed a cultural tendency of saying we “know” this or that when in fact we actually only believe or have faith in it.  This actually causes a lot of guilt, shame, confusion and contempt. It is dishonest of us to redefine the word know to mean believe. It is also unscriptural. Alma says in Alma 32:21 “faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true”.   If you have not seen God, you should not stand up in front of the congregation and say “I know god lives”, that is a lie, you should say “I have faith and hope that god lives for such and such reasons. The Brother of Jared in the Book of Mormon teaches us how we should differentiate faith and knowledge.

19 And because of the knowledge of this man he could not be kept from beholding within the veil; and he saw the finger of Jesus, which, when he saw, he fell with fear; for he knew that it was the finger of the Lord; and he had faith no longer, for he knew, nothing doubting.
20 Wherefore, having this perfect knowledge of God, he could not be kept from within the veil; therefore he saw Jesus; and he did minister unto him. (Ether 3:19–20)

By saying we “know” God lives or we “know” the church is true, we are effectually saying by the definitions in our own scripture that we no longer need faith because we are redeemed from the veil. At the very least, we are reading into our experiences and claiming that they say universal or objective things about truth that they dont, and it’s time we as a church stop promoting it as a cultural practice of both leadership and members.

Also:

Stop manipulating people into thinking every church related spiritual experience or emotional reaction to spirituality is proof that “the LDS church is true”. Care must be taken in the way we frame arguments for our faith.

Reasoning:

Much like the intrinsic human experiences of love or infatuation, the “burning heart” or spiritual awakening is experienced by members of most religions. These experiences can connect people to a religious tradition and seem to typically yield good fruits but can easily be used to manipulate people into cults. When we use manipulation techniques to suggest to youth that spiritual emotions or a burning heart, prove the Mormon church is the only true one, these individuals will likely be bitter when they find people of many, many religions experience them. (see this youtube video for many such examples)   Many ancient and modern religions promote better systems to explain the phenomena of spiritualism in terms of spiritual connection, activated endocrine glands or spiritual centers attached to the human nervous system. (see this wikipedia article on kundalini)

Our current system of gaining a “testimony” is manipulative. If members or investigators “feel the spirit” during a discussion of Joseph Smith or while reading the book of Mormon, we ask them to accept this as proof that Mormonism is the only true church. If they “feel the spirit” while listening to a general conference address, we ask them to accept this as proof that these men are called of God and essentially everything any of them say is the word of God. This is synonymous with asking people to kiss someone or hold a baby or view a sunset and then asking them to accept these good feelings as testimony that the one involved is their only love or that the LDS church is God’s only true church and thus all its tenets are true. We need to stop manipulating people into drawing man-made conclusions which aren’t necessarily true, from their very personal spiritual experiences.  See ‘Is The LDS Church the Only True Church? Understanding Religion and Truth‘, for a detailed exegesis on how religious truth relates to religious pluralism and real truth.

Watch the following video to see how impossible and dangerous it is to believe that spiritual emotional confirmation can serve as the sole basis for testimony.

Elder Dallin Oaks spoke yesterday at a multi-stake fireside on Jan 23rd in Seattle.. A youth in attendance asked him if they should seek to have an “Alma the younger” type of experience and get a personal witness of Christ. His answer was refreshingly honest and direct. He told them that neither he nor anyone in the 1st presidency or Q12 have ever seen Christ, had a vision, or supernatural experience. He reaffirms that the basis for the Q15 testimony is no different than the typical member.

Just after the 30 minute mark. The question is asked. The response that I transcribe here is starting at time mark 31:38:

“I’ve never had an experience like that and I don’t know anyone among the 1st Presidency or Quorum of the 12 who’ve had that kind of experience. Yet everyone of us knows of a certainty the things that Alma knew. But it’s just that unless the Lord chooses to do it another way, as he sometimes does; for millions and millions of His children the testimony settles upon us gradually. Like so much dust on the windowsill or so much dew on the grass. One day you didn’t have it and another day you did and you don’t know which day it happened. That’s the way I got my testimony. And then I knew it was true when it continued to grow.”

Brigham Young was almost exclusively referred to as the President of the Church, never as a prophet and he actually made many public statements saying that he was specifically not a prophet. For example: ” I am not going to interpret dreams; for I don’t profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser;” Brigham Young, Sermon, July 26, 1857, JD 5:77. Brigham also made it very clear several times that he had not seen Jesus. For example: “I cannot bear the same testimony of Jesus that I can of Joseph, because I never saw him with my natural body. Peter, James and John etc., were apostles of Jesus, they were called and ordained by him, so they could testify of him, but they could not testify of Joseph as I can. –Brigham Young, June 27, 1854, The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young 2:809.

When called before congress to testify in the Reed Smoot hearings, President Joseph F. Smith similarly testified that “I have never pretended nor do I profess to have received revelations”. His testimony was that he was unsure if he had been inspired or not and compared his experience as the prophet of the church to the “same as any Methodist, Protestant, or preacher”

I had come to the conclusion long ago that none of the Apostles had reasons to believe beyond what they publicly taught. It always seems that when they dodged the occasional probing questions about seeing Christ, that they were deliberately trying to be vague and let people believe what they wanted to believe. I’m happy to see Oaks owning up to reality with a clear statement.

If you pay close attention, you will find that none of the modern apostles even say that they are special witnesses of Christ anymore. The phrase used now days is “special witnesses of the name of Christ”.

Oaks has gone on record several times explaining this. He quotes D&C 107:23 – “The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world” and then says “This is not to witness of a personal manifestation. To witness of the name is to witness of the plan, the work, or mission such as the atonement and the authority or priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ, which an apostle who holds the keys is uniquely responsible to do. Of course apostles are also witnesses of Christ just like all members of the church who have the gift of the Holy Ghost”

There are accounts of supernatural experience both among some early apostles and more modern members…

Descriptions of the experience can also be found in the annals of the membership. Here we find a description from the journal of Parley P. Pratt.

My dear  wife [Thankful Halsey Pratt] had now lived to accomplish her destiny; and  when the child  was dressed, and  she  had  looked  upon it and embraced it, she ceased to live in the flesh.  Her death happened about three hours after the  birth  of this  child  of promise. A few days previous to her death she had a vision in open day while sitting in her room. She was overwhelmed or immersed in a pillar of fire, which seemed to fill the whole room, as if it would consume it and all things therein; and the Spirit whispered to her mind, saying: “Thou art baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost.” It also intimated to her that she should have the privilege of departing from this world of sorrow and pain, and of going to the Paradise of rest as soon  as she  had fulfilled  the prophecy in relation  to the promised son. This vision was repeated on the next day at the same hour, viz:­ twelve  o’clock. She was overwhelmed with a joy and peace indescribable, and seemed changed in her whole nature from that time forth. (Autobiography of  Parley P. Pratt, Salt  Lake City:  Deseret Book Co.,  1972.  p. 166; italics  added.)

President Lorenzo Snow also relates the choice experience of his rebirth:

Some two or three weeks after I was baptized, one day while engaged  in my studies, I began to reflect upon the fact that  I   had  not  obtained   a knowledge of  the  truth  of  the work … and  I  began  to feel very  uneasy. I   laid aside my books, left the house, and  wandered around through the fields under  the oppressive influence of a gloomy,  dis­consolate  spirit,  while an indescribable cloud  of darkness seemed  to envelope  me. I had been accustomed, at the close of the day, to retire for secret prayer, to a grove … but at this time I felt no inclination to do so. The spirit of prayer had departed and the heavens seemed like brass over my head. At length, realizing that the usual time had come for secret prayer, I concluded I would not forego my evening service, and, as a matter of formality,  knelt as I was in the habit of doing,  and in my accustomed  retired place, but not feeling as I  was wont  to feel.

I had no sooner opened my lips in an effort to pray, than I heard a sound, just above my head, like the rustling of silken robes, and immediately the Spirit of God descended upon me, completely enveloping my whole person, filling me, from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet, and 0, the joy and happiness I felt! No language can describe the almost instantaneous transition from a dense cloud of mental and spiritual darkness into a refulgence  of light and  knowledge, as it was at that  time imparted  to my understanding…. It was a complete baptism­ a tangible immersion in the heavenly principle or element, the Holy Ghost; and even more real and physical in its effects upon every part of my system than the immersion by water; dispelling forever, so long as reason and memory last, all possibility of doubt. …

I cannot tell how long I remained in the full flow of the blissful enjoyment and divine enlightenment, but it was several minutes before the celestial element which filled and surrounded me began gradually to withdraw. On arising from my kneeling posture, … I knew.’  that He had conferred on me what only an omnipotent being can confer – that which is of greater value than  all the  wealth  and  honors worlds can bestow. That night, as I retired to rest, the same wonderful manifestations were repeated, and continued to be for several successive nights. The sweet remembrance of those glorious experiences … impart[s] an inspiring   in­fluence … and  I  trust  will to the close of my earthly  ex­istence.

(Biography – Family  Record of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Eliza R. Snow,  Salt Lake City: Deseret  Book Co., 1884, pp. 7-9; most italics added.) http://jesus.christ.org/teachings-of-jesus-christ/born-of-the-spirit-baptism-by-fire

We have examples of the baptism of fire in scripture, we find them infused in the testimonies of several of the early saints. Are there modern day occurrences of being born again?

 From James:

I wanted a spiritual experience, so I prayed and fasted the next day, Sunday. I broke my fast because we were invited to eat at someone’s house that night.  On Monday I decided to do as Enos and Nephi and fast and pray all day. I went out into a bungalow and prayed vocally for as long as I could. When I couldn’t think of things to pray about I read my scriptures. I prayed until the afternoon, but nothing happened. I was really discouraged. That night I went to my … friend’s house to talk about things. He gave me a blessing.

The next day was Tuesday. … I decided to give it another go. I broke my fast and went out to the bungalow to pray again. I prayed for about an hour and this happened:

From my journal:

I knelt down and was praying to the Lord with all my heart that I might receive evidence that what I was doing was right.    I could feel the spirit in my chest and my face was tingling.  While   feeling this I pleaded that I might have greater evidence.  All of a sudden I felt power come into my body.  As Nephi said it consumed my flesh.  So much so that I felt that my hands were out stretched and my chest was pulled up and power surged through me like I have never felt in all   my life. It was so powerful that I could hardly control myself.  I   felt like I was being shocked with energy.  I knew it was the energy of God.  I felt His power!

At the time I wasn’t sure what had happened, but it wasn’t long after that Heavenly Father began to help me understand that I had experienced the baptism of fire.