Book of Mormon Precepts "Unbelief"

The Book of Mormon provides a striking study in the precept of  “dwindling in unbelief.” From the Book of Mormon it is clear that “unbelief” leads to “dwindling” away from the things of God. Any astute reader is able to see the many cycles of belief and associated righteousness and spiritual prosperity in the Book of Mormon. With very few exceptions, each case of belief and righteousness among people cited in the Book of Mormon, eventually resulted in "unbelief" and dwindling away from principles of truth. I have heard these cycles of righteousness then falling away in the Book of Mormon narrative referred to as “pride cycles.” And, it is true that pride is a primary symptom of people who have begun to dwindle. The source of the disease of “dwindling,” however, is always, without exception, “unbelief.”  Unbelief leads to pride, selfishness, sin, and evil in all of its varieties. It all begins with “unbelief.”

“Belief,” and “unbelief,” both have much narrower definitions as they are contextually used and applied in the Book of Mormon than may appear at first thought. There are as many things to believe in, as there are people to believe in them.  However, there is an eternal principle called “belief” that pleases God and leads to salvation and His presence. In order to understand the nature of spiritually destructive “unbelief,” what it means specifically, how it may be resolved and fixed, an understanding of the eternal principle called “belief” is first required.   

“Belief,” that is acceptable to God, that principle which leads to righteousness, spiritual safety, and progression toward God, is centered in, and is absolutely exclusive in its application to only one thing, The Lord Jesus Christ and His redeeming power. Belief in any other thing, person, or concept, that does not have as its exclusive central focus, the Lord Jesus Christ, is called “unbelief.” The Lord has made it as clear as it is possible to make it, that we are to “believe” in Him. Our belief in Him is to be at the exclusion of all other persons or things in order to receive His redeeming blessings. (John 3:15-16, 18, 36, John 5:24, John 6:35, John 11: 26…)

We may believe in a lot of really good things. We may believe in things the Lord Himself has given us such as a church, a leader, a temple, or a family. These are all good things that come to us as blessings from God. We should be grateful for every blessing from Him. But, if the saving, redeeming power of the Lord Jesus Christ is not eminent exclusively in our hearts and minds, belief even in the gifts of God may then become to us “unbelief.” Another way to say this that adds clarity is; the church cannot and will not save you. There is no leader or man that can or will ever have power to save you. The temple, and every priesthood ordinance in and of itself cannot and will not save you. If your belief is centered in any of these things, or any other thing that is not exclusive to the Lord Jesus Christ and His ability and promise to redeem you, your belief is in fact “unbelief.”

The difference between believing in Christ and His redeeming power on the one hand, and believing in all that He has given us on the other hand, is not as subtle as latter day saints want to make it seem. Though because of blindness, a person may not see it, “believing” in the church is not, and in fact cannot be the same thing as believing in Christ. “Believing” in or following any man regardless of calling or position will not, and cannot, ever be the same thing as believing in Christ and His ability and promise to redeem you. Satan masterfully builds up in people’s minds, equivalents to Christ. He teaches that following a “prophet” or "following the brethren" is the same thing as following and believing in Christ. Yet the Lord has revealed that doing so will lead such a follower to a telestial reward. (D&C 76: 98-101) This kind of followership is “unbelief.”

The notion that latter day saints are a “chosen people” has itself become “unbelief.” Believing proudly that they are God’s chosen people and that they are favored of the Lord above all other people is no different than the attitude of the dissident Zoramites in the Book of Mormon who prayed, “and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may not be led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren, which doth bind them down to a belief of Christ, which doth lead their hearts to wander far from thee, our God. And again we thank thee, O God, that we are a chosen and a holy people. Amen.” (Alma 31: 17-18)  I have heard words not varying a great deal from these of the Zoramites from latter day saints in church meetings on many occasions. The Zoramites, like the latter day saints, suffered from “unbelief.” Christ and His redeeming power have nothing to do with such a belief. Believing you are one of a chosen people will never save you.

People may direct their attention, focus, and devotion to things of the world. It may be a job, a house, a business, a sport, or a hobby. It may be any one of a hundred addictions that consume. It may be any one of a thousand distractions that lead belief and focus away from Christ and His redeeming power.  Any belief or devotion on the part of Gods children to anything whatsoever that does not exclusively focus on the Lord Jesus Christ, His redeeming power and promises, is called “unbelief.”

Understanding now what may constitute “unbelief,” what can we make of the Lord’s condemnation of the latter day saints as set out in D&C 84: 54-57? Remember, that the condemnation of the church by the Lord resulted, “because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—

Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

 And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.”  (D&C 84: 54-55)  If it was “unbelief “ that caused the people in the record of the Book of Mormon to “dwindle” and lose truth and light repeatedly until they had lost the things of God all together, what warning is evident there that should be taken by latter day saints specifically for them from all of the “dwindling in unbelief” that repeated itself in the Book of Mormon narrative?

Something about the conduct of latter day saints since 1832 has caused the Lord to accuse them of “unbelief.” That unbelief has persisted for 180 years and has to do specifically with the Book of Mormon. (D&C 84: 57) What more can be learned from the Book of Mormon that may help us to correct our “unbelief”? Hopefully, there has not been so much “dwindling” because of our unbelief over 180 years that things cannot yet be turned around. I continue to believe there is still time for us to repent and come unto Him. Our exploration into this most perfect of all books will continue. Remember, Joseph Smith said, (paraphrasing), abiding by its (the Book of Mormon) precepts will bring you nearer to God than by any other book. Belief brings nearer to God. Unbelief causes dwindling.   

Book of Mormon Precepts "Dwindling in Unbelief"

The Book of Mormon is the single greatest written source of truth available to mankind today. It was constructed under the tutelage of the Lord. The various writers of the records, and Mormon who abridged the many records that provided the source information for the book, acted under the direction of the Lord. The fact that the Book of Mormon provides the single greatest written source of truth, presents an interesting element of irony since the book itself puts forth the precept that truth is a slippery commodity that is easily lost by men when once found. This is a precept of the Book of Mormon that latter day saints in general simply don't get insofar as the precept applies to them and the church. They don't understand that the precept is purposely made so prevalent in the Book of Mormon precisely so it can provide a warning for the latter day saints and the latter day church. This is one of those precepts in the Book of Mormon that can easily make latter day saints squirm if it is allowed to apply to the church and not necessarily to "other people."

As a doctrinal concept, the ability for truth to be lost is discussed specifically in the book of Mormon in several different places. Here are just a few of those to consider:

"And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full. And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell." (Alma 12: 10-11)

And,

"For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have." (2Nephi 28: 30)

And,

And thus we can plainly discern, that after a people have been once enlightened by the Spirit of God, and have had great knowledge of things pertaining to righteousness, and then have fallen away into sin and transgression, they become more hardened, and thus their state becomes worse than though they had never known these things. (Alma 24: 30)

The word "dwindle" appears in the Book of Mormon twenty three times. The word is found only once in the Doctrine and Covenants and is not found at all in any other scripture. "Dwindle" is used almost exclusively in the Book of Mormon to describe the process by which people lose truth and light after having once had it. I have looked at every occurrence of the word "dwindle" in the Book of Mormon. Of the twenty three times "dwindle" appears, it is accompanied by the word "unbelief" twenty three times. Twenty three times the Book of Mormon mentions the peril of "dwindling in unbelief." Do you think the Lord wanted anyone to understand this precept? Have the Latter day saints yet asked themselves, what could this precept have to do with us? Why would the Lord revisit this issue over and  over again in the words of the Book of Mormon? Is it so that those who do not believe in the first place may be warned about dwindling in unbelief? Makes reason stare, doesn't it?

Unbelief is the destructive element that causes a loss of light and truth. Unbelief is the antithesis of faith that leads once enlightened people to "dwindle" and lose the truth they once had. A great example of the truth destroying power of unbelief is found in the children of the people of King Benjamin in the Book of Mormon.

"1 Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers.

2 They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.

3 And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.

4 And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God."(Mosiah 26: 1-4)

In one generation, truth and light was completely lost because of "unbelief." Notice, "because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God." This is where dwindling begins. Unbelief leads to the inability to understand the word of God.

It was just such "unbelief" that led to the condemnation of the church and it's people by the Lord.

“And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—

Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.” (D&C 84: 54-55)

The unbelief that led to the Lord's condemnation of the latter day saints has everything to do with the Book of Mormon itself.

"And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written"(D&C 84: 56-57)

Does the "unbelief" of latter day saints as to the Book of Mormon mean that there may have been some "dwindling" since the condemnation was pronounced by the Lord in 1832? Remember, the condemnation remains effective upon the church even now according to President Benson and Dalin Oaks. If things had improved respecting the unbelief of the latter day saints, surely the Lord would have lifted the condemnation? Or is the church prevented from dwindling in unbelief? If so, what is it that would prevent latter day saints from "dwindling" in their unbelief? If the Book of Mormon is indeed the “cornerstone” of our religion as Joseph Smith claimed, what are the ramifications of the church being under the Lord’s condemnation for unbelief of the cornerstone?

A few things become clear.

1. The Book of Mormon contains a repeated precept that warns about loss of light and truth. The Lord clearly wants this precept understood for a reason.

2. The Book of Mormon repeats no fewer than twenty three times the perils of "dwindling" when "unbelief" begins and persists. Is the message from the Lord directed to "believers" or "non-believers"? Who is it that is able to "dwindle" from a position of belief and understanding?

3. The Lord has pointed out in clear terms the "unbelief" of the latter day saints. The unbelief of the latter day saints according to the Lord's own words is directly related to the Book of Mormon.

4. The church and the latter day saints have continued under the Lord's condemnation for their unbelief since 1832. The condemnation for unbelief is effective upon the church today.

5. The question must be asked:

Is there any reasoning other than pride and vanity, (which the Lord has also accused the church of), that would lead to the conclusion that the church has not dwindled in unbelief for at least 180 years since section 184 was recorded and the condemnation upon the church was pronounced by the Lord?

All of this gives great pause when one considers that Joseph Smith said about the Book of Mormon, "a man can get nearer to God by abiding it's precepts, than by any other book." If the church is in a condition of unbelief concerning the book itself as the Lord has said, then how near to God can the church and its people be?

"Dwindling in unbelief" is a huge topic and precept from the Book of Mormon. We will discuss more about it in the next installment.

Book of Mormon Keystone and the Very Key

The Book of Mormon was described by Joseph Smith as the "keystone" of our religion. He said, "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by it's precepts, than by any other book." Joseph knew something about the "precepts" of the Book of Mormon that most latter day saints never come to understand. Most good members of the church would be hard pressed to point out what "precepts" the book of Mormon contains that will allow a person to draw near to God in the sense Joseph meant the phrase.

When Joseph said the precepts of the Book of Mormon would allow a person to "get nearer to God" I think he meant something literal and very specific. Two hundred years of continuous dwindling away since Joseph Smith's day, have left much of what Joseph originally taught, changed, forgotten, and in some cases simply abandoned as worthless. Joseph's whole purpose in what he taught and revealed under the Lords direction in the restoration was designed to show the individual child of God how to regain the presence of God in this mortal life. (D&C 93: 1, D&C 76: 117-118, D&C 88: 67-since 68) In this way, the work and the glory of God (Moses 1: 39) is brought to past for individuals that learn and apply Gods prescribed path and commandments. This level of "knowledge" according to John constitutes eternal life. (John 17: 3) The knowledge, instruction, and ordinances needed for individual sons and daughters of God to come into the presence of God is the essence and purpose of the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The very key to that sacred instruction, showing the path back to Gods presence, is to be found in the words of the Book of Mormon. Abiding by its precepts as Joseph said, will "get a man nearer to God" and fulfillment of the promises of the Lord to reveal Himself to man, than any other book. 

The way the Book of Mormon is taught in the correlated curriculum of the church, those "precepts" that will allow a person to get near to God are lost in a too superficial mix of a little history and misdirected understanding of doctrinal meaning. Even the "experts," the scholars, and authorities that most people look to for guidance to understand the meaning and precepts of the Book of Mormon are without understanding. Though they are learned, "they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish." (2Nephi 9: 27) Because their wisdom is foolishness, when it is taught to others, it not only "profiteth them not," but it leads others astray from saving principles as well. Nephi said, "Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines;" ( 2Nephi 28: 9) Nephi also pointed out "they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men." (2Nephi 28: 14)

Lest we vainly think the prophecies pointing to false teachings in our day were given to mean not us, but other people instead, Moroni clearly points out in his words in the Book of Mormon, it is those who belong to the "Holy church of God" that have polluted it and "transfigured the holy word of God." (Mormon 8: 38 and 33, see verses 33-41 inclusive) Among the foremost reasons latter day saints fail to recognize and live the saving precepts contained in the Book of Mormon is because of the strong predisposition to think warnings and negative suggestions in the book are only about or pointed to "other people." If this one false understanding could be overcome, the Book of Mormon could be understood with much greater clarity and truth. The book was written for the latter day church, to the latter day church specifically. The Book of Mormon was not written to, or for, any other people. It was not written to warn people who are not members of the Lord's church and who have not received the fullness of the gospel.  When the words of the book speak ideas and concepts that seem condemning or harsh, it is the latter day saints that need to understand the meaning of the message as it applies to them, not others. It is vanity and pride that makes latter day saints think the warnings in the Book of Mormon are directed toward others. Everything written in the book is about and for latter day saints, not others.     

If the Book of Mormon is ever to have the intended power to bring us near to God as Joseph suggested, its precepts must be clearly understood, believed, and most importantly they must be lived with real intent. For most of my life, though I have been a member of the church, I found I have misunderstood the meaning and purpose of the Book of Mormon. I studied the book diligently, took institute classes, read the commentaries of top church scholars and general authorities, I even did my share of teaching from the Book of Mormon. After all my efforts to learn truth through much study and reading, I found in the end, when truth was finally revealed by the power of the Holy Ghost, I had gained little understanding of the precepts in the Book of Mormon that allow one to draw near to God. I, like most others in our day, was "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2Timothy 3: 7) This inability to learn truth is part of a plague the apostle Paul said would afflict the people of the last days. Paul said these last days would be "perilous times." (2Timothy 3: 1-7) Perilous indeed are the times when men are unable to learn truth that will lead them to life eternal. Though they are surrounded by all the truth needed to find and secure eternal life in the revelations received by Joseph Smith, foremost of which is the Book of Mormon, the precepts of truth found there are mostly misunderstood and grossly not believed. There is peril to the soul of every latter day saint that does not learn the precepts of the Book of Mormon that are designed as a guide book back to the presence of God. This is why Joseph Smith said a man would get closer to God by abiding it's precepts than by any other book.

Latter day saints are lulled into thinking, because they have read the Book of Mormon, in some cases repeatedly, and because they have a testimony of its divine origins and truth, that their obligation where the Book of Mormon is concerned is fulfilled. However, it is entirely possible that a person can have completed the steps needed to gain a witness of the truth of the divinity of the Book of Mormon, (Moroni 10: 3-5), but still not have a knowledge of the precepts contained in the book that Joseph Smith said would lead a person closer to God. A "testimony" of the divinity and truth of the Book of Mormon will not save. Almost all latter day saints are caught in the deception that their belief in the Book of Mormon will be enough to lead them to the celestial kingdom. Instead, it is only "abiding by its precepts" that will lead closer to God. Abiding by any precept cannot be done unless the precept is clearly and correctly understood, believed, and lived with real intent.

In 1832 the Lord placed the church and its people under condemnation largely because they had "taken lightly" the Book of Mormon. The words of the condemnation are: "And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all. And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—" (D&C 84: 56-57) This condemnation has never been lifted by the Lord. In fact it has been reconfirmed and reiterated by various church leaders including President Ezra T. Benson and most recently by Dalin H. Oaks since it was originally pronounced by the Lord.

We are to abide by the precepts of the precious Book of Mormon in order to "get nearer to God." Being under God's condemnation for taking the Book of Mormon lightly should be taken by us as a clear signal that we are far from understanding how to draw closer to God by its precepts. The next many entries to this blog will be devoted to discovering the little understood and nearly universally rejected precepts contained in the Book of Mormon that are given to us by the Lord in the latter days to show us Gods great works and how to come unto Him.  

The Church a "Compound in One"

The great prophet leader Lehi in the Book of Mormon taught his son Jacob a concept he referred  to as “a compound in one.” (2Nephi 2: 11) He was teaching Jacob about the great atoning sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God. Lehi explained that in the absence of opposites, all things tend to amalgamate into one bland mass of nothingness, a "compound in one." Even the great atonement would not have been needed or have had purpose in the absence of opposites. Lehi explained, “Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement—For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad.” (2Nephi 2:  10-11) In the absence of opposites, all things tend toward a “compound in one.” Lehi then launched into a marvelous discourse to teach his sons the great principle of agency and acting for ones self, as opposed to being acted upon.

In his discourse, Lehi taught that God created some things to “act,“ and other things to be “acted upon.” (2Nephi 2: 14) Man, was the foremost thing created by God to “act” for himself.  Lehi said, “Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other.” Further, Lehi said,  “the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given.” (2Nephi 2:  16 and 26)

We learn from the precious Book of Mormon through Lehi’s words, how tragically wrong it is when Gods children are deprived of their God given right to learn truth, as well as their right and need to learn and study unimpinged, any elements that my be in opposition to truth as well. Hiding anything from Gods children, depriving them of information needed to make personal assessments of true principles, is evil and will result in conditions God deemed unacceptable for His children. Anyone who thinks or believes he is doing God’s children a favor by not allowing them to be exposed to doctrine, history, or information, is buying into, and playing a part in the policies that were rejected by God our Father for His children from the beginning. No man has been given the right to “control,” exercise “compulsion,” or otherwise practice “unrighteous dominion,” upon the souls of men. (D&C 121: 36-39) When anyone, including church leaders, exercises any of these elements of  anti-agency to any degree, they set themselves up as supporters of principles the Lord has already rejected.

Included in Lehi’s discourse is a description of Satan who became a devil because he “sought that which was evil before God.” (2Nephi 2: 17) That which is evil before God has every thing to do with the right and ability of man to exercise agency and to be free to choose. The Lord revealed to Moses, “Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;” (Moses 4:3) That being who once stood in the presence of God, was finally cast down by the power of the Only Begotten largely because of ambitions he had to “destroy the agency of man.” It seems Satan, as a part of his evil ambitions, desired key elements of that condition Lehi called a “compound in one.” Satan desired to eliminate opposites and the ability that comes through the existence of opposites for God’s children to choose between good and evil. The resulting “compound in one” would have resulted in Gods children being “created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation.  Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and His eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.” (2Nephi 2: 12)            

The practice of any man, regardless of position or title, who places himself above others, assuming a right to determine what others are and are not ready for, or in need of, is evil.  Equally as evil is the idea that leaders have a right to censure anyone because of their beliefs or what they choose to study and speak. Joseph Smith set the policy out clearly, “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” Joseph set this policy forth to include “all men,” I suppose he had in mind members of the church when he stated this. To a large degree this article of faith does not apply to members of the church in our day. If you choose to worship "how, where, and what you may," and it is deemed by leaders to be unacceptable, you may be exercised upon and compelled to leave the church. It makes members of the church mad , distrusting of leaders, and to feel belittled, when any man assumes to rule over them and control their lives to the point of deciding what truth or opposition to truth should and should not be given and explored by them. There was a day in the church when true leaders taught true principles then simply allowed the people to govern themselves unmolested, as if they were competent to act as Gods free children.  To use a term Joseph Smith himself used, they were not "trammeled" in their search for truth and Gods presence. 

We all know there are elements of doctrine, rites, and practices that are of a sacred nature. Those should not be tossed about freely. Those sacred items of doctrine are not at issue here.   

Since the death of Joseph Smith, oppressive tactics of  church leaders to control what is and what is not taught and discussed, tactics by which members expectations are assumed to be managed by leaders,  have led to an institution that is a type of “compound in one.” Leaders have sought to sterilize the exposure of members from anything they perceive may be in opposition to what they would like the people to believe. On the other side of things, leaders dumb down the doctrine to those items they believe pose no threat to the institution.

These are things of a very serious nature, though they are now institutionalized and practiced every day as business as usual. Tampering with the exposure of Gods children to opposites, leads to destructive results Lehi called a “compound in one.” Ultimately, such practices by men result in destruction of “the wisdom of God and His eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.” (2Nephi 2: 12) I believe the consequences for men who choose to participate in such practices, resulting in the destruction of any of these eternal principles as they apply to even the least of God’s children, will be unpleasant to an extreme degree. We know of at least one who was cast down for even wanting to practice such things.                

Mormon Reformation - Leadership Indictment

Most members of the church, including myself until just recently, would have no idea about a period of history in the church referred to as “The Reformation.” I have always thought the church would never have needed anything like a “Reformation.” I always believed the continuing succession of leaders after Joseph Smith precluded the need for anything that might be called a “Reformation.” The word Reformation implies change or alteration. Isn’t that what the restoration was all about to begin with after all?  Exactly what was it about the church Joseph had established under the direction of the Lord that needed reforming after only 26 years of existence? As I learn more about the Mormon Reformation, I realize it was actually much less a reformation of the church itself so much as it was an evolution within the leadership of it. I have come to realize there is much more to learn about the early church leadership from the Mormon Reformation than about the wayward membership the leaders were attempting to “reform.”

The Mormon Reformation was an effort by Brigham Young and his leadership team of the church to bring in line or “reform” the membership of the church. It was the perception of President Young in 1856 that the people were becoming too relaxed, too dispassionate about their duties and responsibilities. As a result Brigham Young and his first presidency began the reformation program in earnest. It quickly turned into a revivalist atmosphere among the members of the church and more. Almost all existing members were required to be re-baptized or lose their membership in the church.

 It was during this same period that President Young began the rhetoric and teaching of blood atonement. This doctrine provided that there were certain sins that in order to be forgiven of, a sinner must shed their own blood. Apologists claim the doctrine was never actually practiced. Critics claim it was. It is not our purpose here to decide that question. It is important for what we are considering to understand however, the doctrine was taught and espoused by Brigham Young openly and in public, almost no one refutes that. It is a historical fact. Whether or not the doctrine was ever actually practiced, it had the effect of instilling fear and anxiety in the people. During the reformation, messengers sent from the church visited each home of the members. These “home missionaries” came equipped with a list of questions to be read for confession purposes in every home. Among the questions to be asked in each home were these that if answered in the affirmative were understood to carry a penalty of blood atonement:

“Have you committed murder, by shedding innocent blood, or consenting thereto?”

“Have you betrayed your brethren or sisters in anything?”

“Have you committed adultery, by having any connection with a woman that was not your wife, or a man that was not your husband?” (Questions taken from Massacre at Mountain Meadows by Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley Jr., and Glen M. Leonard, page 26)

In addition to these, there were another 23 questions the home missionaries administered in the homes of the people.

From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism: (which I find more apologetic than most other sources.)

“The revivalistic spirit, the anxious confession, and the mass rebaptisms, however, gradually gave way to more judicious and ordered reform. The reform became especially systematic at Church headquarters, where a policy was established to have two home missionaries assigned to each ward. Equipped with a twenty-seven-question catechism to help measure the worthiness of the Saints, the home missionaries assisted families with everything from hygiene and church attendance to obeying the Ten Commandments. Only after some months of missionary-member visits were Saints in the Salt Lake City wards rebaptized in early spring of 1857. In Salt Lake City, rebaptism generally marked the formal end of the Reformation, though reform fervor continued until mid-1858.

Under instructions from President Young, the Reformation was carried to settlements and missions throughout the world. While procedures differed somewhat in areas away from Utah, rebaptism was a strong recommendation for all the Saints. It symbolized both forgiveness of sin and a recommitment to obey commandments. Those who refused to be rebaptized might lose their membership in the Church. In Britain, zealous application of Reformation principles resulted in trimming from Church rolls a large number of the less-committed.”

As a side note, what do you suppose would be the response if you were to request a re-baptism for yourself from a present day church leader?

The revelations given by the Lord through Joseph Smith provided every guideline needed for Priesthood leadership to deal with every leadership issue then and now.  As I consider the reformation, I find practically none of the revealed priesthood principals for leadership applied. It is for this reason I find more in the reformation that causes me to question the actions of the leadership than the poor members who were summarily and systematically raked over the proverbial coals. Because revealed priesthood leadership principles were absent, the Lords people were subjected to unneeded anxiety, pressure, and fear. It is clear; control, compulsion, and dominion were the leadership tactics of the day. We will consider here just how destructive such practices by men are to any priesthood power they think they may have.

In the Doctrine & Covenants the Lord instructed, “Let no man think he is ruler; but let God rule him that judgeth, according to the counsel of his own will, or, in other words, him that counseleth or sitteth upon the judgment seat.” Priesthood leaders are not to set themselves up as “rulers” of the people. (D&C 58: 20) They do not “rule” over anyone.

The ancient apostles James and John approached the Master and asked Him if they might sit on His left, and the other on His right hand in His Kingdom. This request agitated the remaining ten apostles. The Master used this occasion to teach the great Priesthood leadership principle. He said, “Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Mark 10: 42-45) Again, as he did in D&C 58, the Lord makes it clear; priesthood leaders are not to assume they are “rulers” of the people. They rule over no one, to choose to do so as we will see, results in forfeiture of priesthood power.

The Lord revealed correct priesthood leadership principles in a magnificent revelation to the prophet Joseph Smith.  The Mormon Reformation, and the actions of the leaders of the day, if they are weighed against these eternal truths, is found greatly wanting. D&C 121: 36-44 is given by the Lord as follows: (with commentary following)

36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

The only possible way the rights and powers of the priesthood can be controlled or handled by any man regardless of position or calling is upon principles of righteousness. There must be a connection with heaven itself. That connection does not and cannot come from a position or calling including president, prophet, or pope. We have already seen the Lord does not consider acting as a ruler over people a principle of righteousness. It is in fact unrighteousness. There could not have been the direction or blessing of heaven in the Mormon Reformation because its foundations were unrighteousness.  

 37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

The conferral of priesthood is no guarantee of power in the priesthood. A man may be ordained to a priesthood office and never have any power in the priesthood whatsoever.  If any or all of the parameters outlined by the Lord in this verse are violated the spirit of the Lord is grieved. When the spirit of the Lord becomes grieved it is withdrawn from the man. The Lord then declares “Amen” to the priesthood and authority of the man. A very convincing case can be put forth that every one of the qualifying attributes of unrighteousness in this verse were violated by the church leaders in the Mormon Reformation.

 38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

In this verse we find a direct and stern warning from the Lord to wayward leaders. It is one thing to forfeit your priesthood by your actions. (This usually happens unbeknown to the man because in his arrogance and blindness he believes wrongly that he has rights and privileges because he has been ordained or has such and such a calling or position.) However, when you do forfeit priesthood power, and the connection with heaven by which it may be exercised, since you no longer have any connection, help, or rights from heaven, the only options left for you if you choose to continue in unrighteousness is to “kick against the pricks,” to “persecute the saints,” and to “fight against God.” Persecuting the saints in the reformation seems to have been the chosen fare of resort for leaders whose priesthood surely must have been forfeited according to the criteria the Lord set.  

 39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

The effects of our fall and the telestial existence we all struggle against make flaws and mistakes in every man inevitable without exception. All of us, including anyone and every one regardless of position or rank who has been ordained to a priesthood office are disposed to immediately think it is their right to “rule” and to use their position or calling to exercise what the Lord calls “unrighteous dominion.” To borrow words from an earlier verse, unrighteous dominion includes any effort at any level by a leader to “control” or to apply any amount or level of “compulsion” whatsoever upon the souls of the children of men. The Mormon Reformation was at its heart an effort on the part of leaders to implement and extend control and compulsion upon people. The dominion exercised against church members by the leadership of the church during the Mormon Reformation is in my opinion, the poster child case for “unrighteous dominion.”     

 40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

Zion has failed in the church for a number of complex reasons. The unrighteous efforts of church leaders to control, to apply compulsion, and their exercise of unrighteous dominion upon the souls of members of the church is at least a major contributing factor.

 41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

 42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

 43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

 44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

The leadership applied almost none of the accepted principles of priesthood leadership from these verses in the Mormon Reformation. No wonder it failed miserably to create greater spirituality among the people. It did however instill plenty of fear and subservience to the leaders. Such leaders, such principles, deserve no loyalty or followership from any of Gods children. 

Vestiges of these flawed leadership tools and philosophies were passed along and remain in the church today. Though cloaked in a slightly different garment than what appeared in the mid 1800’s, control, compulsion, and dominion are yet tools used to achieve desired results of church leaders from the people. The people want and need priestly, Christlike, humble, loving, servants to minister righteousness among them. The Lord requires it. He has offered no other options for priesthood leaders. Other options adopted by men result in "Amen” to their priesthood.   

Unrighteous Devotion to Men

Loyalty is a good and desirable attribute when lived and applied properly. The Lord made it clear that He expects our devotion and loyalty as part of our discipleship. He taught that, “No man can serve two masters.” He said that when we have choices to make concerning our loyalties, we “will hate the one, and love the other: or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.” (Matt. 6: 24) When teaching about the need for loyalty, the Lord intended that our devotion and admiration were to be directed to Him only, because, “ye cannot serve God and mammon.” The early Israelites were told, “thou shalt have no other gods before me.” (Exodus 20: 3) That commandment still is effective upon us today. The Lord appreciates our devotion and loyalty to Him. He delights to bless those who give their devotion to Him. He has said, “I, the Lord, am merciful and gracious unto those who fear me, and delight to honor those who serve me in righteousness and in truth unto the end.” (D&C 76: 5)

It seems to be a natural human tendency to want to please other men. It is a rare person that simply won’t be influenced by those around them. This human tendency is very often taken to unhealthy extremes. Joseph Smith the prophet succumbed to the urge to bow to the influence of men and was chastised by the Lord for doing so. Joseph was told, “And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men. For, behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise his words—“ (D&C 3: 6-7) Fearing men, paying devotion to men, giving our loyalty or unrighteous admiration to men at any level is offensive to God.  Nephi lamented his own weakness and declared, “O Lord, I have trusted in thee, and I will trust in thee forever. I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh; for I know that cursed is he that putteth his trust in the arm of flesh. Yea, cursed is he that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arm.”

I recently read the Last Confession and Statement of John D. Lee. Brother Lee was the only man that received any legal retribution for the horrible events of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. It is not my purpose to treat the events of the massacre in this posting. For current purposes, I want to restrict attention to statements made by Lee in His last confession about the horrible events. I will say however, that reading Lees confession and statement was disturbing for me. I came away from the reading shaken at what had been done. I recommend it be read.

It is not the purpose of this post to try and determine what Mormon leaders gave what orders or necessarily even who may have been complicit in the massacre at Mountain Meadows. The mindset of John D. Lee is what we want to consider for now. In his confession, he describes the motivation that led him to his part and participation in the bloody events at Mtn. Meadows. In his words there is something to be learned about unrighteous devotion and loyalty to men. After having received orders for the contemplated killing of over 120 emigrants from Arkansas, Lee describes his feelings,  “While in bitter anguish, lamenting the sad condition of myself and others, Charles Hopkins, a man that I had great confidence in, came to me from the Council, and tried to comfort me by saying that he believed it was all right, for the brethren in the Priesthood were all united in the thing, and it would not be well for me to oppose them.” (All quotes and references of Lee in this post are taken from Last Confession and Statement of John D. Lee WRITTEN AT HIS DICTATION AND DELIVERED TO WILLIAM W. BISHOP, 
ATTORNEY FOR LEE) 

According to Lee, about ten days prior to the killings at Mtn. meadows, apostle George A. Smith came to southern Utah and visited for some time with John Lee. Lee describes parts of his conversation with the apostle as follows: “Brother Lee, I am satisfied that the brethren are under the full influence of the reformation, and I believe they will do just as you say they will with the wicked emigrants that come through the country making threats and abusing our people.” I repeated my views to him, but at much greater length, giving my reasons in full for thinking that Governor Young should give orders to protect all the emigrants that he did not wish destroyed. I went into a full statement of the wrongs of our people, and told him that the people were under the blaze of the reformation, full of wild fire and fanaticism, and that to shed the blood of those who would dare to speak against the Mormon Church or its leaders, they would consider doing the will of God, and that the people would do it as willingly and cheerfully as they would any other duty. That the apostle Paul, when he started forth to persecute the followers of Christ, was not any more sincere than every Mormon was then, who lived in Southern Utah. My words served to cheer up the General (George A. Smith) very much; he was greatly delighted, and said,
"I am glad to hear so good an account of our people. God will bless them for all that they do to build up His Kingdom in the last days." Notice that the “sincerity” of the apostle Paul in his persecution of followers of Christ before his conversion to the Lord is set up as an equivalent of the zeal felt by Mormons in southern Utah.  Knowledge of this, according to Lee, served to cheer up the apostle George A. Smith very much.

Describing his feelings at the time of the murders, Lee says, “I knew that I was acting a cruel part and doing a damnable deed. Yet my faith in the godliness of my leaders was such that it forced me to think that I was not sufficiently spiritual to act the important part I was commanded to perform.” Lee’s orders in the execution of the murders were “to help kill all the sick and wounded who were in the wagons, and to do it as soon as they heard the guns of the troops.” Because of his “faith in the godliness of  (his) leaders” Lee felt he was “not sufficiently spiritual” to murder sick and wounded people in the back of a wagon where he had lured them making them think he was taking them to safety.

The elevation of men to a status of “godliness” is evil and damnable. Even acts of cold-blooded murder perpetrated against women, children, sick, and wounded, can be accepted if leaders approve.

To summarize the illustration of unrighteous, even evil loyalty and devotion to priesthood leaders, consider this statement recorded by John D. Lee. As speeches were given prior to the cold-blooded murder of over 120 men, women, and children, John D. Lee remembered the following being said: "Brethren, we have been sent here to perform a duty. It is a duty that we owe to God, and to our Church and people. The orders of those in authority are that all the emigrants must die. Our leaders speak with inspired tongues, and their orders come from the God of Heaven. We have no right to question what they have commanded us to do; it is our duty to obey. “ No right to question. Their order comes from heaven. It is our "duty."

Many, especially perhaps those who wish to cast a more favorable light on the church and its leaders will argue that John Lee cannot be believed. Perhaps they are right. On the other hand, Lee was a condemned man. He was about to step into eternity himself. His fate and execution were set. There would be little purpose in lying about oneself at the doors of death. I personally believe much of what Lee said and recorded is based in truth, especially those statements that express his personal feelings. Every man’s feelings are his reality. It is clear John D. Lee considered his priesthood leaders the final word and the final and supreme authority, even if their word meant cold-blooded murder. If we exclude all else from his confession and try only to learn from the mindset of John Lee himself, the lesson may be learned. Leaders are not to be adored or elevated above anything more than a mere man.  That is after all what they are.

I am disturbed when I here over and over the mantra “follow the prophet.” It has become the number one “doctrine” of the church in our day.  Children begin to hear it in primary as they sing, “Follow the prophet. Follow the prophet. Follow the prophet. He knows the way.” If the prophet did indeed know the way, there will be very little talk of, or singing about, “the prophet.” Things would begin to be spiritually healthy for us as a people if our children never sang about “the prophet” but instead sang praises to our Lord and Redeemer exclusively and continually. A true prophet will never bring attention or focus upon himself or his position. He will never assume that others are to bow to him or his position. A true prophet would teach and require subservience and obedience to no one but the Lord Jesus.

A true prophet will never speak or do anything whatsoever that would even remotely draw attention, devotion, and loyalty away from the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus and our Father have no surrogates on the earth. “Following” any man be he “prophet,” or apostle, or pope, is not now, nor ever will be, in the economy of God, the same thing as following the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. There is no man, not the pope, not the president of the church, not a political leader or king on the earth that deserves, or should righteously require our loyalty, adoration, or obedience. The Lord alone has required that of us. He has no surrogates among men only humble servants that, "if they desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all." (Mark 9: 35)

  

     

Gospel Restoration's One Purpose