Our assumptions can desensitize us to the perspective of LDS friends and family who are pondering. Take a moment to consider some of those before bulldozing into a conversation.
[Transcript of a talk given by Sandra Tanner in 1992]
[Original audio here (YouTube)]
I want to share my thoughts on obstacles to leaving Mormonism: major assumptions that keep Mormons from considering the Christian message. This is not a complete list, but these seem to be the major objections I have come across in my years of talking with Mormons about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I will list them all for your consideration, then use personal letters and other sources to illustrate most of them.
Major Assumptions
- The Bible has been corrupted to such a degree that no one can know for sure what it originally said.
- Therefore, a modern-day prophet is needed to speak for God.
- If the Mormon prophet is not trustworthy, then we cannot know truth.
- Since other churches make contradictory claims, none of them can have the truth.
- An unbroken line of priesthood ordination from the original Apostles until today is needed in order to act with God’s authority.
- The most reliable knowledge of truth comes from prayer and feelings, not from comparing evidence.
- Reading anti-Mormon literature does not give you a feeling of peace, therefore, it can’t be from God.
- Since most people are decent, God would not be too harsh with their failures.
- Almost everyone will be saved in some level of heaven; therefore, there is no ultimate fear of God’s judgment.
- A loving God would make it possible for all his children to be saved. Only Mormonism offers a way to convert the dead who died without hearing the gospel.
The Bible has been Corrupted
The Mormon assumption that the Bible has been corrupted is used to dismiss any Bible verse that goes against Mormon teaching. Where does this idea come from? One source is A Bible, A Bible by Robert Mathews, past Chairman of the Department of Ancient Scriptures at Brigham Young University. In this book, he seeks to destroy confidence in the Bible.
The problem with the Bible is not one of language and translation — it is the absence of an adequate and complete manuscript. (p. 271)
It is a cardinal principle of the Church that many plain and precious things have been removed deliberately from the text of the Bible since the time that it was originally written. The most serious things that were removed were the doctrinal changes. (p. 23) [see 1 Nephi 13:26-28]
He believes the Bible went through a cataclysmic revision before the oldest manuscripts we have today were even written. Therefore, the Bible is untrustworthy because the underlying manuscripts are corrupt.
The basis of the Mormon belief that the Bible is corrupt comes not from the study of ancient documents, but from their belief that Joseph Smith was a prophet. For example, Mathews writes:
Many people seem to go about it backwards. They want to test Joseph Smith by the content of the inadequate manuscripts [the Bible]. . . . Joseph Smith had an independent revelation of his own. The Book of Mormon and the JST [Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible] are the proper standards by which to measure the Bible. (p. 131)
The result of this teaching is not hard to see. Imagine what it would be like for a Mormon to hear this repeated all his or her life. It is easy to see why so many Mormons are inoculated against Biblical arguments which contradict Mormon teachings. When people are steeped in this concept, it is very difficult to witness to them.
The Need for a Prophet
The second assumption is a corollary of the first: the belief that a living prophet must speak for God. At a recent LDS general conference, Elder Craven of the Quorum of Seventy gave a talk entitled “Prophets.” At the end of his speech he said:
My witness from personal observation is that you can have unwavering faith in the united counsel of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. They will lead you in the path of righteousness, happiness, and inner peace . . . I admonish the saints to look to the prophets, study their words [by that he means the living prophets, not the Bible] . . . Teach their words in your family home evening. Sustain them in private and public; pray for them in your private and family prayers. And in turn enjoy in your lives that inner peace that surpasseth understanding.
(Ensign, May 1991, p. 29)
I find it curious that Mormons often tell me I am trusting in the arm of flesh. Yet their whole confidence is placed in these men, rather than in the standard of Scripture, to give them truth.
Only the Mormon Church Can Give God’s Truth
The third assumption further underlines the exclusive claim to truth by Mormonism: if the Mormon Prophet is not trustworthy, then we cannot know truth from any source. In 1995 a man wrote1 with some questions:
If, therefore, as you say, Mormons are misled by a church which claims authority to speak for God, then where does that authority lie? Or, alternatively, is God really a figment of men’s minds and a nonexistent crutch? Shall we all be atheist?
Notice the contrast he makes: if they are misled as Mormons, atheism is seen as the only alternative. He continues:
Elsewhere in the article reference is made to the inconsistencies in Mormon doctrine arising from statements of the Church’s prophets. For reasons which I believe will not be too obscure to you, I find this a satisfying strength rather than a weakness. Men, even prophets, are never perfect and do not know everything, and, when they attempt to explain a principle which appears at the moment to need some discussion, they often err [remember, he is talking about the LDS prophets] and, more significantly, those who interpret them are not in the same spirit as the prophet, nor do they understand the background in which the statement was made. Personally, I would be extremely uncomfortable in the modern world with a religion whose leaders never made a mistake.
I find that Mormons often point to the problems in the lives of Christians as a reason to reject it as true, yet the problems of their own church leaders somehow are not important. The writer continues:
I find it comforting that Brigham Young may not have always been right, at least as I understand him.
Personally, as a young Mormon, I did not find that idea at all comforting. As a descendent of Brigham Young, I assumed that reading his sermons would be a great faith-promoting experience. So, I readily agreed to do just that when my future husband, Jerald, brought over several volumes of the Journal of Discourses. I read Brigham Young’s sermons about such topics as the Adam/God doctrine, plural marriage, and blood atonement, as well as his predictions that the Civil War would not free the slaves and that Mormons would never give up polygamy for statehood.2 Having read his sermons first hand, I had a real problem with Brigham Young! It is amazing to me that the man who wrote this letter was not also troubled by Brigham Young. Yet, he finds it “comforting” that the prophet “may not have always been right.”
His letter concludes:
In summary, let me be forthright in suggesting to you that if the only hope for spiritual salvation lies in creedal Christianity, the world is without hope, and the whole business of religion is a fraud. There is, after all, some justification for the Communist declaration that religion, and Christianity in particular, is an opiate. Without reference to testimony or spiritual insights of any kind, let me conclude by suggesting that if “Mormonism,” as you call it, is false, then there is no religious truth, and God is a figment of man’s imagination.
This is the mindset against which we struggle. If you allow for only two choices — Mormonism or atheism — it is no wonder that many people, upon losing faith in Mormonism, will go to atheism. That is the only option they have been taught to consider. They would not even consider what a Christian has to say.
Christianity Does Not Have Truth
The fourth assumption is that since other churches make contradictory claims, none of them can have the truth.
A Mormon recently sent me his answers to a question-and-answer sheet that someone had sent to him.3 One of the questions was:
- “Should a disenchanted Mormon leave the church?”
This man’s answer was:
If all churches have a credibility problem, and the writer thinks they do, then why should a person leave a church that has a credibility problem and then join another one that also has credibility problems? Many Mormons have told the writer that if they ever left the Mormon Church, they wouldn’t join any other church. They believe that if the Mormon Church isn’t true, then none of them are.
This man’s comments are quite representative of the attitude that I deal with every week at my bookstore.
Apostolic Authority Is Needed
The fifth obstacle is the claim that an unbroken line of priesthood ordination from the original Apostles until today is needed in order to act with God’s authority.
In a recent LDS conference, one of the Quorum of Seventy concluded his sermon with these words:
I testify that through an unbroken chain, the prophetic keys and authority received by the Prophet Joseph Smith have been transmitted through intervening generations and today are held, intact, by today’s prophet, Ezra Taft Benson, who stands as the earthly head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, possessing all the keys and authority necessary to help bring about the exaltation of God’s children.
(Ensign, May 1991, p. 33)
One implication of his “testimony” is to declare all other churches to be false.
Something that I often hear Mormons say is: “Why do you attack our church? We don’t attack anyone else’s.” When I object, they will often say to me: “Yes, but we were just telling you the truth.” I respond: “It sounds like an attack on my church when you say that your men and priesthood are the only ones that have the authority to act for God. That means that my pastor, and every pastor and Christian I know, is outside God’s true church.” And, of course, they agree with that. Then I remind them: “To outsiders, that looks a little like an attack.” But they do not perceive that their claim to exclusive authority from God is an attack on all Christian churches.
Truth Comes Through Prayer and Feeling
The sixth obstacle is the idea that the most reliable knowledge of truth comes through prayer and feelings, not from comparing evidence.
In 1966, a Christian college student from Idaho was engaged to a Mormon girl. Needless to say, they were having religious conflicts. In looking for a solution, they agreed that each would talk to a representative of the other’s faith. She was willing to go and talk to his pastor if he would be willing to go to Salt Lake and talk to one of the General Authorities. After they had agreed to this, the young man and his girlfriend went to Salt Lake. The apostle they saw was Spencer Kimball, before he became the LDS prophet.
After the meeting, this young man sent us a two-page letter4 outlining the basic thrust of his conversation with Kimball. Here is how Apostle Kimball tried to persuade a young college man that he should become a Mormon.
Even if [Sandra] Tanner does show the truth, then what? . . . Show what is better . . . Use your heart instead of your head . . . With a testimony you don’t need to look further into the church . . . To present anything better than what the LDS have cannot be done . . . Look for the good in the church, and you will know that it is true. The way to learn truth is:
- Number One — Want to believe.
- Number Two — Pray that it is true.
- Number Three — Read only the Mormon books.
Now, that is a good way to get you to believe absolutely anything. “Want to believe it’s true, pray that it is true, and read only the books that support that position.” I am sure it always works. Kimball went on to tell him that other churches have nothing and further recommended:
Do not question things you cannot understand. But pray in favor of the LDS church. . . . A person with a testimony doesn’t need proof.
Anti-Mormon Literature
The seventh obstacle is the rejection of “anti-Mormon” literature because it does not give a feeling of peace. That is true. While I was a Mormon it never gave me any peace. And I am sure that it does not give peace to other Mormons who read it. But is peace a criterion for determining truth? Just because truth is uncomfortable does not mean it is not truth.
I believe that the following quotations from a long letter we received over ten years ago5 may be helpful in understanding this point:
Over the past two years I have read and partially re-read your book Shadow and Reality and several other publications . . . I put them aside and only looked at them again when I “bumped” into them again. Lately, however, I have read them all several times. Sometimes I doubt their completeness in telling the truth and sometimes the “spirit” of them is missing. Others of the writings have really confused me about the Mormon Church.
A church leader whom I spoke to about this said to “Get rid of the stuff.” He said that when we read the anti-Mormon literature we only get angry and confused, which is a sign of the Devil. If we would just stick to our scriptures, we do not have that anger and confusion; we have a feeling of peace, which is a sign of the Holy Ghost . . . I’ll have to agree with what he says, for I do have those exact feelings in reading your material and scriptures, however, that does not help to calm the feelings and questions that have arisen from your material.
I have prayed for answers and seem to just get more questions. It is very hard to give up something that has been so much the center of one’s life. I have had some very beautiful friends and experiences from the Mormon Church. I continue to hang on to the Mormon Church because somewhere deep inside of me I feel there must be some truth there and perhaps the spirit of it has just left me for awhile [sic] and I am trying to be ‘too intellectual’ about it instead of spiritual . . .
What I am really writing this for is to ask, “Whom do I believe?” My prayers are probably being answered for me but I am really not seeing the answers. One friend said that I will never see the answers until I start living the way the Lord wants [which, to her, is the Mormon way]. I do attend my meetings and do my Church jobs, but with the doubt I carry around, I certainly am not living the Mormon way . . . Someone must be right. Whose testimony shall we believe? The Mormon who says that his “burning in the bosom” comes from answered prayer and revelation or YOURS?
As I said, there are some things about the LDS Church that bother me. In fact I have a list of 46 of them. But much of this is balanced by good things the Church has provided me — guidance in family rearing, morality, some moving spiritual experiences, good people and friends, an understanding of creation, life and death, and a sense of striving for perfection. There is also that fear of giving up something that really does sound logical — that God did create us in his image so . . . that we did have a pre-life, that we have more to look forward to than just a Heaven-Hell judgment, that prophets are needed in these times . . . and that, in translation or by omission, the Bible does not contain all of the ordinances of the Gospel, etc. Are these not logical?
As you can see, I am really concerned about which way to turn. I am going through a real struggle and it has become very painful. The mental and spiritual agony is horrible. I must admit that I never felt this way until I read your literature and sometimes I wish I had never started reading it. I feel sneaky and hypocritical around my LDS friends. I feel like I’m being unfair to my children, that I may be misleading them one way or another . . . I admit that I have been dragging my feet, but I want to be SURE. Sometimes the confusion is so great that I completely ignore it and go on with my Mormon routine like nothing is wrong. Then I come back to the problem again and am confused all over again.
We need to understand that in talking with Mormon people it is not just a matter of giving them a verse of Scripture. They are having a tremendous struggle with a lifetime of attitudes, beliefs, and training that argues against everything we present to them — especially Bible verses — because they have been conditioned against the reliability of the Bible. I do not know what finally happened to the person who wrote this letter. It’s a sad letter written by someone who knew that the facts did not support Mormonism and who could not face the reality of what the evidence was saying to her.
Overcoming the Obstacles
There is not enough space to comment on the other points in my list. But I do want to leave you with a story of how one woman faced these obstacles and how she eventually overcame them to become a Christian. She begins her letter:6
I am 31 years old, a housewife and a mother of three. I joined the LDS Church in 1963. In the past, when I heard of anyone who was inactive in the Church my tendency was to assume that the person either had a “Word of Wisdom” problem or didn’t understand the importance of being active in the LDS Church. This was not the case with me.
I tried to do all the things a good Latter-day Saint would do. Keep the Word of Wisdom, pay tithing and fast offerings, attend meetings, do geneaology work, and hold Family Home Evening . . . It is difficult to say at what point I began to question the teachings of the LDS Church. I questioned the necessity of the detailed record keeping . . . I vaguely felt there was something wrong in the teaching that a person should not refuse a position he is “called” to by the Bishop. It seemed to me that this made the bishop infallible and took responsibility for his own actions away from the individual . . . I always assumed that any thoughts that I had which went against the established pattern were wrong. I often heard that we should support the authorities. I wanted to do what was right.
I loved to read books about the Gospel . . . One of the books I bought was Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith . . . I loaned it to a friend who was a recent convert to the Church. One day she told me she did not understand why Joseph Smith said that blood sacrifice would be re-instituted in the Temples . . . I did not believe that Joseph Smith said any such thing. However, after she returned the book, some months later, I saw that she was indeed correct in her statement.
She goes on to give the references, and then states that Hebrews 9-10 says that Jesus became the Ultimate sacrifice for sin. That left her very confused.
About the same time a neighbor I had been trying to interest in the Church showed me a book which quoted Brigham Young [she goes on to quote the Adam/God doctrine] . . . I read Joseph Fielding Smith’s explanation of this in his Doctrines of Salvation . . . However, no matter how hard I tried, I could not really be satisfied with this explanation. It certainly was inadequate for my friend. I decided to locate a copy of the Journal of Discourses . . . I found a number of statements made by Brigham Young which disturbed me and caused me to reflect upon the qualities of character that I thought a prophet of God would possess.
She then tells of reading his statements on cursing enemies and other things like that.
At the library I also found a book written by Jerald and Sandra Tanner. It is entitled Mormonism, Shadow or Reality. Many of the quotations are from Journal of Discourses. Well, all of this was certainly new to me, but I trusted whatever the General Authorities taught as doctrine to be true . . .
As I pondered on these things, the question that my neighbor had asked: “Do the prophets ever contradict each other?” and my answer about having prophets at the head of our church and the necessity for unity in doctrine kept coming into my mind again and again. I will never forget the awe in her voice when she asked her question—nor my answer. I told her that the prophets of God could never contradict each other on matters of doctrine.
But she was troubled by reading the Journal of Discourses, and she talks about other things she read as well.
I asked my home teacher, who was the former Bishop and who is now the Stake President, about these matters. He did not have any explanations. When I pressed for answers, he said it was the responsibility of the present Bishop to talk to me. It was becoming apparent that Mormonism was not based on the solid foundation that I had thought it was. And this was very frightening to me . . . I was trying to hang on to my faith in God, and in Christ as my Savior by almost continual Bible reading and prayer . . . Although I took the lessons from the missionaries before joining the LDS Church, I did not understand the LDS view of salvation, nor many other doctrines unique to the Mormon church at the time I became a member of it. I heard and accepted much of Mormon doctrine gradually over a period of several years. It was only in talking with my neighbor and reading the New Scofield Reference Edition of the King James Bible that I learned how radically LDS doctrine and interpretation of the Bible differs from that of traditional Christianity. And much of it has no foundation in the Bible.
One Friday afternoon my neighbor and I were discussing my situation. She told me of the assurance of salvation that she has and of the abundant life.
The writer goes on to tell how she prayed at that time, not to accept the Lord, but for guidance. Then she says:
After I finished that prayer I felt the most wonderful feeling of peace and happiness. I was just exhilarated!
I have learned through personal experience that a person who has accepted the Lord as his own Savior is in a personal relationship, desires to serve the Lord because of his love for and his gratefulness to the Lord. Now I really understand the meaning of the statement “You must be born again.” On February 24, 1974, I made public profession of my faith in Christ as my personal Savior and was rebaptized—meaning a Christian baptism. Recently in Sunday school class each person was asked to stand and quote a verse that was meaningful to him. I chose, “And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” Also, “If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.” [John 8:32, 36]
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would like to leave you with a few thoughts in response to this list of assumptions. Let me point out that the oldest Bible manuscripts we have teach the same doctrines as today. Unless the LDS Church can come up with historical manuscript evidence that Joseph Smith’s peculiar doctrines were once in the Biblical text, we have no reason to accept the LDS church’s indictment of the Bible.
Their solution to a defective Bible is modern-day revelation through a living prophet. However, I find that most Mormons are unaware of revisions that have taken place in their own scriptures. They are also unaware of their own church’s evolving theology. Mormonism has been defined as a smorgasbord religion: through its 160-year history its leaders have expounded so many variant beliefs that it becomes difficult to establish an authoritative and consistent theology. Thus, you can find a large divergence among the members’ beliefs.
As long as you support and participate in the LDS organization and don’t stir up trouble, you are allowed a certain latitude in your beliefs. I fail to see where Mormonism provides a more sure foundation. If we have accurate documents then we have a sufficient base for testing those who claim to be prophets and teach a new doctrine. Early Christians were counseled by the apostles:
do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
(1 John 4:1, NKJV)
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.
(Galatians 1:8, NKJV)
Finally, we need to have patience with our Mormon friends as they go through this struggle, and we need to realize that conversion does not happen overnight. We cannot just give people a brief scriptural challenge and then say: “I gave them a chance to hear the gospel. I did my part.”
Please understand that in talking to a Mormon you are talking to someone who speaks a totally different language (even if many of the words sound the same).
I remember as a teenager visiting a church where I am sure the sermon was fantastic. During the invitation at the end of the service I saw many people go forward as a response to the preaching. I was really impressed with the spiritual qualities of the man who led the service. He and his wife exuded a beautiful spirit of love. But I did not understand the service. If they had spoken in Chinese, I would have understood just as much. I missed the whole thing. Yet, despite my initial confusion, God did not give up on me. Years later I finally did understand and accept His Gospel. I encourage you to be patient and understanding in your response to Mormon friends.
Related reading:
Footnotes:
- Excerpt from a letter written February 1, 1985, from Utah. ↩︎
- To read more about these troubling topics see: “Did Brigham Young Teach False Doctrine?” Salt Lake City Messenger, no. 119, (Nov. 2012). ↩︎
- Excerpt from a letter written June 4, 1991, from Utah. ↩︎
- Excerpt from a letter written August 29, 1966, from Idaho. ↩︎
- Excerpt from a letter written March 27, 1979, from Colorado. ↩︎
- Excerpt from a letter written May 9, 1974, from Texas. ↩︎