Subjective Truth vs Objective Truth: Some Thoughts for the LDS

One of the most attractive features of the LDS church is the encouragement members get to pursue revelations. In the early days of the church, this might have been its most popular custom. However, after a short time with this arrangement, Joseph Smith recognized its dangers.

In September 1830 Joseph and Emma Smith moved from Harmony, Pennsylvania, to Fayette, New York. When they arrived, they found that some Saints were being deceived by claims of false revelations: “To our great grief, … we soon found that Satan had been lying in wait to deceive, and seeking whom he might devour. [1]

In response, Smith received a revelation that placed a limit on the revelations that might be received by members of the church.

But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee, no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses. And thou shalt be obedient unto the things which I shall give unto him, even as Aaron, to declare faithfully the commandments and the revelations, with power and authority unto the church. [2] (D&C 8:2-3)

The church still encourages revelations. In fact, the church insists that if you haven’t received a revelation, you haven’t received the Holy Ghost. As Harold B. Lee taught,

Any Latter-day Saint who has been baptized and who has had hands laid upon him from those officiating, commanding him to receive the Holy Ghost, and who has not received a revelation of the spirit of the Holy Ghost, has not received the gift of the Holy Ghost to which he is entitled. [3]

But these revelations are subject to the teachings of the church. As Elder Gerald N. Lund insisted in a 1997 devotional address at BYU,

Revelation from God does not contradict gospel principles or go contrary to established Church policy and procedure.

When there is new doctrine or new procedures to come forth, you will get it in one of three ways:

a. A formal press conference will be called by the leaders of the Church, at which an official announcement will be made.

b. It will be announced through the Church News, the Ensign, or other official Church communications.

c. It will be announced in general conference by those in authority.

Otherwise, we should be very wary about accepting it, and we should not share it with others. [4]

Over many years of life and ministry in Utah, I have heard many accounts of personal revelations. One man told me about personal conversations with George Washington and Ben Franklin. Politicians tell voters they received a direct impulse from the Spirit that led them to run for office. John Hyrum Koyle received a visit from the Angel Moroni. According to Koyle’s account,

the messenger showed him in vision a massive depository of gold ore in the hills near his home. He was also told that the mine would produce financial relief, in the form of gold coins, after a future economic collapse. The sacred treasure would benefit the people by keeping alive the local economy during the financial crisis and other devastating calamities. [5]

Thus, Koyle founded a mining operation and established the Dream Mine. Other members of the church (such as the Lafferty brothers and Brian David Mitchell) have had revelations that led them to commit heinous crimes. Thankfully, this kind of “revelation” is not common among the members of the church.

Continue reading “Subjective Truth vs Objective Truth: Some Thoughts for the LDS”

Preaching, Proof, and Binding the Conscience

The great design and intention of the office of a Christian preacher (is) to restore the throne and dominion of God in the souls of men. (Cotton Mather)

To preach is to prove, and to prove is to bind the conscience. Every sermon sets forth the certainty of the things of Scripture and calls the people to believe and do what the Bible says. Or maybe I should say that every sermon should do this. We don’t need to ask whether the preacher will bind the conscience, but how he will bind it and what truth he will preach as binding on the conscience.

But that raises a myriad of questions: What is proof? What kind of certainty do we look for? What types of proofs should we use? Do emotional proofs count? Should the church be bound by every opinion the pastor holds? Is proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” or “beyond a shadow of a doubt?”

Continue reading “Preaching, Proof, and Binding the Conscience”

The Practical Value of the Armor of God, part 1

I’ll be honest: I’ve never understood the practical use of the armor of God.  I’ve always considered it pie-in-the-sky, metaphorical not meaningful armor.  If that sounds heretical to you, it does to me as well.  But I took a little truth serum before writing this, so I’m being completely candid with you.  I have known that the armor is there and that God says I am to take it so that I can withstand in the evil day, “and having done all, to stand.”  But I have never understood how, practically speaking, “the helmet of salvation” or the “shield of faith” would help me in the hour of temptation.

Then, I took a good look at it.  I should have looked thirty years ago.  Maybe I did – you forget a lot in thirty years.  But recently, I had the opportunity to preach through the armor of God. In doing so, I was struck with the practicality of it.  Christian armor gives us real-world help in the face of trial and temptation.

Satan is the original Wile E. Coyote.  We are not ignorant of his devices (2 Corinthians 2:11).  He has had thousands of years to hone his skill at deceiving, has developed an entire system for enslaving, and has wounded many mighty.  We shouldn’t think that anything in our Christian experience – regardless of how long we have been standing or how faithful we have been – will exempt us from his attacks.  We must take unto ourselves the whole armor of God, or we will fail in the day of battle.

But how does the armor of God give us practical help?  What is the use of it?  I hope I can encourage you to consider the value of each piece of the armor of God.  We’ll cover two pieces of armor here.

The Belt for the Armor

The belt is not for you.  The girdle is for the armor.  Maybe that’s why Paul starts with the belt though we would typically dress in a different order.  The practical purpose of the belt is to keep the armor firmly in place – to hold it together.  We don’t want the breastplate riding up or getting twisted in the heat of battle.  And besides, we need a place to keep our swords and tuck our skirts so we might gird up our loins like a man. 

Continue reading “The Practical Value of the Armor of God, part 1”