What happens when your faith comes across a reality check in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? An essay by Jeffrey Owen

The Story

I started having my "faith crisis", as I later found out it was referred to, about three years ago at the time I'm finishing writing this, which is December 2018. That puts the events about which I’ll be writing in late 2015 up to now. Ironically enough, the onset of my faith crisis coincided with when I was called to be an Elder's Quorum President in my home ward in St. George, Utah. Several things happened all at once and in quick succession to catalyze a foundational questioning of my beliefs, this questioning which would then progress slowly.

In October 2015 my wife and I did an In Vitro Fertilization fresh egg harvesting followed by an embryo transfer. This was after multiple failed attempts of Intrauterine Insemination after which we were turned over from our OBGYN to a Reproductive Endocrinologist. Turns out we did end up getting pregnant on our first IVF attempt which at the time I felt was a godsend. In fact, we got pregnant with twins. Twelve weeks later in December, during one of our routine ultrasounds we found out that one of the babies had passed away in utero. This was the first thing that prompted me to thinking and questioning. The other twin, Chloe, is a healthy toddler now.

About one month before we found out this news, I was extended the calling of Elder’s Quorum President. This would be in about November, 2015. I accepted the calling and was set apart in January of 2016. That is not what prompted me to questioning though, it was why they called me to be Elder's Quorum President, someone who had very poor, practically non-existent personal prayer and scripture study habits. It was sporadic. It made me call into question the claim for divine inspiration especially in the issuance of callings in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, hereafter referred to as the Church. Granted at the time I did still believe in the Church and divine inspiration, I just thought it odd, even then, that they would call someone with a severe lacking in the solo prayer and scripture study departments. In hindsight, I think I was just the guy to pick because I was organized, well spoken, in good standing in the ward, friendly, dependable, and knowledgeable in the scriptures. I was simply a good choice. So number two, I'll call the divine inspiration discrepancy.

Number three. Shortly after I was called to be Elders Quorum President, the Bishop of the ward sits me down to give me a rundown of the quorum. What Elders need what, who needs help, then he drops this bomb on me that someone I'd known by then for two years almost, had basically no testimony of the Church and didn't even know if he believed in God. I didn't really show any emotion to the Bishop telling me this, but I still remember vividly feeling like my spiritual jaw just hit the floor. This was someone that I looked up to, was an acquaintance of mine, and was incredibly intelligent. Overall it stunned me. It got me thinking a lot about why someone like him would question in such a way. Not that that was a bad thing, but how and why?

Over the next several months, the weighty duality of an in utero death of one of my daughters and the loss of belief of an acquaintance led me to be very pensive even amidst the busy duties of a full time intensive care unit registered nursing job, bachelor's degree studies, and the newly acquired duties of an Elders Quorum President. I tried not to think too much about anything in particular though and tried to just skim through while doing the best I could at juggling life. Most of my time however I felt a profound sadness and was grieving for the loss of what could have been, with my wife, who was also very much grieving.

Come June 2016, my daughters were born. Ellie Mae was cremated. As for Chloe, I honestly didn't really feel super close to her for about a year until she started talking and putting words together. I loved her notwithstanding and love her more every day now that she toddles around and has a super personality. It wasn't how a lot of people describe it though at the time where I was supposed to feel this overwhelming God/love presence all of a sudden in my heart and home. On the contrary, it was around the time of Chloe's birth that I realized I felt quite the opposite: a lack of God's touch in my life or even presence for that matter.

The prior six months I had done a lot of researching online looking for some type of spirituality or something more than what I was getting at church, because attending church was boring, had always been boring, and still to this day, might be the most boring three hours I endure every week, soon to be two hours. I would go there and feel completely unfed, and this is after making sure the lessons were of a better quality than what they were when I was not the Elder’s Quorum President. It just felt hollow and unfulfilling.

So during the natural progression of my curiosity and exploration I stumbled across Rock Waterman's blog PureMormonism and read a couple of his essays, which is a feat in and of itself. They're long. But that was and is the type of person I am. I have an attention span and a hunger for learning that affords me the patience to read a two hour blog essay from start to finish in the course of a day, amidst other responsibilities. What I read troubled me and catalyzed a serious skepticism and questioning in my mind about why there had been so many changes on this doctrine or that policy and why things were the way they were in the Church now when they were so different at the time of the Church's founding.

The months moved on and by the end of 2016 I had realized that my spiritual questions were more of a foundational and fundamental nature, such as, "Does God exist?" "Is Jesus Christ divine?" "Is there an afterlife? What's it like?" Well, I thought there was an inherent conflict of interest with me holding the calling I did and having such fundamental questions. I didn't think it appropriate. I approached my bishop very softly and expressed my concerns and he basically told me to hang in there and continue reading the scriptures and praying. In reality, I think he was uncomfortable with needing to find and call a new Elder's Quorum President with just a couple of months until he was to be released. I don't hold it against him either, I get it. I also respect him very much and consider him a friend.

And I did try praying too. I was at the point where I really wanted to hear if God had anything with which to defend Himself or verify to me that He even existed, that if He truly cared about each of us individually, now was the time to let me know something about it. I prayed in my living room in the dark when Lindsay was asleep in bed and I felt absolutely nothing.

At about this time my wonderful wife was feeling like something was up with me because I was acting sad, stressed, and depressed, according to her. She got to the point where she asked me about it in a gentle manner, and I told her what I was thinking. Now understand, at this point my issues were almost exclusively of a foundational nature despite the moderate amount of research I had read about the Church itself. With regard to my Church issues, I was doing the cognitive dissonance dance and really just ignoring anything that conflicted with my beliefs too much.

Lindsay and I talked about my feelings and my lack of feeling God in my life and that I really had no idea what I believed in at that point. The conversation was not really long, but I let her know what I was thinking and that I was scared to talk to her about it because of the horror stories you hear about other people going through the same thing being left by their spouse. I should have been more trusting. My wife surprises me again and again with how understanding and compassionate she is.

Around the beginning of 2017 a new bishop was called in our ward. I decided to give him a month before approaching him about my concerns, to let him settle into his new stressful position. A month came and went, and nothing changed in regards to my deteriorating belief in God, so I sat down with him and told him that I no longer felt like I could testify about anything really, and that I didn't know whether or not I believed in God. He told me the same things that the prior bishop told me, albeit more awkwardly because he was new at his job. He told me to try to do things that helped me feel the spirit, like listening to wholesome music and attending the temple. No decisions were made at that meeting between us.

Another month or two passed and by this time I was getting increasingly uncomfortable having to speak publicly at all in a church setting. This was a problem because the Elder's Quorum Presidency taught once a month and I had it set up so that we would rotate amongst myself and the counselors. For probably 4-6 months I had been intentionally dodging having to teach until it came right down to me pulling one of my counselors aside and saying something to the effect of, "Hey, I need to talk to you. I need you to teach for me this month. I no longer feel like I have a testimony and I'm going to request to be released from being President." He was accepting but understandably a little shocked, much like I was a year and a half before when I was in his position when I found out about the lack of belief of an acquaintance. He graciously accommodated my request and was understanding of my situation. We never did speak of it again though, and not for lack of desire. I just think it was awkward for him. Maybe he felt like it was something I didn’t want to talk about. I never approached him about it either. I don’t know. We remain friends to this day.

Shortly thereafter I explicitly asked my bishop to release me and find someone else. Within a month and a half I was released and someone else was called to be Elder’s Quorum President. My other counselor and secretary to this day still don't know why we were all released (as far as I know). They probably think it was just time to call in a new presidency. It had been a year and a half after all.

After being released the Bishop tried to "feel me out" for a calling to be in the nursery. That's when they basically ask you to do it, but it's not official. Something to the effect of, "Hey, what would you think about being in the nursery?" Then if you say yes they schedule a meeting to officially ask you. I said no, my reasoning being that if I was uncomfortable holding a calling being the Elder's Quorum President, than I would feel uncomfortable accepting a calling in the nursery because of my disbelief in the claim of divine inspiration for callings. I wasn't going to do one calling when I wouldn't do another. Really, he just wanted to give me a calling to keep me coming to church, is what I think. Again, I get it. And I have to say that I really respect this man. I considered him a friend before he was called to be bishop and he was very understanding and accommodating of my situation as it unfolded.

After all of this, I actually started reading in earnest about Church history. Talk about a testimony check. The Tom Phillips Second Anointing podcast by MormonStories was the catalyst that got me looking into Church history and issues of the Church, of which there is a proverbial closet packed full of skeletons. All I needed was Google and a brain to see that what was one man's "anti-Mormonism" was simply another man's historical verifiable fact. Before that point I was still trying to abstain from reading anything that could be construed as anti-Mormon. Why I would ever intentionally avoid information because I’m told it’s dangerous is a silly idea to me now. It’s for me to evaluate information and decide whether or not it is factual or skewed, regardless of the light it casts on the Church.

I watched a lot of podcasts on YouTube and honestly think it has helped so much, especially the episodes where people talk about what they went through with their faith crises. It's helpful to realize that hundreds and thousands of other people are going through or have gone through the same exact thing that I'm going through right now, that I’m not alone.

That brings me to now. It's been about a year and a half since I asked to be released from my calling and three years since the onset of my faith crisis. So much has changed with regard to my beliefs about God and the Church. And so much has not changed. I still very much love my wife and she still loves me. I still, if not more so than I did before, value integrity, honesty, loyalty, the significance of values and standards, as well as the prioritization of raising a kind, thoughtful, intelligent, well-rounded and observant family.

What I’ve just presented is what constitutes the “context” of my faith crisis. What I’m now going to present is a non-comprehensive list of my actual issues with and observations about the Church. I’ll begin by sharing a quote.

“If we have truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not truth, it ought to be harmed." ¹ This was said by J. Reuben Clark, “an American attorney, civil servant, and a prominent leader in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints…” ²

I’ve studied Church history extensively and lost my belief in the veracity of the Church’s claims, namely the disparity between historical fact and what we are told or led to believe by the Church leadership, whether local or as high as the twelve Apostles and First Presidency, whether explicitly said, implicitly inferred, or an issue skirted all together.

In sharing this I feel like I need to add a disclaimer first regarding and clarifying my intentions so there is no misunderstanding. My intent in sharing this is first and foremost to be informative and provide both the context and the information that caused me, Jeffrey Owen, to have such a drastic and life altering change of heart about the claims of the Church. It was written primarily with Mormons in mind, but non-Mormons and those investigating the Church may benefit from it as well. It was written in order that those reading better be able to understand a different point of view, line of reasoning and thinking, and to develop empathy for what I believe is not only a prototypical faith crisis, but that which is also going to become a more common and public problem in the Church in the future, and what is already a common private problem held by many Mormons, unbeknownst to the majority. Furthermore, the reason why I am releasing this is because the weight of this secret has been constant, oppressive, suffocating, distracting, and anxiety producing for me, which I find to be an untenable and unbearable situation during graduate school.

My intent is not to persuade anyone to my point of view or instigate a traumatic faith crisis that could cause people pain and suffering, as I’ve endured. I will also say that I personally believe that we as individuals should question our circumstances and beliefs about everything on a daily basis and continue to strive for that which is true and correct regardless of where that leads us. Whether that is questioning why we hold specific religious or spiritual beliefs, or why we practice certain protocols in medicine, it all should be subject to questioning and improvement.

As an additional disclaimer I will say that I am not an LDS scholar. I have not studied religion at an LDS college.  However, the Church has never put any value on educational degrees with respect to one’s ability to teach or understand doctrine in the Church. I am someone who has read The Book of Mormon in its entirety, multiple times, went on a two year mission, devoted years of my life, years of my money, and years of my time and effort to the Church, and hours upon hours of listening and studying the Church’s sources, the Church’s scriptures, and official Church publications and general conference talks. I follow current events as it pertains to the Church. I read stories that intentionally frame the Church positively, stories that intentionally frame the Church poorly, and stories that are fairly neutral. I follow the political activities of the Church. All of this together means that I consider myself well versed in LDS doctrine, policy, and current events, and intimately familiar with the culture of the Church which makes me more than qualified and more qualified than most, to voice an opinion on matters pertaining to the Church.

To sum that up, I think that my time spent researching these issues has been in depth and sufficient for me to come to the conclusions I’ve come to. That is not to say however, that I know everything about the topics. But, there is only so much time in the day and having spent a large chunk of my time over the past three years reviewing and looking into this information has led me to believe that my efforts have been more than sufficient and were I to continue to research these issues as voraciously as I have been or even spend the next twenty years becoming the foremost expert on these topics, I don’t think it would change anything with respect to how I view the Church’s claims.

Note that links are provided within the essay. Often times hyperlinks within the essay will lead to an essay or a website. *PLEASE* see the Resources page at the end of this essay for more information pertaining to each individual quote and source. There will likely be directions on how to navigate to the exact spot where a quote or picture is located as well as any context needed.

The Issues

(In no particular order of significance)

1. The Church has repeatedly and erroneously portrayed the translation of The Book of Mormon in pictures in the Ensign, a widely dispersed Church magazine, as well as on their websites and other Church publications, and only recently has acknowledged how The Book of Mormon actually came to be. The translation is often portrayed as seen here:

3

And here:

4

Most Mormons do not in fact know the real method by which The Book of Mormon was translated. They are led to believe that Joseph Smith Jr. pored over the plates in righteous consternation while verbally dictating a literal translation of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic characters to a scribe, who was positioned so as to not see the golden plates from which the translation was supposedly occurring.

In fact, a “peep stone” or “seer stone” was used by Smith to do the translation, almost at the entire exclusion of the Urim and Thummim, which is widely believed by LDS membership to be the primary and exclusive source of translating power possessed by Smith. The peep stone was a rock that he found years prior while digging a well for Chase Mason, on Chase Mason’s property. ⁵

The actual method of translation consisted of the stone being put in a hat by Smith after which he would put his face in the hat, attempting to exclude all light, wherein he would see illuminated characters revealed which he would then dictate to a scribe. ⁶

Richard Bushman, LDS historian and author of the prominent biography on Joseph Smith, Jr., Rough Stone Rolling, said, 

“Joseph put the seer stone in a hat to exclude the light and read off the translated text by looking in the stone. All the while, the plates lay wrapped in a cloth on the table. Apparently Joseph did not look at the plates through most of the translation... The actual process by which The Book of Mormon was translated, according to the witnesses of the event and the earliest sources, is generally unknown to members of the Church.” ⁷

This is verifiable proof that Smith did not in fact translate the plates as he and the Church both claim, as the method portrayed that led to the coming forth of The Book of Mormon did not demonstrate actual translation. Rather, it would be more appropriate to deem what we call “translation” a dictation instead, as it pertains to The Book of Mormon.

Knowing these circumstances about the coming forth of The Book of Mormon begs us to question the Church’s claims of The Book of Mormon being divine, revelatory, a literal history, and a literal translation, since in fact, it was not ever translated in any way resembling what the Church has so long claimed.

The peep stone is well summarized by an editor on Mormonthink.com, when he said,

“Why would a common stone "discovered in the ground" have the same prophetic seering abilities as the spectacle urim & thummim which was "kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord" and "handed down from generation to generation, for the purpose of interpreting languages"?

The [LDS essay on the Translation of The Book of Mormon] ⁸ completely glosses over the fundamental question of this seer stone - Did the seer stone have any special abilities o[r] was it just a stone? The essay implies that this stone had some sort of power. The essay neglects to say that it was found some 24 feet underground on Mason Chase's property when Joseph and his brother Hyrum were digging a well for Mr. Chase. So why would this stone unearthed on Mr. Chase's property have any special seering abilities? It was not given to Joseph by the angel. It was not in the stone box with the plates. There is no evidence it was used anciently by the Nephite prophets. So why would this ordinary rock have any special abilities whatsoever?” ⁹

Furthermore, Dan Vogel, an independent researcher and author and one of the most knowledgeable individuals when it comes to early Mormon historical documents, ¹⁰ has this to say about The Book of Mormon:

“Eyewitness testimony confirms that Joseph Smith translated The Book of Mormon in the same manner that he once hunted for buried treasure: that is, with his brown-colored seer stone placed in the crown of his white top hat and his face snug to its brim. Rather than seeing treasures in the bowels of the earth, Smith claimed he saw luminous words on the stone, which he read to a scribe. In this manner the entire Book of Mormon as we have it came into existence. This fact conflicts with Joseph Smith's official history, which claims that he used magic spectacles—which he euphemistically called Urim and Thummim—attached to a breastplate...” ¹¹

2. There was never an official declaration or a revelation stating that the Church would deny the Priesthood to the black race, as Church leadership was wont to give when making a drastic policy change such as the rescinding of polygamy or blacks receiving the Priesthood. As such, an official declaration ¹² stating a reversal of something that never actually occurred was highly inappropriate.

At the time of this claimed revelation, in the 1970’s, there were instances of schools losing their protective tax exempt status due to them having inflammatory segregation policies. ¹³

The Church owns and operates no less than three education institutions, those being, Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah, Brigham Young University Idaho formerly known as Ricks College, located in Rexburg, Idaho, and the Church College of Hawaii, also known as Brigham Young University Hawaii, located in Laie, Hawaii, and was liable to a loss of tax exempt status at these schools as happened in the precedent-setting case Bob Jones University vs. United States. ¹⁴ If such an exemption were to have been made for the Church owned schools, it would have cost the Church potentially tens of millions of dollars per year.

As is also explained on BeggardsBread blog by a quote from the Ostlings, writers of Mormon America, the construction of the Brazilian temple posed a serious problem since there wouldn’t be enough Priesthood holding members to man temple assignments as officiators and veil workers. It can be inferred that this was also about money, as

“When a temple is built, [there is] an identifiable increase in all revenue from the area, and specifically tithing.” ¹⁵

BeggarsBread continues,

“There were not enough people with verified ancestry to run the temple, let alone be patrons. Even with the change, missionaries were taken from the field and trained as temple officiators and veil workers to man the temple for the first month it was open. As far as dates, the revelation was made June 1978 and the temple dedication was October 1978. Initial training of workers was held in September. Very tight time frames by LDS Church standards.” ¹⁶

It is very believable now why the Church reversed its almost 140 year old non-policy of disallowing the Priesthood to blacks. When understood in this context, it suddenly makes a lot of sense why the Church would reverse the policy at that time. The Church stood to lose potentially tens of millions of dollars if it were to lose tax exempt status on its schools, as well as the loss of potential income in the form of tithes and offerings it stood to gain with the building and presence of the Brazilian temple.

As a second point, it is suspect how a church that claims to be led by divinely called leadership, Prophets, and Apostles, could stand such a racist and exclusionary policy which in effect denied an entire race entrance into the Celestial kingdom by denial of the Priesthood and subsequent saving ordinances which required the holding of the Priesthood. This is disturbing taking into consideration Christ’s invitation to all men saying,

“23 And he (i.e., Christ) commandeth all men that they must repent, and be baptized in his name, having perfect faith in the Holy One of Israel, or they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God.

24 And if they will not repent and believe in his name, and be baptized in his name, and endure to the end, they must be damned; for the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel, has spoken it.” ¹⁷

By His own mouth, Christ has qualified ALL to be baptized provided they repent and believe in His name, according to The Book of Mormon. That means all people, every single person, no one is allowed to be disqualified, all regardless of race, etcetera. EVERY SINGLE PERSON. Does this mean that if the Church leadership was restricting certain demographics, that the Church leadership was also willing to suffer the damnation in place of those who were not allowed to be baptized, as it says in verse 24?

*EDIT* The above paragraph is not directly pertinent to the issue being presented, as blacks WERE allowed to be baptized prior to the revelation (duh.) It does NOT however change the principle argument or the validity of the point, in that LDS leadership essentially disallowed a race entrance into the celestial kingdom by way of not allowing them the Priesthood, and how that is suspect of a church that claims to be led by divinely called leadership, Prophets, and Apostles. *EDIT* (Made before making essay public as unable to alter video at this point.)

3. The recent policy changes enacted on November 5th, 2015, by the Church, restricting baptism for minors “whose primary residence is with a couple living in a same-gender marriage or similar relationship” also go explicitly against Christ’s teachings regarding His commandment for all to repent and be baptized in His name. ^{17, 18} It is also exclusively aimed at an already highly persecuted minority and is at odds with the Church’s efforts at being more accepting of the gay/queer community, as they claim to be.

4. The claim made by Joseph Smith, Jr. and the Church that the Book of Abraham was literally translated by Joseph Smith, Jr. and was written by the hand of Abraham of the Old Testament, is demonstrably false as is widely accepted by the academic community based on the fact that the contents of the Book of Abraham do not match whatsoever the contents of the papyrus from which Smith based his translation, The Breathing Permit of Hor.

Here is the claim on the title page of the Book of Abraham: “A Translation of some ancient Records that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of Egypt. The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus.” ¹⁹

For good measure, here is a screenshot of the claim taken in the “Gospel Library” application. It was retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

Robert K. Ritner, an American Egyptologist of the University of Chicago, ²⁰ wrote an essay dissecting the mistakes of the Book of Abraham. ²¹ He summarized in the opening and closing paragraphs of his essay, respectively, that,

“The recent web posting on the Book of Abraham by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (hereafter the LDS church) represents new reflection on a document whose authenticity as verifiable history is now officially acknowledged to be in serious dispute.” ²¹

Followed by,

“With the Book of Abraham now confirmed as a perhaps well-meaning, but erroneous invention by Joseph Smith, the LDS church may well devote some reflection to the status of the text. The former Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, since 2001 renamed the Community of Christ, avoids this issue by treating the Book of Abraham as speculative writing by Smith, not as a document of historical truth. In this decision they are clearly correct. Despite its inauthenticity as a genuine historical narrative, the Book of Abraham remains a valuable witness to early American religious history and to the recourse to ancient texts as sources of modern religious faith and speculation. The book still has its uses and significance, but not for the ancient world of Egypt and Abraham.” ²¹

This leaves no room for doubt or interpretation. Joseph Smith incorrectly translated the Book of Abraham. It is not what he claimed it was. The Book of Abraham does not contain “…The writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt” nor was it “…written by [Abraham’s] own hand…”

5. The claim by Church leadership that the Prophets and Apostles of the Church cannot lead the members astray. In his talk Stay in the Boat and Hold On!, Elder M. Russell Ballard says, “Keep the eyes of the mission on the leaders of the Church. … We will not and … cannot lead [you] astray.” ²²

This is a false idea. It goes against the very foundation of the Plan of Salvation, which is why it perplexes me so that it is every once in a while promulgated by high leadership. The foundation of the Plan of Salvation is built upon the idea of what we call free agency, meaning, every being is capable of making decisions and not being forced to do anything against their will. The idea that no person in a leadership position could ever lead the general membership astray is completely contrary to the idea of free agency.

What’s more, there are numerous examples of not only local leadership, but high leadership, that’s to say, Prophets and Apostles, promoting false doctrine, i.e., leading members astray, such as in the cases of:

• Adam God Doctrine famously touted by Brigham Young ²³
• Boyd K. Packer implying that being gay is a choice (an absurd idea that the Church is walking back from now, only eight years later) ^{24, 25, 26}
• The hushed excommunication of a standing general authority James J. Hamula ²⁷
• The disaffection of area authority Hans Matson ²⁸
• The disaffection of Stake President Tom Philips after his Second Anointing ²⁹
• The calling of a known sexual predator to be MTC President to preside over thousands and thousands of young male and female missionaries as was the case with Joseph L. Bishop ^{30, 31}

In his book An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, Grant Palmer states,

“It is the evangelical affinity of The Book of Mormon that similarly identifies emotion as evidence of the truth. Moroni 10:4-5 predicts that when one reads the book with ‘real intent,’ he or she will know the ‘truth of it… by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.’ The Doctrine and Covenants confirms that when preacher and hearer ‘are edified,’ or feel ‘the Spirit of truth,’ that which they speak and hear is the truth (D&C 50:21-22).

Most of us have felt this spiritual feeling when reading The Book of Mormon or hearing about Joseph Smith’s epiphanies. What we interpret this to mean is that we have therefore encountered the truth, and we then base subsequent religious commitments on these feelings. The question I will pose is whether this is an unfailing guide to truth. Is something true because I and others find it edifying? Hundreds of thousands of people believe in the truthfulness of their own religion because of similar confirming experiences. As one example, many people, including myself, felt this confirming spirit when we heard the World War II stories of Utah Congressman Douglas R. Stringfellow. Stringfellow’s experiences were later revealed to be a complete hoax. I was about fourteen years old when I heard him speak, and it was a truly inspiring experience. After Stringfellow concluded, I remember that the leader conducting the meeting said, ‘If you have never felt the Spirit before, it was here today in abundance.’ He was right. I felt it strongly, as did many others, when hearing Paul H. Dunn, a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy, relate his religious experiences during World War II and as a professional baseball player. Today his stories are known to be contrived.” ³²

The examples above illustrate how Church leaders are not only more than capable of leading us astray, but how they have done so on myriad occasions throughout the history of the Church ever since its inception.

6. Polyandry, which is a “form of polygamy in which a woman takes two or more husbands at the same time,” ³³ is not only expressly forbidden in the Doctrine and Covenants Section 132:63, but those who practice it are also threatened with destruction. ³⁴ Polyandry was known to be practiced first and foremost by Joseph Smith Jr., the first prophet of the Church. In total, it’s estimated he was married to 11 women who were currently married to other men. In these cases Joseph Smith was married to them after they were already married. The women include: ^35, 36

• Lucinda Morgan Harris
• Zina Huntington Jacobs
• Presendia Huntington Buell
• Sylvia Sessions Lyon
• Mary Rollins Lightner
• Patty Bartlett Sessions
• Marinda Johnson Hyde
• Elizabeth Davis Durfee
• Sarah Kingdsley Cleveland
• Ruth Vose Sayers
• Elvira Cowles Holmes

The Church, in an attempt to be more transparent, released multiple essays one of which is about Polygamy. It is entitled Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and nowhere in it is polyandry addressed or mentioned. ³⁷ This is prevarication. The Church has attempted to put this controversial issue to bed by being open and transparent about what transpired, while at the same time, keeping hush the fact that Smith married and was sealed to other women who were already married to living husbands. Why all of this topic was not addressed in the essay in one fell stroke is puzzling.

There is a second essay entitled Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo ³⁸ also available on LDS.org, which goes into more depth regarding the more controversial aspects of polygamy in the Church’s history, like polyandry. But why is this not all addressed in one place on the Church’s website?

Many details are left out or skirted which leaves an overall puzzled but forgiving impression after reading essays on the topic of polygamy on the Church’s website. This feeling of puzzlement and forgiveness evaporates when the Church’s essays are shown in a whitewashed and half-truth telling light, as they are shown to be in MormonThink’s essay response for the Kirtland and Nauvoo essay. ³⁹

7. There are stark similarities and parallels in Ethan Smith’s View of the Hebrews ⁴⁰ and The Book of Mormon. Both books speak of the destruction of Jerusalem, Israelites coming to the American continent, colonists spreading out to fill the entire land, an ancient book that was preserved for a long time and then buried, and a buried book taken from the earth. These parallels are presented differently in each respective book and are listed 

• The destruction of Jerusalem
• In View of the Hebrews, is carried out by the Romans in A.D. 70
• In The Book of Mormon, is carried out by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.
• Buried book taken from the earth
• In View of the Hebrews, is in the form of four, dark yellow, folded leaves of old parchment.
• In The Book of Mormon, is in the form of a set of inscribed golden metal plates.
• Colonists spreading out to fill the entire land
• In View of the Hebrews, colonists spread from the North to the South.
• In The Book of Mormon, colonists spread from the South to the North.
• Israelites coming to the American continent
• In The View of the Hebrews, Israelites come via dry land across the Bering Strait.
• In The Book of Mormon, Israelites come via the ocean on board a ship.

There are more parallels, these are just some of them.

There are unmistakable, undeniable and unsettling similarities between the two books and since View of the Hebrews was published in 1823, a full seven years before The Book of Mormon was published, it can only be concluded that Joseph Smith at the very least drew inspiration from View of the Hebrews, which clashes with the idea of him having divinely translated The Book of Mormon.

FairMormon, an apologist LDS website, ⁴² argues that “Many of the ‘parallels’ that are discussed are not actually parallels at all once they are fully examined:”. ⁴³ I say that’s hogwash and I’ll explain myself by way of a story.

When I was in 3^rd grade in Ms. Wetzel’s class, we had a sharing sort of activity where one student would sit in a chair in front of the rest of the class and read a piece of creative writing that they had written. One week, my friend Matthew Bannister wrote and shared with the class a short story about aliens abducting Ken Griffey, Jr., who was a center fielder for the Seattle Mariners baseball club at the time. He was a big baseball fan. It was a hit. The next week I wrote and shared a short story with the class about aliens abducting Jeremy Roenick who was a center for the Phoenix Coyotes Hockey club at the time.

After I was done, one of the students raised her hand and said something along the lines of “isn’t that the same as Matt’s story?”

“No!” I denied.

But it was.

So when FairMormon argues that “Many of the ‘parallels’ that are discussed are not actually parallels at all once they are fully examined,” that makes me think about how in the third grade I plagiarized a story involving the alien abduction of professional athletes. This would be like me denying that I did not in fact copy Matthew, because the aliens abducted different athletes from different teams in entirely different sports.

What remains is that large undertones and entire plot scenarios are the same in The Book of Mormon as they are in the previously written View of the Hebrews.

8. In the Church, there is a pattern of covering up sexual abuse by leadership. The Church’s approach to these cases appears to be a stance of protect the Church’s reputation at all costs, as can be seen in the case of McKenna Denson’s allegations against Joseph L. Bishop, which were then confirmed by Bishop himself in a sting interview. ^{30, 31} I will preemptively say, that despite evidence having come out that indicates Denson is mentally unstable and has a history of lying, the evidence regarding the Bishop allegations is incontrovertible, as he admitted as much on tape. 

Or, the Church will take a completely hands off and look the other way approach where they will scant acknowledge an accusation has ever been made, investigate members against whom allegations are made, nor release them from callings, as in the case of Jared Egley when he alleged that his uncle, recently called as bishop (in 2018) sexually abused him when he was a child some 35 years earlier. ⁴⁴ Nothing was done in this case despite Egley’s proactivity and persistence in informing local leadership of the character of the man that was in the process of being called as a bishop.

Mormonleaks recently (2018) released a document which was verified by Church lawyers as authentic, which illuminated the process by which the Church approaches the handling of sexual abuse allegations against its members and missionaries, which is to say, primarily with regard to the Church’s reputation and without regard to victims. ⁴⁵ Police authority were not notified and overall, there seems to have been nothing done by the Church, which did result in the Church being protected from any potential fallout or negative publicity.

9. The recent string of high profile excommunications as in the cases of John Dehlin, a Mormon podcaster, ^{46, 47} Sam Young, an LDS Bishop turned activist, ^{48, 49} and most recently Bill Reel, another LDS Bishop. ^{50, 51, 52}

I want to make it clear that I think the Church can proceed however it desires with its members. The Church is not a democracy and every member should understand that. That doesn’t mean that I agree with the excommunications or view them in a positive light though. The Church has the right to excommunicate members that it believes are in apostasy or for other reasons (the members I’ve listed were all excommunicated for apostasy).

However, I, as a member, have the right to completely disagree with the decision to excommunicate these members, especially since there are positive changes that have resulted from the proactivity of said excommunicated members.

Essays about controversial Church doctrine and controversial historical issues of the Church’s past, some of which I’ve referenced in this essay, were released seemingly as a result of Dehlin’s podcast and the agitation it caused the Church. So the Church validated him by releasing the essays, then excommunicated him.

Many Bishops are taking proactive measures against putting themselves in dangerous or risky situations with children with regards to worthiness interviews, seemingly as a result of Sam Young’s activity and cause. Whether this is out of self-preservation or for the more altruistic reason of protecting children is up for speculation, but Sam Young’s cause seems to have caused a direct and positive change in the Church. So they validate him, then excommunicate him.

Bill Reel, the most recent high profile excommunicant, was excommunicated for calling Jeffrey R. Holland out in certain circumstances where Elder Holland lied. He presented demonstrable evidence proving his point, was validated during his disciplinary council, and excommunicated a couple of days later even though he had told the truth. This is frankly appalling.

The transcript of Reel’s disciplinary court is readily available in document form online. ⁵³ There are two places of special interest in the 40 page transcription. On pages 28-29 the following conversation takes place between Reel and the Stake President presiding over the court:

“Bill Reel (BR): Which particular thing am I being excommunicated for? Like, let’s get one specific thing and say ‘You can not say THIS’

Stake President (PC): You can not call anybody a liar... I don’t think you can call anyone a lair? ... Apostles... We hold. Somebody in the position of an apostle or a prophet who we know holds keys

(1:22:33) BR: Even if they lied?

PC: Even if they lied.

BR: I’m glad. That’s beautiful.” ⁵³

Then on page 37, a High Councilman validates Reel’s premise that the Church lacks integrity when he says,

“(1:38:21) [High Councilman] HC (money line): Yeah, I think this has been an opportunity to understand your point of view. I think that the purpose of the Council, as was mentioned at the first, now your integrity is not in question at all. It isn't. The purpose of this council is to look at protecting the integrity of the church. And you mentioned that as well. and uh, but I believe now, that pretty much as you outlined every step of your presentation, If you take all that, there is no integrity left in the church. And so that's a problem. There are a lot of nuances there. You are a very intelligent man. You've looked at sources as you've said on both sides, all the information there. It leaves the church with zero integrity." ⁵³

Original spelling, grammar, and punctuation kept intact.

10. Why do the prophets and apostles today not perform miracles of the caliber recorded in the Bible or the Doctrine & Covenants? Why do they not heal the sick? Why do they not raise the dead? Why do they not heal withered arms? Why do they not speak in tongues? Why do they not cure blindness? Why do they no longer translate ancient documents? Why do they not prophesy of future events? Why do they not call fire from the sky to consume the enemies of the Church? Why do they not share the visions they see with the gift of their seership? Why do they not share with us the content of their conversations with Christ? Why do they not speak in Christ’s voice as the prophets of old did?  If you are someone who believes that every word that proceedeth forth out of the mouth of the prophets and apostles is in fact revelation, then why do we no longer canonize it? I don’t have any sources for this point as I can’t source something that hasn’t taken place, but I will add that the last canonized scripture was in 1978 and I’ve already gone over that in my second issue. In any case, these are important questions entertain.

The Conclusions

This concludes my personal story and essay. To reiterate, this was not comprehensive by any means. I could have told of my childhood and mission and a variety of subjective anecdotal experiences. I could have explored 30 issues I have with the Church, but I thought the length was adequate.

The purpose of this was to inform and provide a base for empathy as I believe faith crises in the Church are going to continue to become more and more common, as well as provide friends and strangers someone to whom they feel they can reach out if they’re having similar feelings. I want people to know they’re not alone in feeling like their world is crashing down on them, and that they’re not crazy. I am open to publicly or privately discuss any part of this essay PROVIDED it is done in a civilized and respectful manner with no personal attacks. I reserve the right to make edits to this document at any time. I give permission in advance for this essay to be shared publicly or privately PROVIDED there is no monetary gain involved or editing done without my permission.

This essay is not in any way shape or form for personal gain. It will never be monetized in any way. While many of the retrieval dates are listed in December of 2018, the bones of this essay were written in early to mid 2018 with the finishing touches, revisions, and sourcing from about September to December 2018. All that means is that I didn’t write this over the course of a week, but rather over the course of a year.

EDIT: May 27, 2019, 8:45 PM, added a sentence clarifying Denson on point 8.

Resources

(In Order of Use)

1. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/J._Reuben_Clark. J. Reuben Clark quote. Retrieved April 9^th, 2018.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Reuben_Clark. J. Reuben Clark biographical information. Retrieved April 9^th, 2018.

3. http://www.withoutend.org/book-mormon-translation-story-changed-time/. Depictions of Book of Mormon translation. Picture located under heading “Postscript: Recovering the Earliest Translation Narrative (ca. 2015)”. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

4. https://www.lds.org/church/news/viewpoint-testimonies-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng. Depiction of Book of Mormon translation. Picture located under heading “Viewpoint: Testimonies of The Book of Mormon”. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

5. Eber Dudley Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, Ohio: Telegraph Press, 1834), 241-242; cited in Richard Van Wagoner and Steven Walker, "Joseph Smith: 'The Gift of Seeing," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 15 no. 2 (Summer 1982), 48–68.

6. https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng. LDS.org Book of Mormon translation essay. See third and fourth paragraph under the heading “The Mechanics of the Translation”. Retrieved December 15^th, 2018.

7. Richard Lyman Bushman, “Foreword,” in MacKay and Dirkmaat, From Darkness unto Light, vi.

8. https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng. LDS.org Book of Mormon translation essay. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

9. http://www.mormonthink.com/essays-bom-translation.htm. MormonThink.com response to LDS.org Book of Mormon translation essay. See fourth and fifth paragraphs under the heading “Editor’s Comments” for specific information. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Vogel. Dan Vogel biographical information. Retrieved December 3^rd, 2018.

11. http://www.mormonthink.com/essays-bom-translation.htm. MormonThink.com response to LDS.org Book of Mormon translation essay. See paragraph under heading “Dan Vogel Video on The Book of Mormon Translation”. Retrieved December 3^rd, 2018.

12. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/2. LDS Official Declaration 2. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

13. https://beggarsbread.org/2013/08/19/what-we-do-know-about-the-1978-revelation/. BeggarsBread blog post on 1978 revelation. See first paragraph under heading “The IRS and racially discriminatory private schools”. Retrieved December 9^th, 2018.

14. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Jones_University_v._United_States. Precedent setting cases for rescinding of tax exempt IRS status. Retrieved December 6^th, 2018.

15. Richard and Joan Ostling, “Mormon America”; Nook edition, position 1010.6/1200. Retrieved December 9^th, 2018.

16. https://beggarsbread.org/2013/08/19/what-we-do-know-about-the-1978-revelation/. BeggarsBread blog post on 1978 revelation. See third and fourth paragraphs under heading “Money, politics and temples”. Retrieved December 9^th, 2018.

17. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9.23-24?lang=eng. Book of Mormon, 2^nd Nephi 9:23-24 (highlighted verses.) Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

18. www.lds.org/pages/church-handbook-changes?lang=eng. First Presidency clarification of policy change. Released November 13^th, 2015, as a clarification to the policy which was revealed the week before to poor reception by the public, and a mixed reaction by LDS membership. Retrieved December 1^st, 2018,

19. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr?lang=eng. Title page of Abraham chapter 1. Retrieved December 10^th, 2018.

20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_K._Ritner. Robert K. Ritner biographical information. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

21. “Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham” --- A Response. Robert K. Ritner. https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/Research_Archives/Translation%20and%20Historicity%20of%20the%20Book%20of%20Abraham%20final-2.pdf. See opening paragraph of essay, and first paragraph under heading “Going Forward”. Retrieved June 1^st, 2018.

22. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/stay-in-the-boat-and-hold-on?lang=eng. Elder M. Russel Ballard. Stay in the Boat and Hold On! See 15^th paragraph. Retrieved October 17^th, 2018.

23. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Repudiated_concepts/Adam-God_theory#Question:_What_is_the_history_of_Brigham_Young.27s_Adam-God_Theory_and_why_was_it_rejected_by_the_Church.3F. Adam God Doctrine. Retrieved December 10^th, 2018

24. https://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=12749665. KSL news story about changes to Boyd K. Packer’s talk. Retrieved September 7^th, 2018.

25. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/cleansing-the-inner-vessel?lang=eng. Altered transcription of Boyd K. Packer’s talk Cleansing the Inner Vessel. Retrieved September 7^th, 2018.

26. https://youtu.be/2C1wUI5xuhs?t=538. Original video of Boyd K. Packer talk Cleansing the Inner Vessel. See timestamp 8 minutes 58 seconds for changes when compared to altered text transcription of Boyd K. Packer’s talk Cleansing the Inner Vessel (resource 25 listed above). Retrieved September 7^th, 2018.

27. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/religion/excommunication-high-ranking-mormon-official-james-j-hamula-called-very-n791351. Excommunication of general authority James J. Hamula. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

28. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U1vKSxO8qss. Disaffection of area authority Hans Mattson. This is part 1 of a 5 part series. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

29. https://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/tom-phillips-and-the-second-anointing/. Disaffection of Stake President Tom Phillips after his Second Anointing ordinance. This is a four part audio podcast available on the page linked. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

30. https://medium.com/@davidscoville/timeline-of-the-joseph-bishop-sexual-abuse-scandal-77f39be1ef3a. Joseph L. Bishop called to be MTC President while high Church leadership had knowledge of his sexual predatory past and inclinations. See first paragraph under the heading “1979-1982”. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

31. https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/index.php?title=File:2017-Joseph_L_Bishop-Transcript.pdf. Transcript of Joseph L. Bishop admitting to his accuser (McKenna Denson) his sexual predation past. Audio file and transcript available for download on linked page. Retrieved December 13^th, 2018.

32. Palmer, G. H. (2002). An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins. Pages 131-132. Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books.

33. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry. Polyandry definition. See opening paragraph. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

34. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/132?lang=eng. Polyandry consequences in the Doctrine & Covenants. See verses 61-63. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

35. http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/. Polyandry and polygamy of Joseph Smith, Jr. See list provided on page, paying attention to right hand “Husband*” column, indicating the women already married. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

36. http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/References.html. References for each individual wife of Joseph Smith, Jr. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

37. https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints?lang=eng. LDS.org essay Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

38. https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng. LDS.org essay Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

39. http://www.mormonthink.com/essays-plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo.htm. MormonThink response to LDS.org essay Plural Marriage in Kirtland & Nauvoo. Retrieved December 16^th, 2018.

40. https://books.google.com/books/about/View_of_the_Hebrews.html?id=xhIeAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button. View of the Hebrews in its entirety, in PDF form. Retrieved October 8^th, 2018.

41. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Authorship_theories/View_of_the_Hebrews#Question:_What_are_the_similarities_and_differences_between_View_of_the_Hebrews_and_the_Book_of_Mormon.3F. Similarities between View of the Hebrews and The Book of Mormon. See table under “’Parallels’ that actually aren’t parallels” (they really are parallels). Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

42. https://www.fairmormon.org/. Apologist LDS website. Retrieved December 17, 2018.

43. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/Authorship_theories/View_of_the_Hebrews#Question:_What_are_the_similarities_and_differences_between_View_of_the_Hebrews_and_the_Book_of_Mormon.3F. See first paragraph under “’Parallels’ that actually aren’t parallels”. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

44. https://youtu.be/RmloaOTp5Rk. Jared Egley accusations against his recently called Bishop Uncle. The link is to part 1 of a 2 part series. Retrieved December 14^th, 2018.

45. https://kutv.com/news/local/mormonleaks-leaked-document-sheds-light-on-lds-churchs-handling-of-seven-sex-abuse-cases. Mormonleaks document showing Church handling of sexual abuse allegations. Retrieved December 14^th, 2018.

46. http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=2163720&itype=CMSID. Salt Lake Tribune coverage of excommunication of John Dehlin. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

47. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865621576/Mormon-Stories-founder-Dehlins-spread-of-false-concepts-results-in-excommunication-from-LDS.html. Deseret News coverage of excommunication of John Dehlin.  Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

48. https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/09/16/mormon-church/. Salt Lake Tribune coverage of excommunication of Sam Young. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

49. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900032216/sam-young-announces-he-was-excommunicated-by-local-church-leaders.html. Deseret News coverage of excommunication of Sam Young. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

50. https://www.thespectrum.com/story/news/2018/11/29/bill-reel-excommunication-you-cannot-tell-truth-and-get-away/2152779002/. Spectrum coverage of excommunication of Bill Reel. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

51. https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2018/12/05/jcw-lds-church-excommunicates-podcaster-for-public-opposition-to-the-church-and-its-leaders/#.XBfkhVxKiUk. St George News coverage of excommunication of Bill Reel. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

52. https://www.abc4.com/news/local-news/former-lds-bishop-excommunicated-over-podcast/1636440760. ABC4 news coverage of excommunication of Bill Reel. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.

53. https://www.dropbox.com/s/iqrggr1shrkzpgb/Transcript%20of%20Bill%20Reel%27s%20Disciplinary%20Proceedings.pdf?dl=0. Transcript of Disciplinary Council of Bill Reel. See pages 28-29 and page 37 for quotes. Retrieved December 17^th, 2018.