As a missionary in Guatemala, every day I woke up with the goal of "bringing souls unto Christ." That was the big goal. From there, as an LDS missionary, I further believed that really the only way a soul could "come unto Christ" was through repentance, baptism by immersion at the hand of someone with authorized priesthood authority, confirmation by the same priesthood and then ultimately making covenants in a Mormon temple. Sometimes we were able to bring people to the waters of baptism, sometimes all we could do was bear testimony. And in rare cases, we saw some who would enter the temple.
But none of that can happen unless we, and the people who agreed with us, accept one crucial premise: that there is only one true, authorized-and-endorsed-by-God religion on the earth. And by virtue of that premise, all other religions and philosophies are false.
From a religious and philosophical belief, everything hinges on that premise for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Time and time again, leaders of the church, from the beginning, to today, have maintained that there is no middle ground. Either it's Christ's restored church and kingdom on the earth today, or it is a fraud. I will never forget the words of the Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley when he said in 2003, "Each of us has to face the matter—either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing."
As a missionary, I asked people to always re-evaluate their beliefs and in that process, they should consider reading the Book of Mormon and ask God if it was true or not. At that time I sincerely believed in truth and that we are all on a life-long journey to find un-alterable and un-changing truths. Today, I still believe this. I think we all ought to be open to feedback and checking our compasses to see if we are still heading in the direction of truth. We all ought to be on the lookout for lies and half-truths in our quest. We all ought to be mindful of where we build our homes. We may think we have built on rock, but when torments and rains and winds come and our house sways, cracks and tumbles, we may need to re-consider where we rebuild our home. And when we play a sport, such as football or soccer, we ought to expect that the posts or goal won't move for the duration of the game, otherwise the game may be pointless.
And as I asked others to re-evaluate their life decisions, religious beliefs and philosophy, I too should be willing to do the same. After all, when the stakes are this high (a religion is either endorsed by God or not), I ought to take this seriously!
My "testimony" for the first 30 or so years of my life was roughly built on this framework:
The Book of Mormon is true (historically and philosophically), because I read it, agreed with most of its teachings and when I prayed about it, God caused me to feel good, peaceful and reassured.
Since the Book of Mormon is true, I now know Joseph Smith is a prophet of God, since he was called of God to translate the golden plates using the Urim and Thummim and breastplate into English.
And everything else that stems from Joseph Smith (teachings, actions, doctrine) is from God since he was called by God.
Anything else that didn't "feel right" or caused a "stupor of thought" was of Satan. A lot of "anti-Mormon" rumors were spread by Satan, including Joseph using a peep-stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon or marrying other mens' wives. Anything Gerald or Sandra Tanner said, was also false and "anti-Mormon."
So, you might be able to imagine my predicament when I began to read Rough Stone Rolling in 2008 and 2009 and learned that "anti-Mormon" rumors and lies were indeed accurate! And not only did Rough Stone Rolling confirm these things as fact, but the Church also produced essays admitting that many doctrines were now "theories advanced by men." What would you do the moment you suspect the compass you have been using is inaccurate? How would you feel when the news is delivered to you that your home, which you thought was built on rock, is actually not? That is how I began to feel. I was at a cross-road and had a couple of choices: 1) ignore it all or 2) confront it and find the truth. I chose to confront it.
I finished reading Rough Stone Rolling and proceeded to investigate more. I entered the world of accusations and apologetics. Gone were the days of trusting my feelings. Now I was trying to de-tangle fact from fiction; truth from half-truth, both from leaders and apologists of the church and from its critics.
I won't review all the aspects of the Church doctrine I disagree with now, in this blog post - there are plenty of resources on-line that get into all that. However, I will say that if there were just one or two issues, and that were all, then maybe I could keep them on a "mental shelf" and still maintain a strong belief in the dogma of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But that is simply not the case. Time and time again, I've concluded that what is unique about the Church is not good, and what is good about the Church is not unique.
As I begin to wrap up this blog post, I'll note some of the unique things about the Church, which I think are not good. I'll phrase them in such a way using Christ as a spiritual north on a spiritual compass.
Would Christ use a scrying or peep stone (different from the Urim and Thummim) to translate ancient Egyptian scripture?
Would he be less than truthful about his abilities to translate ancient Egyptian text?
Would he call one of his apostles to use a scrying stone and be less than truthful about his abilities to translate ancient Egyptian text?
Would Christ marry another man's wife, especially after establishing commandments to not commit adultery and coveting?
Would He command his followers to do the same?
Would He deny eternal blessings to some children of God based on the color of their skin or some other God-given genetic factor?
Would He command or encourage his apostles to lie or deceive others or use carefully worded denials?
Would He prioritize building worldly assets over feeding the hungry?
Would He change his doctrine based on political or social pressure?
Would He excommunicate His followers for trying to make His religion a better and more safe place for its members and children while ignoring and not excommunicating physical and sexual abusers?
And would He accuse you or anyone of being ignorant, wanting to sin or being offended if you did discover any of the above?
Obviously, that is a lot to unpack. If any of that causes you to scratch your head or cause you concern, I know exactly how you feel. It is not a good feeling. But you have to ask yourself, if The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were not true, would you want to know? We asked this question, in the positive format, all the time during our missionary service. I think the negative version of the question is just as valid and important.
Also, time and time again, in Sunday School, seminary and priesthood classes and in private conversations, we would often point to other religions who would do some or all of the above and consider this as evidence that that religion is not of God ("by their fruits ye shall know them"). Why would we not apply this same standard to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
I want to conclude with one more thought for you to consider. I have not lost my faith. In all this journey of re-evaluating my religion and philosophy for the past ten years, I learned what it means to "walk through the valley of the shadow of death" (Psalms 23:4). The torch of certainty was taken from me and I was no longer spoon-fed what I must believe. Now, I have to truly trust in God that things will work out fine; that He is still leading my life and that He has a purpose for me. I often wonder if this is what Adam and Eve felt like after leaving the Garden of Eden. I have concluded, this ten year re-evaluation has greatly increased my faith and trust in God.
