Bigotry and Prejudice Against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint Is Alive and Well in American Society and Its Colleges and Universities©

This will be brief, but I must speak out. Twice in the last year the supporters of teams in the PAC- 12 have given over to chanting the bigoted obscenity “F _ _ _  the Mormons” during football games against BYU. The history of persecution of the Latter-day Saints goes clear back to the beginnings of the Church in the early Nineteenth Century.  We have had two centuries to decide how to respond–mostly non-response, or taking it like a joke as with the play “The Book of Mormon.” These days we are often praised for our restraint. But the few articles I’ve read about these incidents, most of which call for an apology and even stricter measures, have all missed hitting directly a couple of important points to which I wish to call attention.

First, lets call a spade a spade. This is religious bigotry pure and simple. The academy prides itself upon leading the way through instruction and example of inclusion, diversity, and tolerance–except apparently for the Latter-day Saints. We seem to be one of the few groups in the U.S. against whom it is acceptable to publicly express religious prejudice and bigotry. It is not racism because we are not a race; it is not sexism either, though for certain reasons it may involve a near relative,(1) but it is religious prejudice and bigotry pure and simple. Freedom of expression sure, even blatantly offensive free expression for sure–all protected by our Constitution. I’m not calling for restrictions on such free expression–I am asking that we be clear about the nature of that expression. It is not reasoned debate or difference of opinion only. It is one of the most virulent types of free expression–castigating a minority group for its religious beliefs. It is expressed by the religiously prejudiced and bigoted in chants at a public sports event–where it nearly takes on a mob mentality.

Second, again lets call a spade a spade. This is a clear double standard in the academy and in our larger society. Imagine the outcry if this was shouted at the Catholics of Notre Dame, the Methodists of SMU, or Baylor Baptists. Doubtless it would be branded in the strongest terms as anti-Semitic if it was aimed at  “the Jews,” of Yeshiva University in New York.  (Do they even have a football team?  Probably not.)  It is difficult to imagine the outcry that would result if a PAC-12 crowd chanted this epithet at blacks, or gays, lesbians, bisexuals, queers, and transvestites. Such talk would not only be soundly and repeatedly condemned,  but very likely there would be calls for resignations and sanctions, maybe even reparations, and surely reformations of all types. Certainly such religious prejudice and bigotry should also be roundly condemned when aimed at the Latter-day Saints. I denounce this double standard and the religious bigotry it condones.

A significant segment of American society, including some of its colleges and universities, quietly harbor deep prejudice, bigotry and double standards toward The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  It is a minority that is often considered a societal pariah in private speech and discussions. So it shouldn’t surprise us when it sometimes surfaces publicly in the classrooms and at sports events. If tolerated and not resisted, it will only grow and eventually turn really ugly.  It always does.

Let’s think together again, soon. 

Notes:

1.  An approach in this direction was made by Elder Russell M. Nelson as quoted by Neil L. Andersen: "President Russell M. Nelson has said: “There are those who label us [as] bigots, but the bigots are those who don’t allow us to feel as we feel but want us to allow them to feel as they feel. Our stand ultimately boils down to the law of chastity. The Ten Commandments are still valid. They’ve never been revoked. … It is not our prerogative to change laws that God has decreed” (in Dew, Insights from a Prophet’s Life, 212)

Neil L. Andersen, “The Eye of Faith,” Ensign (May 2019): 37, n. 17.

Evidence Sixty-Eight: “Joseph Smith and One More Look at the Baptismal Covenant in Mosiah 18:8-10”©

 101 Reasons why I Believe Joseph Smith Was a Prophet of God

Evidence Sixty-eight

Joseph Smith and One More Look at the Baptismal Covenant in Mosiah 18:8-10©

It interests me how reading one thing on one subject often stimulates thinking about another aspect of the same subject according to one’s interests and projects. It happened to me again today.  The subject is the baptismal covenant as it is given to us from Alma in Mosiah 18.  The text reads:

8)  And it came to pass that he said unto them: Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called) and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear one another's burdens, that they may be light;  9)  Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death, that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal life—10) Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?

A covenant is typically defined as a mutual promise between two people. Indeed, Joseph Smith said, “it requires two parties to make a covenant, and those two parties must be agreed, or no covenant can be made.”(1) When Latter-day Saints speak of covenants with God, the traditional view is that it is a mutually agreed upon “two-way” promise between God and man.” Several brethren have taught that the stipulations of the covenant are determined by God and we exercise our agency to agree to those stipulations.

What interests me about this version of the baptismal covenant is that it goes beyond this traditional view of a covenant. Most covenants are “bilateral,” that is, they are between an individual and God.  However, my reading early this morning suggested that this iteration expands the covenant beyond the commitments between God and man, to impose obligations on those accepting God’s stipulations, to the wider covenant community. That is to say the individual member takes on the obligation to “bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light ... and ...mourn with those that mourn ... and comfort those that stand in need of comfort.”(2)

The distinction between a simple bilateral covenant and this more complex community compact is stunning when you think about it.(3) First of all, there is neither a clearly delineated bilateral or community compact version of the baptismal covenant in the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible is baptism designated as a covenant! It is considered so by some by inference only. This is interesting because in Nephi’s great visions early in the Book of Mormon he sees the Bible come forth in the Americas and it is missing some important “plain and precious things” which have been “taken away” from it. One specific he mentions is that “many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.”(4) But, back to my point. I suggest this community compact is not only more complex than the traditional bilateral covenant, but it is also more sophisticated, indeed more expansive and elevated in terms of the obligations it imposes on the recipient and the impact it is intended to have on the covenant community. God does not just want us to be a witness of him, serve him, and keep his commandments; he also obligates us to care for the community of Saints.

It is evident that Joseph Smith understood well the importance of the communal nature of this covenant.  Two years later he told the Church,

On the 27th [April 1832] ... It was my endeavor to so organize the Church, that the brethren might eventually be independent of every incumbrance beneath the celestial kingdom, by bond and covenants of mutual friendship, and mutual love.(5)

Seven years later he contrasted two types of principles which maintain human relations. First, he spoke of the gospel principle of love and contrasted it with the principles of government which maintain relationships by law and eventually coercion, when necessary:

There is a love from God that should be exercised toward those of our faith, who walk uprightly, which is peculiar to itself, but it is without prejudice; it also gives scope to the mind, which enables us to conduct ourselves with greater liberality towards all that are not of our faith, than what they exercise towards one another. These principles approximate nearer to the mind of God, because it is like God, or Godlike. 

Here is a principle also, which we are bound to be exercised with, that is, in common with all men, such as governments, and laws, and regulations in the civil concerns of life. This principle guarantees to all parties, sects, and denominations, and classes of religion, equal, coherent, and indefeasible rights; they are things that pertain to this life; therefore all are alike interested; they make our responsibilities one towards another in matters of corruptible things, while the former principles do not destroy the latter, but bind us stronger, and make our responsibilities not only one to another, but unto God also.(6)

Where is any of this to be found in the experience and environment of a New England and New York farm boy whom many accuse of only being interested at this time of his life in “money digging,” that is, searching for treasure with his psuedo-spiritual gift of seership? He was twenty-four years old when the Book of Mormon came off the press in March 1830. If he were making up this book to palm off on an unsuspecting world, what in that world would have impelled him to concoct Alma’s baptismal covenant?  What would be his motive? It is righteous and good, and noble, and elevated.  Where did a twenty-four-year-old of his time get this?(7) If it was genuinely in his heart as it is in Alma’s, that certainly contradicts the generally held anti-Mormon notion that he was a ne’er-do-well black heart, a corrupt fraud and deceiver.

And there is more. Noel Reynolds a retired BYU professor, in a recent article, shows how this passage, as are many others in the Book of Mormon, is expressive of the Biblical concept of hesed.  Hesed is a Hebrew term regarding God and his interaction with his children, the meaning of which is so broad that it is difficult to find an adequate synonym, or even a collection of synonyms to express it. Indeed, according to Reynolds, it calls “to mind the entire complex of moral qualities associated with God and his righteous people in covenant Israel.”(8) Regarding Alma’s statement in Mosiah 18 and the Biblical concept of hesed, Reynolds wrote:

[W]e do see the divinely sanctioned covenant structuring a community that expects each to help others as their means and abilities would allow, including the redemption of captives–in this case, the redemption of fallen people from the captivity of the devil....  In every respect, Alma’s description of the moral implications of the covenant reflects the classical Old Testament notion of hesed that was expected of Israelites under the covenant of Abraham....(9)

So, Reynolds adds one more example of The Book of Mormon as truly one “marvelous work and a wonder,” among many that continue to accompany the Restoration of the fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But, even without Reynolds’s persuasive arguments about hesed in the Book of Mormon, Alma’s description of the baptismal covenant stands as a witness of the complex, elevated and deeply spiritual nature of the book in which it is found. Reason compels us to ask if young Joseph Smith was capable of imagining, let alone articulating such a covenant; one that is entirely consistent with both ancient covenants and concepts. In my opinion, the likelihood that he knew of these things in his farmland homes of the northeast approaches zero.

Thank God for Joseph Smith, The Book of Mormon, and faithful scholars.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:  

1.  Joseph Smith, in B. H. Roberts, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 Vols., Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1963, 1:313, hereafter cited HC.

2.  Mosiah 8:8-10. There are more stipulations that fit the traditional mold of a bilateral covenant between the individual and God, where one promises to “stand as a witness of God at all times and in all things, and in all places, and to “serve him and keep his commandments.”  

3.  This distinction was encountered in today’s early morning reading in Noel B. Reynolds, “Biblical hesed and Nephite Covenant Culture,”  BYU Studies Quarterly 60, no 4 (2021):167-69.

4.  1 Nephi 13:26.  Equally interesting is the motive attributed to those who took those things out of the Bible.  “And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.” (1 Ne. 13:27.)

5.  Joseph Smith, HC 1:269, emphasis added.

6.  Joseph Smith, HC 3:304, March 1839, emphasis added.

7.  And this is only one of many such like things, not only in the Book of Mormon, but also in the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price.  It brings to mind D&C 67:9 where the Lord is taking on critics of Joseph Smith’s revelations and asserts “For ye know that there is no unrighteousness in them, and that which is righteous cometh down from above, from the Father of lights.”

8.  Reynolds, “Biblical hesed,” 152.

9.  Reynolds, “Biblical hesed,”168-69.

Evidence Sixty-Seven: “Hold on Thy Way:" A New Look at Enduring to the End from the Life of the Prophet”©

 101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was a Prophet of God

Evidence Sixty-seven:

“Hold on Thy Way:" A New Look at Enduring to the End from the Life of the Prophet”© 

As so frequently happens when we are faithful in attending Church, this morning I was blessed with a great doctrinal and historical insight, one that has great meaning to me personally. We “attended” via Zoom. It is the day after Christmas and the program was comprised of Christmas musical numbers, a youth speaker, and an adult speaker–sister Sue Salmon. Her assigned topic was “the doctrine of Christ.” She read from 3 Nephi about the fundamental principles that make up the doctrine of Christ and then expounded on each one briefly.

When she came to “endure to the end” she taught me something very important. She said she long wondered what that meant and went on to give an idea from the life of Joseph Smith. He endured so very much during his life. He endured persecution, rejection, misunderstanding, betrayal, loss of close friends and family, financial problems, being driven from his home, death of children, and much more. And, in what at the time seemed to be the culmination of his problems, in 1839 he was languishing in Liberty Jail, a cold, damp, dreary dungeon in Missouri. He cried out to the Lord. As part of the answer given to him then, sister Salmon quoted something we often quote in these kinds of discussions, but it is something I think contains a message that is often overlooked.  D&C 122:9  begins: “Therefore, hold on thy way....” “Hold on thy way?” Continue what you have been doing!

Joseph was instructed to persevere through the Liberty Jail experience like he did through all of his previous difficulties. Apparently, this wasn’t the end, either of his life or his trials. Apparently, there was still more for him to do and he was not to be distracted or derailed by the intensity of what he was then experiencing. He was to “hold on thy way.”

Then Sue said something, that brought it all into focus for me–this is the doctrinal and historical lesson that I learned from her that instantly became a treasure to me. She pointed out that between his 1839 Liberty Jail experience and his Martyrdom in June 1844, Joseph Smith received and gave to the Church some of his most important doctrinal revelations, particularly relating to the temple and its ordinances. When I say things came into focus for me when she said that, I mean really, really sharp focus. I have spent much of the last fifteen years of my life studying the temple, its doctrines, rituals, and ordinances. They are most precious and important to me. Sister Salmon’s almost casual insight rocked me in my chair. I now have a clearer and fuller understanding of “enduring to the end.” “Hold on thy way” because the last may be the best if you do.  

In this sense Joseph Smith was like Nephi and other Book of Mormon prophets. He perhaps didn’t see clearly why the Lord wanted him to hold on and “hold on thy way” while he suffered in Liberty Jail; just like Nephi and Mormon did not understand why they were to make the plates and the records they were commanded to. With 100% hindsight, we now know that the Lord was doing it for other people at another time–the future–for you and me. In the midst of the loneliness and sense of abandonment Joseph doubtless felt in jail, I doubt he understood that the next 4-5 years would be the doctrinal culmination–the theological apogee of his prophetic career. He must endure Liberty Jail, because on the other side the true meaning of the “fulness of the Gospel” became evident.

And the personal application of all this to me? Well, I am 78 ½ years old, and because of two back operations and related matters I am physically useless as a minister, friend, or family member. Yet I am reasonably healthy and happy and as interested and motivated about my life-long interest in studying the Church and gospel as I have ever been. I have built over 22,000 files on many aspects of the gospel and yet I find myself adding new ones almost daily. On Christmas I added three, and this subject is the first for today. Because of my physical limitations, I’ve prayed for guidance about what the Lord would have me do with my time. Without really recognizing it, the consistent answer seems to be, “Hold on thy way.” Keep doing what you have done for 50 years. And... oh, by the way, I believe the last is the best. The technology and resources now available, the things I’m doing and the materials I’m collecting, organizing, and preserving are among the best of my whole life! Now, my prayer, like those of the Book of Mormon, is that they may be of great value to someone in my family and in the Church.

I am so grateful for this Church, for its organization and teachings, for Sacrament meeting, for the inspiration and insights of the good basic Latter-day Saints who speak in them, and for the life and teachings of Joseph Smith. This is one more evidence to me, he was and remains a prophet of the living God.

Lets think together again, soon.

Eternal Marriage and Procreation Are Under Divine Direction©

  “Personal and Family Application of the Teachings and Counsel of Living Prophets”

Quotation 2: Eternal Marriage and Procreation Are Under Divine Direction© 

It is no surprise that the world has many opinions about marriage, its origin, purpose and value, and about sex, procreation and the family. What does surprise me is that so many of the younger generation of Latter-day Saints seem to share many of those worldly opinions. Individual freedom from family responsibility surfeits modern culture. My sense is that these trendings have also greatly influenced the most recent generation of Latter-day Saint youth. Their lack of understanding about the LDS doctrine of marriage demonstrates itself in the freedom with which many LDS youth take issue with the Church and its leaders on LGBTQ matters, as if the Church should have one standard for LGBTQ folks engaging in all sorts of sexual practices, and another one for straights who engage in petting, fornication, or adultery. There is no such double standard in the law of chastity as taught by the LDS Church. But, this is not an essay on sexual preference per se. That is only an illustration of the ignorance and the arrogance of the elevated value of personal opinion I see even among some LDS youth about the LDS doctrines of marriage and family. This essay intends to address a single aspect of this subject.

In doing research on those subjects when I was an active sealer in the Logan Temple I came across a wonderful, and wonderfully profound quotation by Charles W. Penrose. He was a counselor in the Church’s First Presidency during the years 1911-1925. He was a native of England and called as an apostle 7 July 1904. The quotation comes from the period prior to his apostleship, but its precision, eloquence, and profundity may give some indication why the Lord thought so highly of him.  In 1881 he wrote:

In its correct form [marriage] is under the divine direction. The Father of the race has the right to a voice in the sexual unions of his children. Those relations are fraught with so much consequence, relating to time and eternity, that the Supreme Ruler should regulate them for the benefit of the parties, the welfare of society and the good of posterity in this world, as well as for eternal results in the life to come.(1)

This is a tightly worded statement, requiring us to unpack it. At least four things are of note in this passage. First, the correct form of marriage [presumably this means temple marriages] are under God’s direction. This is because, as D&C 49:15 says, “marriage is ordained of God unto man.”  There are only two possibilities for the origin of marriage. Either God established it, or it is a man-made institution which evolved with civilization. Since God ordained it, it is “under his direction.”  Elder Penrose thus asserts God’s right and authority to direct marriage, like all other saving ordinances, that is, to give laws and set conditions and boundaries pertaining to both marriage and procreation. 

Second, as part of his direction, God has the right to “a voice” in the sexual unions of his children. This statement likely surprises many. The mantra today is, “It is my body, I will do what I want with it.” Many, perhaps most people, including many Christians, are not aware that the Apostle Paul taught otherwise. Here is what he said in 1 Corinthians 6:18-20.

18) Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20) For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

When you think about it, it must be this way. Otherwise how can God hold us accountable in the judgment for various sexual transgressions with the body? But brother Penrose suggest other reasons we should seriously consider. 

His third point is that those sexual unions are “fraught with so much consequence, relating to time and eternity,” that God regulates them. What consequences relating to time and eternity? For one, we are back to the judgment. Most in secular society and a large number of Christians, have abandoned the notion that God means what he said on Sinai–“thou shalt not commit adultery,” or that there will be any consequence for doing so. Christ raised the ante when he declared that if one engages in lust, he has already committed adultery in his heart. (Mt. 6:28)  And Elder Jeffrey R. Holland reminds us that,

Sadly enough, my young friends, it is a characteristic of our age that if people want any gods at all, they want them to be gods who do not demand much, comfortable gods, smooth gods who not only don’t rock the boat but don’t even row it, gods who pat us on the head, make us giggle, then tell us to run along and pick marigolds.

Talk about man creating God in his own image! Sometimes—and this seems the greatest irony of all—these folks invoke the name of Jesus as one who was this kind of “comfortable” God. Really? He who said not only should we not break commandments, but we should not even think about breaking them. And if we do think about breaking them, we have already broken them in our heart. Does that sound like “comfortable” doctrine, easy on the ear and popular down at the village love-in?(2)

So much for eternal consequences. We turn to contemplation of the consequences relating to time of which brother Penrose spoke. It isn’t difficult, just look around. See tens and hundreds of thousands of moral-less men (the sterile academic term is amoral) scattering their sperm around like a gardener fertilizing roses, with equally as many willing moral-less receptive women. See the deadbeat fathers leaving the hapless women to suffer the consequences alone, with apparently none to themselves. See about a million of these women a year in the United States alone since Roe v. Wade (1973), eliminate the conception as if it was so much flotsam.  See the hardness of heart, insensitivity to the sacredness of life, and total lack of responsibility to man or mankind evident in these two patterns of behavior and consider the consequences in time. This is but one of a myriad of scenarios playing out in the era of  modern sexual freedom.(3)

Finally, as with all aspects of the Gospel, brother Penrose says God regulates the sexual unions of his children for the benefit of three entities: 1) “the parties,” i.e., the couple, 2) the “welfare of society,” 3) “the good of posterity in this world,” and 4) for “the eternal results in the life to come.”  

What practical benefits does adherence to the laws of chastity and eternal marriage bring to the couple?  Modern apostles and prophets speak of many. Church leaders have consistently taught that marriage is necessary for the growth, refinement, and perfection of men and women.(4) Elder Bednar explained, “The natures of male and female spirits complete and perfect each other and therefore men and women are intended to progress together toward exaltation.”(5) Elder Glenn Pace wrote, “There is a spiritual development that can only be obtained when a man and a woman join their incomplete selves into a complete couple. Just as conception requires the physical union of male and female, perfection requires the union of the very souls of male and female.”(6)  Elder Bruce Hafen said, “Marriage and family life are among God’s chief institutions for perfecting us....”(7) Elder Packer taught, “No relationship has more potential to exalt a man and a woman than the marriage covenant.”(8) President Nelson observed, “Marriage should ever be a covenant to lift husbands and wives to exaltation in celestial glory.”(9) In addition, the prophets and apostles teach that eternal marriage and families are  relationships out of which can grow here and in the eternities the greatest love, joy, peace, serenity and happiness known to man.(10) These are just a few of many statements on many aspects of this subject which could be cited.

How do the laws of chastity and eternal marriage benefit the “welfare of society.” Elimination of a million abortions a year in this country isn’t a bad start. Elimination of a million Lady Macbeth’s with indelible blood incarnadine on their hands could introduce a new element of respect for life, and compassion, responsibility and family strength that would inevitably redound to strengthen our society. Elimination of hundreds of thousands of expectant mothers that do not want to be, would lift legions of women each year. Hundreds of thousands of men respecting the chastity of women, providing for the children they sire–who can count those benefits to the welfare of society? If you want a good society it isn’t created by governmental legislation, it is created by honorable, honest, moral men and women, one at a time. Idealistic you say. Consider the havoc perpetually wrecked upon society in the absence of such ideals! 

Brother Penrose also calls our attention to the benefits of adhering to God’s guidance in matters of marriage and procreation to the “good of posterity in this world.” Now, things incessantly spiral ever downward, perpetuating secular immorality, crime, poverty, ignorance, and a host of societal ills. What benefits would come to millions of children if they were raised in a two-parent home, with a responsible father? We would eliminate millions of children who are often reared by a poor and uneducated single mother, who but for exceptional circumstances, start life on an uneven playing field with little or no chance to catch up, trillion dollar government programs notwithstanding. 

Brother Penrose concludes by asking us to consider the “eternal results in the life to come.” The Lord told the Prophet Joseph Smith those who meet the conditions of eternal marriage 

shall be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall the be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them. Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.  (D&C 132:20-21)

I hope, at this point, that you agree that brother Penrose’s statement was all that I said it was and more.  And I assure you there is much, much more that could be said in reference to this single quotation.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:

1. Charles W. Penrose,  “Leaves from the Tree of Life,” Eleventh Leaf, The Contributor, 2 (August 1881):337. Elder Penrose went on to write, “The male and female elements of humanity seek union, of their own volition. The natural attraction that prompts this is right and proper. But if there were no rules and restrictions for the government of these tendencies and the actions resultant, confusion would ensue, and the effects would be sorrow, ruin and destruction. Matrimony therefore becomes a part of religion. It is a divine institution, and hence should be divinely directed.” Emphasis added.

2. Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Cost–and Blessings–of Discipleship,” Ensign (May 2014):7-8.  See also Mosiah 4:29-30 and Alma 12:14.

3. I am aware that there is a trend downward in the number of abortions in the United States.  But I am not simply concerned with US statistics.  Add to our total those from around the world and surely many more than a million fetuses are aborted every year.

4. Indeed, Elder Bednar in teaching that marriage can be understood only in context of the Father’s plan of salvation and exaltation and happiness, says that the first of the doctrines that help us understand why this is the case is that “The natures of male and female spirits complete and perfect each other and therefore men and women are intended to progress together toward exaltation.” David A. Bednar, Increase in Learning: Spiritual Patterns for Obtaining Your Own Answers,176-177. See also: John Taylor, “It takes a woman and a man to make a man. Did you ever think about that, that without a union of the sexes we are not perfect? God has so ordained it. And therefore do we expect to have our wives in the future state? Yes. And do wives expect to have their husbands? Yes.” JD 19:245, discourse of 21 October 1877; Brigham Young, “Speech Delivered April 6, 1845,” Millennial Star 6, no. 8 (1 October 1845):122, in which he said: “No man can be perfect without the woman, so no woman can be perfect without a man to lead her. I will tell you the truth as it is in the bosom of eternity, and I say so to every man upon the face of the earth–if he wishes to be saved, he cannot be saved without a woman by his side.” Cited in Brian C. Hales, Joseph Smith’s Polygamy, Volume 3: Theology, 153. See also George A Smith, JD 2:216, discourse of 18 March 1855; Wendy Ulrich, The Temple Experience: Passage to Healing and Holiness, Springville, UT: Cedar Fort, 2012, 207-17. Ellis Rasmussen has written: “The greatest opportunity of all, to learn eternal values and achieve heavenly potentials, resides in the responsibility and the privilege to create bodies for others of God’s spirit children.” Ellis Rasmussen, A Latter-Day Saint Commentary on the Old Testament, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1993, 7-8; Richard G. Scott, “To Have Peace and Happiness,” in Brigham Young University Speeches 2010-2011, Provo, UT: BYU, 2011, 178; D. Todd Christofferson,“Why Marriage, Why Family,” Ensign (May 2015):52. “A family built on the marriage of a man and woman supplies the best setting for God’s plan to thrive....”  

5. David A. Bednar, Increase in  Learning, 176-177. He went on to say, “By divine design, men and women are intended to progress together toward perfection and a fulness of glory.  Because of their distinctive temperaments and capacities, males and females each bring to a marriage relationship unique perspectives and experiences. The man and the woman contribute differently but equally to a oneness and a unity that can be achieved in no other way. The man completes and perfects the woman and the woman completes and perfects the man as they learn from and mutually strengthen and bless each other.” Emphasis added.

6. Glenn Pace, “The Divine Nature and Destiny of Women,” BYU devotional address 9 March 2010. Available online at:  http://speeches.byu.edu/index.php?act=viewitem&id=1886 

7. Bruce C. Hafen, Covenant Hearts: Why Marriage Matters and How to Make It Last, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005, 31-32.

8. Boyd K. Packer, “Marriage,” Ensign (May 1981):15. Terryl and Fiona Givens offered an interesting insight when they agree the godly virtues are all social in nature–kindness, patience, mercy, generosity, self-control, etc. Thus, they are best developed and perfected in a social environment with others and God. Terryl and Fiona Givens, The God Who Weeps: How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life, Pleasant Grove, UT: Ensign Peak, 2012, 113.

9. Russell M. Nelson, “Nurturing Marriage,” Ensign (May 2006):37.

10. Bruce R. McConkie, “Celestial Marriage,” BYU Devotional, 6 November 1977, in 1977 Devotional Speeches of the Year, Provo, UT: BYU Press, 1978, 174; Joseph Fielding Smith, in Doctrines of Salvation, compiled by Bruce R. McConkie, 2:58-59, 3 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954; George F. Richards, Conference Report, October 1942, 40-41; Heber J. Grant, Gospel Standards, Salt Lake City: Improvement Era, 1943,153; “Beginning Life Together,” Improvement Era (April 1936):198-99.

Help Youth Lay the Foundation of a Happy Marriage©

 Introduction: I am starting a new series in this blog. Since I became active in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints more than 60 years ago at age 17, I have loved the teachings and counsel of the Apostles and Prophets, ancient and modern. Now in my dotage, I have increased the time I devote to a study of the words of the modern apostles and prophets. My collections of quotations from them on virtually every conceivable spiritual subject and many others is extensive and growing faster now than ever before. Much of what they have and continue to say is so applicable on a personal and a family basis that I have elected to do a series I am calling, “Personal and Family Application of the Teachings and Counsel of Living Prophets.”

Each entry will provide an unusual, insightful, and helpful quotation from church leaders in this dispensation, followed by generally brief commentary and suggestions. Much of it will be aimed at my grandchildren, former CRM missionaries who served in California with us from 2002-2005, and anyone else who may find the subjects interesting and worthwhile. So, here is the first one.

********

“Personal and Family Application of the Teachings and Counsel of Living Prophets”

Quotation 1:  Help Youth Lay the Foundation of a Happy Marriage© 

Last night, Saturday 9 October 2021, was a bit sleepless so I turned on the reading light on my night stand and opened a book of the teachings of President David O. McKay called Man May Know for Himself, compiled from his writings by his secretary Clare Middlemiss. I'm halfway into this book and presently in a section about marriage and family. In an early morning hour I read the following statement directed to the youth of the church:

If you want to have a happy home, ever keep in mind the fact that you are going to lay the foundation for it in your teens before you even choose your mate.(1)

A simple, almost self-evident statement, yes!  I suspect many of you reading this, like me, said to your self, “Well, Dan, I know that!”  But do you really?  I admit I don’t remember ever consciously thinking when I was young, or at anytime since, that I laid the foundation for my marriage in my teenage years.  And I certainly did not teach that simple truth to any of my children overtly, and probably not inadvertently.  I never taught it in a class in seminary or institute, or in any talk I have given in a myriad of settings over the last 60 years. So, if it is so self-evident and simple, why didn’t I pass it on? The truth is, the thought did not pass through this thick head for 78 years, until last night.

Here’s my recommendation to my grandchildren, returned missionaries from CRM, and anyone else who will listen. Teach your children from the time they are little up through the time they get married the absolute necessity and importance of being married in the Lord’s way in the temple.  It is one of the five required ordinances for exaltation.  

Then, teach them over, and over, and over again that they must use part of their youth to lay a proper foundation for that marriage, and you help them do that! That includes, gaining a testimony of and living the Gospel of Jesus Christ, doing as much as they can to build a character based on the attributes of Jesus Christ, and here President McKay emphasizes as a beginning, honesty, loyalty, chastity, and reverence.(2) It includes personal worthiness, with an emphasis on chastity for both men and women (check this book out, President McKay has much to teach about this subject), taking care of one’s body and physical health, and education.  I could say more, and you should to your own children and grand children.  What follows are a few brief suggestions to act as triggers as to how parents may do this.  Your own understanding and creativity will come up with more.

1. Regularly devote FHEs and dinner time discussions to the subject of the doctrine of marriage, and to explaining that  youth is the time they lay the foundation for a happy marriage by what they believe, know, and do.
2. Discuss with children what a foundation is and how it applies to the idea of a future relationship such as marriage. Discuss the various elements of that foundation of a happy marriage.
3. You could discuss the teachings of Jesus at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount about foundations and their importance. Be sure you are clear on what the foundation is. There are several other important passages about foundations in the Standard Works you could talk about.
4. You could use President Nelson’s first talk in the October 2021 General Conference which discusses strengthening one’s spiritual foundation.
5. Help children see that important time must be spent in laying this foundation and doing so is much more important than learning to ride a skateboard, play video games, spend endless hours texting friends on social media, becoming a beauty queen or a macho man, surfeiting one’s life with entertainment, fun, and pleasure.  President Kimball once said because of Satan’s increasing influence, parents must do their work “better, sooner.”  Don’t fall into the trap that youth is a time that can be wasted without consequence. What foundation is laid if one’s youth is spent in pursuit of these things? Can it ever be recovered? Do you believe a two-year mission will compensate for a wasted youth? Isn’t that a dangerous philosophy and belief in which to place the trust of the future of your children’s marriage and family life?

If you have other related quotations and ideas about this subject, please share them here in the comment section.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:

1.  Clare Middlemiss, comp., Man May Know for Himself: Teachings of President David O. McKay, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967, 250.

2. McKay, Man May Know for Himself, 216.

The Pangs of Unlearning©

The Pangs of Unlearning© 

I like to occasionally turn this platform over to someone else, especially when I find a great talk I think may not be well known, but which I believe is of exceptional value. Today the microphone is given over to Elder Delbert L. Stapley of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  The title of his talk is “The Pangs of Unlearning,” and it was given in the April 1967 general conference. I consider it a classic address, and highly recommend it to you. Two points may entice you to read the whole thing: 1) Though he does not used the word pattern, he makes the case that there is a pattern in the Lord’s dealing with us that as we grow, progress, and increase in learning, He is anxious to give us more truth, and higher laws to live, to prepare us to return to His presence in the Celestial Kingdom. He repeats this idea three times in the talk. This pattern began in the Garden of Eden when He gave Adam and Eve what appear to be two conflicting commandments– i.e., not to partake of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and to multiply and replenish the earth. However, Elder Stapley points out, the Lord was giving them the choice to live either a lesser or a higher law, and Eve chose the higher law! Wala–theological problem solved! 2) Elder Stapley argues that both the world and members of the Church have many things that are useless, incorrect, or bad that must be unlearned, and he gives several examples for both groups. The talk contains important statements about free agency, minimizing the sacredness of sex, one of the unusual purposes of the atonement, and the fact that the Lord did not use any existing Church as the framework for establishing his kingdom, both in the meridian of time when he set up the Church, or in the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times, when he restored the Church.  And there is more.... One reminder–this talk was given in 1967 and some of the examples need to be updated in your own experience, but that is one of the beauties of this talk–the principles are easy to apply to our own time and situation. Enjoy!

*****

The Pangs of Unlearning 

Delbert L. Stapley 

of the Council of the Twelve 

Recently, I read a talk, given by a doctor to a convention of medical men, entitled "The Pangs of Unlearning."  He called attention to the discoveries through research of new drugs and improved treatments that require much unlearning by physicians and surgeons, because many former practices and medicines do not best serve the interests of today's patients. A doctor friend of mine significantly stated that the majority of medical services practiced ten years ago are obsolete today. This talk challenged my interest, as I envisioned updated learning, reorienting, and retraining as applying to the pattern of our own lives. 

I should like to share with you some of my thoughts on this subject of unlearning and the possible personal improvement each individual can attain by living strictly within the framework and spirit of the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

The word unlearn as here used does not mean a casting aside of eternal truths and everlasting knowledge. Rather, it means altering our habits of behavior so as to live more in harmony with God's will. It reflects a desire and a willingness to keep pace with up-to-date knowledge gained through research (as well as inspiration and revelation), which provides advanced learning, new methods, and techniques to replace the less effective or obsolete.  Are we faithful and obedient enough in the Church to accept authorized changes that represent improvement and growth? 

The wonderful, complex instrument for registering our experiences that we call the mind gathers a maze of data to be sifted, analyzed, and appraised. In such a process some data will be found useful and some without value. In the latter case, what shall be done with such material? 

It would be well, of course, if it could be thrown away, like refuse, and forgotten altogether. That, however, is quite out of the question, as the Master so clearly illustrated in his parable of the wheat and the tares. And no way has, as yet, been discovered by which we may press a button or turn a switch and have that which is of no value to our learning cast aside automatically. That which is learned, the useful and the seemingly unuseful alike, memory retains. 

What, then, can be done as our learning process grows and expands and memory retains the good and the not good that have been accumulated there? The simplest answer to such a question would be "unlearn the not good." We are then faced with the next question, "How can that be done?" 

The answer is not so simple nor so easy. It involves many matters and requires earnest, prayerful consideration. In the first place, the primary law of intelligent life, free agency, or the personal power to exercise judgment should be made operative. With that power set in motion, the good and the not good may be determined. Yet even here man on his own may not be perfect in judgment. One needs to be humble in spirit, contrite of heart, ready in prayer, as was the Master, even though he was perfect. By such means one is entitled to the promptings and guidance of the Holy Ghost, so necessary when one is on the road of perfectness, yet needing to "unlearn" that which is not good. 

Another factor important in the process of learning and unlearning is that of attitude. Some of us need to unlearn personal attitudes that are contrary and resistant to gospel teachings and requirements. Certain attitudes are destructive to true character.  They inhibit growth. If allowed to develop, they may produce disastrous consequences. Negative, cynical, and other kindred attitudes are dangerous to faith, hope, humility, righteous desires, and high purpose, which virtues are essential to the discovery and retention of that which is best in the learning process and of "unlearning" the undesirable in life. One should, therefore, be well aware of the many types of attitudes present in daily living. 

We sometimes wonder why people behave as they do. Perhaps it is because they are unwilling to unlearn the reasons for their unwarranted behavior.  Now, I do not want you to think I am advocating the unlearning of eternal truths, principles, standards, ideals, and ordinances, because these gospel verities never change. God's laws are immutable and endure forever. By increasing our learning, however, we become acquainted with additional truths and higher laws referred to in scripture as truth, light, spirit, and the mysteries of godliness. A scientist frequently forsakes theory he has learned because research uncovers advanced knowledge that changes or makes obsolete some former concepts but does not eliminate basic principles. The sciences are subject to constant change. This is true also in technological advances, where we forsake the old and accept the new improved methods of performance that have advanced our civilization tremendously. 

While all this advancement takes place in our modern world, we cannot afford to forsake or discard the teachings and revelations of God. People brought up in a religious faith that does not teach the true doctrines of Christ, regardless of how sincere they may be, must unlearn much of what they were taught and accept the new light and way to obtain salvation and glory. Because the children of Israel had gone astray and were so steeped in the faith and tradition of their fathers, they were unable to unlearn the law given for their temporal benefit, for the higher spiritual law brought to them personally by the Christ. They thus failed to recognize the Christ when he was sent of God, the Father, to live among them. It was Christ who came to fulfill the lesser law and to reveal to them the higher law of his gospel. Jesus was put to death because his own people of the house of Israel could not unlearn and prepare themselves to receive him, their Jehovah, Savior, and God. 

The peoples of the world must unlearn the idea that all churches are acceptable unto God. Some teach that it doesn't matter which road one takes (meaning which church one belongs to), since all roads, it is claimed, lead back to the presence of God. This premise does not accord with the teachings of the scriptures. 

Christ did not accept any of the churches of his day to supply the framework for his earthly kingdom. He taught, "Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, . . . but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved." (Matt. 9:17.) For the same reason the organization of his Church and the gospel of his kingdom could not fit into the framework of the existing churches. They were false and unsuited to Christ's needs and purpose. The identical condition was also true in this dispensation when God restored the gospel and his kingdom through his divinely called servant, Joseph Smith. 

Man must unlearn the idea that any and all baptisms are acceptable unto God. There is only one true mode of baptism, and that is immersion. Only men who hold the appropriate priesthood office and are divinely called and ordained can efficaciously perform this holy ordinance in the gospel and know that it is acceptable to God and that a record will be made of it on earth as well as in heaven. 

I sincerely testify that as all members of Christ's Church progress toward perfection they will enjoy increased knowledge and clearer vision of God's plans and purposes. They will also have some unlearning to do, not because basic truths, standards, and principles change, but because new methods and techniques are employed to achieve greater and more widespread improved performance and spiritual results. 

Now, to support this thought, I quote from the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith: "We consider that God has created man with a mind capable of instruction, and a faculty which may be enlarged in proportion to the heed and diligence given to the light communicated from heaven to the intellect; and that the nearer man approaches perfection, the clearer are his views, and the greater his enjoyments, till he has overcome the evils of his life and lost every desire for sin; and like the ancients, arrives at that point of faith where he is wrapped in the power and glory of his Maker, and is caught up to dwell with him. But we consider that this is a station to which no man ever arrived in a moment; he must have been instructed in the government and laws of that kingdom by proper degrees, until his mind is capable in' some measure of comprehending the propriety, justice, equality, and consistency of the same. . . . [and] that it is necessary for men to receive an understanding concerning the laws of the heavenly kingdom, before they are permitted to enter it: we mean the celestial glory." (Documentary History of the Church, Vol. 2, page 8.) 

Nevertheless, people become too complacent and satisfied with what they have. It is most difficult for them to unlearn and accept the better way. It is also difficult for some members of the Church to unlearn and give up less effective methods of doing things for greatly improved programs planned to build increased spirituality, faith, and testimony to perfect the Saints of God. The Church programs are constantly being strengthened and perfected to meet the challenge of the growing, progressive needs of its members. 

We hear much these days about Church correlation, which is an important step forward in promoting a rounded-out educational understanding of all that pertains to God's latter-day kingdom. The lesson outlines are prepared by the Church correlation committee and are adapted to meet the needs of the members of each Church organization. This prevents any overlapping in study courses, which produce well-informed doctrinal and Church history students who can intelligently give an answer and reason for the hope within them. Correlation of Church organizations, lesson material, and coordination of activities will increase effectiveness and strength in the lives of members, both young and old. 

Parents must unlearn the leaving of all gospel teaching to the organizations of the Church, when the prime responsibility for the teaching of children rests upon the home. If home evenings are not held or are poorly planned, children and parents are denied the wholesome association and companionship of one another. This condition requires a change of attitude and an up-dated learning to enjoy the blessings of this choice family experience. The Church program planned for these occasions is ideal and can, with some imagination, be adapted to every family need. Parents should unlearn the ineffective methods of dealing with their children, finding more effectual ways; then children will feel free to discuss and counsel with parents about the intimate, delicate, and confidential matters that concern them.

Do some of us need to reevaluate what constitutes proper observance of the Word of Wisdom? Are we becoming too liberal in our personal interpretation and application of this law? The 

Apostle Paul counseled: "Abstain from all appearance of evil." (1 Thess. 5:22.) Here again, we can unlearn and resolve to stay strictly on the Lord's side of this law and be safe and at peace with ourselves.

Can we justify a partial payment to the tithing fund as an honest accounting with the Lord on his law of the tithe? Shouldn't we be honest with him and unlearn any wrongful practices to fully meet the obligation and conditions of this law? 

Man must unlearn his changing liberal attitude toward sex that minimizes the sacredness of sex behavior and opens the way for licentious living. I proclaim with all the power of my being that God's seventh commandment to the children of Israel through Moses, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," is a law as binding upon man today as then. Adultery is one of the most abominable sins in the sight of the Lord (Alma 39:5), and forbidden by our God. (See D&C 42:24; Exod. 20:14.) Those who willfully violate this law must pay God's penalty, which is denial to the celestial kingdom. (1 Cor. 6:9-10.) 

If prayers are not a regular practice in the home and personal prayers uttered daily, isn't it wise for us to be more faithful in keeping in contact with our God? Wouldn't it be wise to unlearn some of our feelings, habits, and doings that prevent us from enjoying the sweet companionship of the Holy Ghost to guide and direct us in our personal lives? Many brethren endowed with the Holy Priesthood should unlearn a complacent approach to the duties and responsibilities attendant to this holy power. The Lord has counseled that every priesthood bearer is to "learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence." (D&C 107:99.) Slothfulness in one's duty isn't acceptable to the Lord. He further requires that men must "do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness." (D&C 58:27.) 

There is unlearning to do to adjust from the previous ward teaching program to the present home teaching plan to Church families. The new plan is much superior to the older method and has far greater potential for- effective results. 

This can also be said of new programs in other fields of church service, such as genealogy, temple work, stake missions, education of youth. 

Failure to accept and follow wholeheartedly the counsel and example of our leader in moral, ethical, and spiritual matters does not produce harmony but disharmony. It also places one in the position of pitting one's knowledge and learning against that which God has inspired or revealed through his anointed servant. Some question the right of the Church through its leader to speak up and let the world know and understand the position of the Church on ethical, moral, and political principles or standards that have to do with the rights and welfare of man. Who is able to speak more clearly and authoritatively on such matters? If man loses his God-given right of agency, freedom, and ethical practices by unrighteous interference and unjust controls, his religious life will suffer, because the climate in which religion should flourish becomes restricted and untenable. 

The Savior taught many truths during his ministry upon the earth; but men were offended by his teachings and reviled against him, for their hearts were not right, and their spirits were not attuned to his. Although many stood against him, he was right and they were wrong. Was not his atoning sacrifice for the purpose of helping man to unlearn his sinful ways, which grow up within us like the tares among the wheat? We must unlearn all dross, that we might be more like our Redeemer and our Eternal Father. 

In this present day many need to unlearn unorthodox teachings and improper standards and to humble themselves, as it were, in sackcloth and ashes. All of us should make a personal evaluation and determine where we can profitably unlearn false opinions and erroneous teachings. Our duty is to condition ourselves to be more valuable in promoting the work of God's kingdom. Freedom does not license contention nor approve nonconformists to supplant God's ways with their own. The Lord proclaimed to Isaiah: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isa. 55:8-9.) 

Perhaps this statement will cause us to remember how small we are in comparison to our God, who is all- knowing and all-powerful. The Lord taught Moses a great lesson in this regard. After he had shown Moses by vision the workmanship of his hands, he withdrew from Moses, and his glory was not upon him. Moses was left unto himself, and he fell unto the earth exhausted. It was many hours before he again received his natural strength, and when he did, he humbly said: "Now for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed." (Moses 1:10.) This counsel should remind all of us to be meek and contrite of spirit. 

As we advance toward perfection, there will be higher laws revealed to our understanding and benefit that will replace those of a lower order. This truth was first taught to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, when the Lord gave them two choices: (1) not to partake of the forbidden fruit; and (2) to multiply and replenish the earth, which choices call for obedience to a lesser law or a higher one. They chose to fulfill the higher law. Again, when the Savior sojourned among men, he replaced a lesser law, which Moses, his servant, had given to the children of Israel, with the higher law of the gospel, his plan of life and salvation. Therefore, as we progress in righteousness and truth, we will come in contact with higher laws previously unknown that, when revealed, all of us must accept and obey to perfect ourselves and become more like our God and his Son, Jesus Christ. When that goal is achieved, we will again be in their presence and glory. God bless us with the Holy Ghost to help us choose wisely and with faithful assurance, that we, without question, are always on the Lord's side of every question.

I leave you my witness and my testimony, brothers and sisters, to the truthfulness of this work. I know this is God's restored kingdom and that it is here for the blessing and for the salvation of his children. God bless us to so live, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen(1)

Let’s think together again, soon.

1.  Delbert L. Stapley, “The Pangs of Unlearning,” Improvement Era (June 1967):42-46.

Satan Diverts Faithful Zeal to the Wrong Causes: Wise Counsel Relevant to the Contemporary Political Situation©

Satan Diverts Faithful Zeal to the Wrong Causes:
Wise Counsel Relevant to the Contemporary Political Situation© 

Introduction:

Today, while researching a specific gospel topic I encountered an article from my deceased friend Stephen Robinson, former religion instructor at BYU.  It is a wonderful article from back in 1993 about the gospel concept of “enduring to the end.”  In the course of his remarks, Steve addressed three hazards to enduring to the end which the Savior taught. His comments about the second one–deception–struck me as some of the finest counsel I have read from a member of the Church that has direct application to the political situation we have been experiencing in America for a couple of decades or more.  I’m thinking of the issue where some in the Church seem to be more committed to their political philosophy, party, and beliefs than they are to the Church.  

As some of you know I recently got embroiled in a brief controversy when I expressed my displeasure about Donald Trump when the Capitol was attacked.  In the course of that discussion I was accosted by several people, all of whom I consider good friends, because of my position. Some of them were so committed to their party and its man, that suddenly I seemed to be the enemy. Suddenly things seemed to be totally black and white for them and I was on the wrong side.  Suddenly, it seemed to me their politics were more important than the Gospel, no matter how hard they tried to weld the two together. I wanted to say more about the situation, but I didn’t.  Today, I discovered that back in 1993 Stephen Robinson gave voice to principles and doctrines that I believe bring the issue to crystal clarity. I commend the entire article, but I have reproduced below his comments I just mentioned because they are so profound and so relevant.  They merit serious study and profound pondering. Please enjoy.

Stephen Robinson:

In Matthew 24:9–13, the Savior’s promise to those who endure includes a warning against three specific hazards. These are affliction, deception, and iniquity. [Matt. 24:9–13]

...

The Savior warned of a second hazard to our endurance, perhaps even more relevant to today’s Saints than affliction. This is the hazard of deception: “For in those days, there shall also arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if possible, they shall deceive the very elect, who are the elect according to the covenant.” (JST, Matt. 24:23.)

If Satan can’t intimidate us with physical trials, he’ll sometimes try to fool us with substitute programs. He would like us to invest our time, talent, and energy in causes that are not the cause of Zion, in the hope they may ultimately replace our commitment to the gospel. Often, these other concerns are valid and worthwhile. The deception comes in giving them a higher priority than our covenants. Those who are fooled in this way usually feel the Church is not doing enough in the area of their pet concerns. They may become disenchanted with the program of the Church and begin to follow “alternate voices.”

These members do not lack zeal; indeed, they are often strong enough to endure tremendous trials. But Satan has diverted their zeal to the wrong causes, and they don’t perceive their shifting loyalties as unfaithfulness. Generally, they do not feel that they are rejecting Christ; they just decide to interpret his will differently or to serve him in different ways according to new standards and values. Consequently, their original commitments take a back seat to their new agenda. But the bottom line is still that they couldn’t be trusted to hold their original course and keep their original commitments. They didn’t endure.

Again and again the Lord has warned the Church about following other voices. (See, for example, D&C 43:1–6.) Right now, there are many alternate voices vying for the attention of the Saints—social voices, intellectual voices, political voices, and other voices. In our premortal life, all of us rejected Satan’s persuasions to subscribe to a plan alternate to the Father’s. Now in mortality, we must do it again. If we are to endure, we must avoid alternate religious “special interest” groups.

I know a man who is going through a difficult time. He is politically intense and is particularly worried about what he sees as events leading up to the end of the world. He sees conspiracies in government and society, and he can’t understand why the Church isn’t as intense and as concerned as he is about these perceived threats. He spends a great deal of time trying to warn other members of the Church whom he believes to be asleep, and he privately wonders if some in leadership positions aren’t also asleep. Basically, his thinking runs like this: “My Church and my politics are telling me two different things, and I know that my politics are true … so there must be something wrong with the Church.” He does not consider the other logical possibility, nor does he recognize the reversal of loyalty evident in his thinking.

There may be some truth in some things he says, but that is not the point. The point is that he is listening to other voices and has transferred his highest loyalty to programs other than the Lord’s. Tragically, his politics have become the idol to which all else in his life must bow—even his commitment to the Church.

For all of us, our main defense against Satan’s deceptions must be a strong and abiding testimony that the Church is true. All may not be well in Zion (which is what the prophets said would be the case), but the Church is still true. It’s not anemic; it doesn’t need supplements. It’s not true if, and it’s not true but, and it’s not true except. It’s just true! Moreover, the Church is not off course; it’s not going too slow, and it’s not going too fast. Its leaders are not asleep, and they don’t need any uninvited help from the passengers to steer the boat.

Some protection from the hazard of deception may be found in the principle of “more or less”: “And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;

“And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.” (D&C 93:24–25; see also 3 Ne. 11:39–40; 3 Ne. 18:13–15; D&C 10:67–68; D&C 98:6–7.)

In the context of the gospel, truth is what God has actually said, what he actually directs, what he actually requires—no more and no less. On a strait and narrow path (see D&C 132:22), it doesn’t matter whether we fall off to the right or to the left, we are in trouble either way. It doesn’t matter whether we are “liberals” or “conservatives,” whether we believe “too little” or “too much”—that is, if Satan can’t get us to abandon the principles of the gospel, he is content that we should live them obsessively or as fanatics. One is less than the will of the Lord; the other adds human requirements to his will. Either puts us in the territory of the wicked one. There are those today who are embarrassed that God and his servants have said so much on some things and who go about trying to discredit the Brethren and neutralize the revelations and commandments. We have others who are embarrassed that God and his servants have not said more on other things and who go about preaching principles and programs the Lord has not revealed. One takes words out of God’s mouth; the other puts them in. Each preaches a “new, improved” gospel inspired by that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning, the very first alternate voice.

It requires discipline to embrace as gospel and to teach as gospel exactly what the Lord has revealed, no more and no less, and to avoid revising the gospel to suit ourselves. But those who can do it will know things as they really are (see Jacob 4:13) and will avoid deception.(1)

Let’s think together again, soon.

1.  Stephen E. Robinson, “Enduring to the End,” Ensign (October 1993):15-16.