Have you ever tһought about adding a little
bit more than jᥙѕt your articles? I mean, what you say is imрortant and all.
Nevertheless imagine if you addеd some great visuals or videos to give yοur posts more, "pop"!
Your content is excellent but with pics and clips, tһis bloɡ coᥙld certainly be one of the most Ƅeneficiɑl in its niche.
Тerrific blog!
Check out my webpage; lantern
DaveFebruary 10, 2016
What if the Pharisees had a multi billion dollar corporation? What if we had digital rameumptums?
ShaneFebruary 23, 2015
I would just point out that we should also pay attention to how "the church" or the "prophets" handled both Korihor and Nehor. They simply taught correct principles. They taught by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile--Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved,
(D&C 121:41-43 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121?lang=eng )
They didn't try to exercise control or dominion or compulsion (D&C 121:37) on either of the two or anyone else like them. They merely taught truth and bore their testimony and invited people to repent and come into Christ, but left it up to the hearers or receivers of the words to have to choose who to believe. It was left to them to recognize the voice of God in either teaching.
Very well written and clever analogy to today's modern day counterparts. As a former CNN Headline newscaster and journalist for 16 years in radio and TV, it amazes me what has past as "news" this last month in regards to antiMormonism and disaffected LDS. The laws and commandments are clear: people are free to stay or go. They are NOT free to claim " member in good standing" while trashing the principles of the Gospel. The Church is incredibly patient and Christlike. Recording private conversations without people's knowledge is deceptive and in certain if not most cases illegal. Providing transcriptions in self-distributed press releases is poor judgement and smacks of a vindictive nature often seen in disgruntled former Mormons. Korihor would be proud:)
BradFebruary 13, 2015
I got the sense from the Book of Mormon account that Nehor and Korihor were trying to form their own movements and persuade other groups to join, not reform a particular movement from within. Kate Kelly (as well as John Dehlin, although he is not mentioned in the article) was trying to reform the LDS church from within. Plus, Nehor killed Gideon, so comparison of Nehor to any non-violent LDS church critics, whoever they are, is unfair. If you're trying to compare the arguments of Dehlin and Kelly to those of Nehor and Korihor, it is really apples to oranges. Dehlin and Kelly should have the right to form their own religious movements based on almost whatever doctrines and ideas they please (provided they aren't preaching direct violence against others). Of course, the LDS church should have the right to excommunicate them if they so desire.
RobFebruary 13, 2015
Although I agree with the article I must say that there is a distinctive difference between Korihor, Nehor and Kelly and John. The record says that both were anti-Christ, both consistently testifed that there is no Christ, that Christ wouldn't come or simply does not exist. John and Kelly never stated that.
NicoleFebruary 12, 2015
While a certain name may not have been mentioned, I think everyone reading this thought of John Dehlin. His supporters say that you need to go to his site to see what he is saying. I just tried to go on his Mormon Stories Facebook page. Guess what? It's a closed group. In order to see anything on the page, you have to be approved to be a part of the group by an administrator. And you have to agree to follow the rules set by the administration of the group. If you don't, you'll get kicked out.
I have also seen plenty of comments from those that don't agree with him that have gone to his actual podcost or blog or whatever is and say that they have posted comments that disagree with John and those comments get deleted. Seems that Mr. Dehlin's followers are quite good at telling the LDS church that they have no right to tell a man that he is no longer a member of the church, but they remain completely silent about the fact that the man they are supporting is doing exactly what they say the church can't do.
MikeFebruary 12, 2015
This article was very well written.
Mother of 4February 12, 2015
You hit the nail on the head! Thank you for writing my thoughts exactly. We must hold on to the iron rod with the tightest of grips. Satin is ever so cunning in his tactics to deceive.
No AuthorFebruary 11, 2015
Debra, This article was designed to talk specifically about the kinds of deception that the Book of Mormon warns us against. I have been thinking about writing it and a companion piece long before John Dehlin or Kate Kelly were in the news. I think the Book of Mormon is a warning to us about ideas that will be seductive to us in the latter days. If I had wanted to write an article specifically about them instead, I would have taken their own arguments one by one. I agree that it is a sad day when any one is excommunicated and I completely agree that these courts should be kept confidential. Unfortunately, both Dehlin and Kelly made their Church courts a public matter by engaging the national press and sending out press releases. The Church responded to John Dehlin's excommunication in a press release because they felt obliged to correct the public record. I did not bash anyone in this article, nor did I intend to. You will notice that there was no mention of John Dehlin and I would not have quoted Kate Kelly except that her derisive comment about Church members was a surprising parallel to Korihor's statement. I think it is important to discern the kind of ideas that are seductive to pull one away from faith as a way of arming ourselves in a world where we will be bombarded by them.
Debra Oaks CoeFebruary 11, 2015
This was a pointed article to specific people and bashing them publicly. I am not saying I agree with them or their philosophies, but I strongly believe that anytime a member is excommunicated, no matter what the reason, it is a sad day even for those who agree with the action. If the church doesn't talk about the proceedings publicly and considers it a private matter then I believe articles like this are also quite inappropriate. The article shows disregard for sacred church procedures where such things are private matters. They are called “courts of love” for a reason and bashing people publicly afterwards is just wrong and mocks the title “court of love.” I don't believe you would see Christ doing anything like this. An article that is more general on the subject may have been quite good and timely but this one is just too pointed and clearly just person bashing. It is beneath the dignity of any good Latter-day Saint.
KristinFebruary 11, 2015
Thank you . . . it never fails to impress upon me as I read and study from the scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon, the similarities we face in society today, the persecution and challenges that face the members of the Church and people who cling tightly to gospel principles. The tools and names are just different but the messages are very similar. I'm grateful for the prophet Moron who did caution us to use wisdom, "o be wise" . . .
Ryan GFebruary 11, 2015
I am an active and devout LDS member. Although this article isn't directly stating that the LDS church is always right and all others are wrong, it indirectly comes across that way. I think it is important to recognize that the Gospel is always right, but that does not mean that the LDS church is always right. It hasn't been in the past (e.g., blacks and the priesthood) and it won't always be that way in the future (of course I think the church is right most of the time). Thus, I don't think we should consider someone who says something negative about the church to be a bad person, an apostate, or a Korihor. Spiritually mature and humble people can take information from various sides of an argument, and weigh them appropriately. In fact, we make the best decisions when we seek information contrary to our beliefs. If we don't seek that information, we usually make a biased and flawed decisions. So, by ignoring sources from outside mainstream LDS thought, I believe we actually limit ourselves.
Additionally, I find it interesting that many commenters praise this post for exposing "the sophistries of men and devils," yet many statements in this blog post can be flipped slightly and used to argue the opposite. For example, the author states, "This Internet age means we are swamped with ideas that are as old as sand and as corrosive as a salt sea. They will be sold to us appealing to our care for the downtrodden and marginalized—to which we can’t help but emotionally respond. They will suggest that we have been duped into our religious beliefs and that the truly enlightened know better."
This could easily be changed to be a criticism of members of the LDS church by someone not of our faith: "This Internet age means we are swamped with ideas that are as old as sand. They will be sold to us appealing to our care for the downtrodden and marginalized—to which we can’t help but emotionally respond. They will suggest that we have been duped into our beliefs and that the truly enlightened know better."
DanielFebruary 11, 2015
Thank you. This is wonderful and exactly what we need right now.
Al MillerFebruary 11, 2015
1 Cor. 6:2 know ye not that the saints will judge the world?
SeekTruthFebruary 11, 2015
Wonderful article saying so much of what we have all been feeling! Way to go!!
Regarding the challenge of having children, friends or others that struggle with same-sex attraction, we love them. If they are sexually active, we love them but we do not condone this behavior just as we do not condone adultery or fornication. Matthew 10, in the last 10-15 verses, tells us what the Lord expects parents, children and all family members to do when they have relatives that are committing or advocating the acceptance of sinful, miserable behavior.
We must not be tempted to put the 2nd commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves before the 1st which is to love God. The 1st commandment must remain first.
Thanks again for standing up for truth and that which brings great happiness.
Del BensonFebruary 11, 2015
When individual members take the public stand and criticize the church, how should we respond? Silence, loving correction or join the fray? How many individuals have been aided in leaving the church? As apostates have a voice that are free to share, so do those who stand for true and gospel covenants. Those who choose to leave the church have such rights...sad to see.
KarenFebruary 11, 2015
Mom of 3,
The Church teaches us to hate the sin but to LOVE the sinner. My brother is transgender and I love him dearly, but I do not like how his actions have hurt not only himself but also his (ex) wife, children, parents, siblings, and extended family. I do not consider it sinful or apostate to continue to love him. In fact, I believe that our Heavenly Father and our Saviour continue to love and care for him as well. When Christ was on the earth, he visited those who were considered the basest of sinners. I wonder if it would not be these very folk that He would visit today, calling them--LOVINGLY--to repentance, and showing them the road back to our heavenly home.
You might wish to consider attending a local Family Support Group run by LDS Family Services, and if that is not available in your area, look up the Addiction Recovery Group. I realize that what these groups are dealing with will not be an exact match for your situation, but both of these groups use a gospel-based 12-Step program that emphasizes the power of the Atonement in our lives to help us overcome whatever our challenges in mortality may be.
Your sister in the gospel,
Karen
Harold StuartFebruary 11, 2015
Mom of 3: No, it's not apostasy to love your children. Our Heavenly Father loves each of his children, including those who openly rebel against him. We may not take our rebellion to the degree that Dehlin or Kelly did, but if we are unrepentant we are rebellious still the same.
However, love does not mean that he condones our rebellion. To quote Hebrews 12:
My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
It's not OK to do whatever you want. At the time of judgment, excuses like "I was born that way" or "I had the right to do what I did" will not be an effective defense. The only thing the Lord will be interested in is whether or not we tried our best to do things his way.
DFebruary 11, 2015
Yaaaass!!! I was thinking about this recently and am so glad you wrote this.
Gregg HammerquistFebruary 10, 2015
No you would not be apostate for loving your children. The Church specifically says TO love them. As far as the rest, as a Temple Recommend holding member who experiences same-sex attraction, I can say that much of what we see and feel while in Church varies and is largely up to interpretation by the individual. My mom and her sister had the same mother yet my aunt says my grandma used to beat her, my mother tells a different story. She says they all were spanked but her sister ran instead of taking her punishment and so she got a number of half-swats. Our experiences are largely viewed from our own point of view.
Also Jesus never said only to 'judge not'; he said not to judge unless you planned on be judged with the same judgment. Most intend to be.
Mom of 3February 10, 2015
What about those of us who have a child/children who are part of the LGBT community? Are we apostate because we choose to love our children? Are we apostate because we no longer will allow our child to be suicidal and severely depressed and have felt abused because of the teachings that are offered every day? Where is the compassion that the Lord teaches us? Where is the refusal to judge not?
JenniferFebruary 10, 2015
Maureen is not calling Dehlin and Kelly "anti-christ," "Korihor," etc. She is highlighting the fact that Dehlin and Kelly, among others, are using the same arguments as those Book Of Mormon dissenters. She is also exploring what might have occurred if the Book Of Mormon dissenters had been able to spread their ideas through the powerful media entities we have today. It is a meaning comparison and one that is worth exploring. I have recently gone back and re-read the arguments presented by Korihor, et al, and it is fascinating (and concerning) how similar the arguments and the tactics are to Dehlin's and Kelly's approach. The prophets of the Book Of Mormon were writing for our day, and their prescient choice to include those stories is all the more evidence to me that they were inspired and that the Book Of Mormon is true scripture. How ironic that the very book that Dehlin disses as "fan-fiction" is actually predicting and describing, in very accurate detail, his own tactics and arguments.
John EFebruary 10, 2015
The difference is Nehor and Korihor were insincere from day 1 about their intentions. There's no chance of persuading Kelly and Dehlin to rejoin the church if we demonize them now.
Sasha Bill KwapinskiFebruary 10, 2015
I would venture to say that if Mormons really are the kind of people that Kate Kelly describes them to be (least fit, least intelligent, least nuanced, etc.), they probably would have all died before reaching Utah.
BridgetFebruary 10, 2015
Thanks for helping me recognize and understand the teachings of those anti-Christs in our day. Things are clearer now, thanks.
JulieFebruary 10, 2015
I think it would be pretty fair to say that anyone who preaches "loyal opposition" to the church and who writes against it and preaches against its teachings is very much "like unto" a Korihor or Nehor. It isn't a far stretch to note that we have many of these in our midst and we need to not be so afraid to call it for what it is.
Carv WilsonFebruary 9, 2015
Dear Maurine,
I love that you point out the similarities to the arguments in the Book of Mormon that seem to be all the vogue today. It is amazing to me that those who purport to believe in divine revelation, prophets in our day, and apostles who commune with the Savior that you would argue with them over doctrine. One of your other posters, argued that 1978 changed the order of the Priesthood, but that is untrue. No one was advocating for the church to change. God inspired His prophet to extend the blessings of the priesthood to those to whom it had previously been denied. This is much different from the very vocal minor minority that seeks to force change on the church that has clearly been stated from the pulpit and from their own local leaders to be contrary to the Lord's will. I don't understand everything, (heck sometimes I think my understanding is very limited!), but being obedient, especially when counseled in love and kindness to do differently would certainly encourage me to change. Being critical, either in the guise of one of these "teachers" of the leaders the Lord has placed over His church seems a slippery slope towards apostasy. May the Lord continue to write about the subjects that inspire.
Carv Wilson
MichaelFebruary 9, 2015
Thank you Maureen for connecting the dots of those who promote dissent today with the characters in the Book of Mormon so that we can view the truths of their deceptions. We can now clearly see their suffering and the suffering of the people of the land because of the many who follow(ed) them.
Allen Wyatt writes about them because they don't know "To Whom Does this Church Belong". https://www.allenwyatt.com/blog/to-whom-does-this-church-belong/
BeccaFebruary 9, 2015
Now THIS is a well-crafted essay. Concise, insightful, and needed--thank you.
Sasha Bill KwapinskiFebruary 9, 2015
When I left the Unitarian Church several years ago (before becoming LDS), I did not launch off onto a years-long vendetta or make a public spectacle of myself. I certainly did not make any money off of it or grab media attention. Rather, due to various religio-political concerns and objections, I simply did the appropriate thing and took my religious direction elsewhere. I continue, moreover, to regard my experience in the Unitarian church as a valuable and integral part of my spiritual journey.
Sarah ParksFebruary 9, 2015
I have always had questions about doctrine, but have ultimately resolved that this is the whole point: for me to learn. Sometimes I am empowered by what I learn and at other times I am also depressed. It's taken most of my adult life to learn to create space for that learning, and to give myself permission to reason through in addition to prayerful consideration of what I believe and how I choose to act. It's what I did before writing this comment. Ultimately, I cannot adopt the view that because some one else acted differently than myself, I have to vilify them to feel a measure of security in my belief. My relationship with deity would be compromised if I did. While difficult, I feel that all that is required of me is to choose to give the author, John Dehlin, Kate Kelly, and every commenter the benefit of the doubt that I will never know enough about the journey of their stories to judge the veracity of their point of view. However, neither does that mean my point of view is so concrete to assume I have to choose judgement over compassion to maintain my belief. That being said, hurt and pain still happen and it is difficult to not internalize how human beings treat each other, even how Mormons treat other Mormons. The author claims that while she is not calling the excommunicated or members in review, Nehor or Korihor, she claims she is exposing their 'arguments'... as I'm assuming "anti-Christ?" Using this logic, in my opinion, she should have also included the rest of the human race. Christ is the only one who is capable of claiming the constant character of being Christlike. Humanity can only attempt to do so. This article makes me grateful for the fact that God is omniscient, and as such knows the intent of my heart, and Korihor, and Nehor, and Kate Kelly, and John Dehlin and all the rest of us in our difficult moments as fellow 'anti-Christs'. It makes me grateful that at the end of the day He is the only One I have to answer to, because as it is exercising hope and compassion are already, most of the time, too overwhelming.
KarinFebruary 9, 2015
I find it so interesting that some of those that join in this argument (here or elsewhere), are so quick to say that those who feel a call to expose or discuss or even bring to light the practices and aspects of history that may and sometimes do cause members to stumble, should be supported in their quest to do so without question or rebuttal. I do maintain their right to question and discuss, to look for answers and explanations of things that trouble them. I also maintain the rights of those who refute those arguments with their own beliefs, experiences, or explanations. Yet they are accused of being judgmental or narrow minded. When members who do not have the same concerns question how the questioners go about disseminating their arguments, questioning the prudence of shouting from a media pulpit, causing some who did not have a stumbling block before to crash in a mighty way, and they do so with scriptural comparisons (not comparing the person to the Antichrists but comparing the similarity of their arguments) they are called judgmental, hateful, and are compared to different, negatively viewed figures in the scripture. I do not think the questions should not be asked and I know from personal experience that some of the issues that individuals like John and Kate bring up do cause people to leave the Church. But I also know that when I say that I have experienced many of the same questions, and been concerned by many of the same issues, and I have found answers for me from studying both scripture, history, the prophets, and the dissenters that don't just allow me to live with things that are seen as wrong, but I have actually gained acceptance, and yes even some understanding as to why certain thing that appear to be wrong or confusing are actually powerful faith building occurrences. As a simple example I struggled with the need of the Israelite's need to kill all of the children as well as everyone and everything else upon coming to the promised land, after years of study and prayer I came to understand that because of the doctrine of the age of accountability these children where actually are saved in Christ and where removed from being brought down by temptation. It became a blessing and a confirmation of Christ and the Father's mercy. I am not saying that I have received all of the answers or that my answers will comfort others. But when I say that I have found answers and individuals like Kate Kelly respond that I belong to a group of "only the least talented, least articulate, least nuanced thinkers, least likely to take a stand against abuse, and the least courageous people" yes I am offended. Yes I cease listening to her arguments because she has just called me an idiot. If I reply with any faith based argument as to why I see validity in certain practices, I must be a numb, naive pleb, unable to look at things rationally or objectively.Well guess what I accuse individuals like this of the same things and more. They are narrow minded, only willing to listen to the sound of their own voices. They refuse to accept spiritual, faith based evidence (coupled with reasoned logic) as proof of something that is inherently spiritual. When disagreed with they resort to name calling, derogatory insults, and never actually give answer to the response. And yes articles like this should be written and read, because you can point out the fallacies of their arguments by pointing out the similarities with other scriptural examples, and not in any way say that the individual is the same as the Antichrist sighted. And we are the ones who aren't nuanced thinkers? Even someone as stupid as Kate Kelley believes me to be can see that there is a difference between comparing an argument that two people make and comparing the people themselves. Oh wait, I forgot, because I don't agree with her anything I say is dismissed as irrelevant, and therefore my opinions, worries and concerns can be completely ignored and discounted just like she accuses the Church of doing to her. And just to clarify I do not actually group John with Kate, even though many see them as the same. While in the recent past John podcast has slipped farther and farther into only listening to the voice of dissent, and that personally bothered me enough to stop listening, I have often sought out his voice as one who was balanced and clear. In earlier times for any one discussion focusing on opposition to the Church, he included and equally vocal and articulate discussion of faith, and the validity of the faithful practice of members. While that balanced approach has become less evident in recent times, I do believe that it is Johns nature to be fair and well balanced and that he should be acknowledged and appreciated for all of the people who's faith he actually sustained, and strengthened through crisis, including mine.
Gary LawreceFebruary 9, 2015
Good job, Maurine. The twaddle of your challengers only strengthens your points.
KathrynFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine, your insights are inspired and absolute truth. How I appreciate your ability to articulate distinctly on selected moral issues of our day.
In 1 Nephi when Laman and Lemuel are in one of their rebellious moods, Nephi invites them to return to Jerusalem--- paraphrasing, “You have choice, go on back”. To those today, that do indeed appear as Nehor and Korihor, I say, you too have choice. Yes, carry on with your blogs and arguments and your rebellions and your attempts to discredit and debunk the doctrines of Jesus Christ—in essence go on back to Jerusalem if you will where wickedness reigns. But remember Nephi’s warning “And now, if ye have choice, go up to the land, and remember the words which I speak unto you, that if ye go ye will also perish; for thus the Spirit of the Lord constraineth me that I should speak.”
Survivor of DeceptionFebruary 9, 2015
Well written, Maurine. What you wrote about deception needed to be said and I hope your readers will take the message to heart. Once a person has been deceived and recognizes the error, they can see deception from a mile away. I know this firsthand. Coming out from under it is no easy thing. My family has been drastically harmed by the teachings of both John Dehlin and Kate Kelly. My son left the church over the things they taught and took his wife and 4 children with him. I am heartbroken, but hopeful because I know in whom I have trusted.
Carolyn in UtahFebruary 9, 2015
Wow. Thank you for saying what needs to be said, Maureen.
Perhaps in the beginning, Dehlin and Kelly were sincere in their questioning. I'm not arguing with that & think that our faith is shallow indeed if we don't ask questions. However, it is glaringly obvious that in the end their motives are praise, adulation, and most importantly, CREATING A FOLLOWING. Every press conference and candlelight vigil feeds their egos. They start to see and rank-and-file of the Church as unthinking cattle while only they see The Truth. They are raised up in the pride of their hearts. Period. It's the same song, one millionth verse.
Renaissance NerdFebruary 9, 2015
Kelly is quite right that the Church is for the weak. It is not a showplace for the righteous but a hospital for sinners. For those who reckon themselves so very strong and wise, it is certainly pointless. As Joseph Smith said: "...and I say unto you there is more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth than over the ninety-and-nine just persons who are so righteous; they will be damned anyway, you cannot save them."
The self-righteousness of the leftist set really astonishes me, and it runs the gamut. Whether they are religious or anti-religious, they do seem to bask in the glow of their own overweening self-esteem. I suppose it must feel nice to KNOW you're right about everything, that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid or wicked or both, and that every whim that pops into your mind is not only not wrong, but completely right! However I don't see how you can learn once you already know everything, so I'm happy to remain ignorant and always learning instead. And I'll bow to their claims of superiority over the rest of us once they can go a year without paying their tribute to the porcelain throne. Until then, they're just ordinary human beings with delusions of grandeur and ironbound self-righteousness.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine Proctor here. I've tried to answer some of these comments directly, but our content manager has lumped my responses altogether and called them "No Author." So sorry for the confusion. If you see a "no author" comment, that is from me and is actually addressing an earlier response.
Travis WhitsittFebruary 9, 2015
"...the Church and the God it represents is narrow and that asserting standards is bigotry. Maybe tomorrow when the Church becomes more progressive and international, it will drop its outmoded doctrines."
How do you classify what occurred in 1978, especially in light of the Church's recent essay in which past prophetic declarations that the Priesthood ban was doctrinal were merely "theories?" Is it really so heretical to believe that what admittedly happened once could happen again?
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I don't believe that in pointing out the fallacy of some ideas that I am digging a pit for my neighbor.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I can't understand why Korihor, who admitted himself that he was operating under deception would be a favorite character.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
Kudos to the Church for publishing articles on difficult issues. I am thoroughly familiar with all of the accounts of Joseph Smith's vision and feel grateful we have the additional information on what he experienced. He still told us only a very small part of what happened there and said, "I can keep a secret until doomsday," and he did. We only have the smallest part. On translating the Book of Abraham, you should read Kerry Muhlstein's interesting articles, published on Meridian. I do not see that the Church actively works against the truth of its own history. What could be more comprehensive than the effort put forth on the extensive Joseph Smith Papers project.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
As I've stated above, I don't call either Kate or John anti-Christs. I think where there are problems we need to address them. However I also think that some people do lead other people out of the Church. For instance, Joseph Smith is a particular expertise of mine and when I hear the way he is caricatured I think that people who know little are often led away without putting circumstances in context.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I was unaware that she had referred to Meridian that way, but ultimately I feel that name-calling in any direction is not helpful. I don't call Kate or John Korihors. I really tried to state that clearly. But I think what we see in the arguments of Nehor and Korihor are the common attacks of our time on the Church. These arguments wouldn't fly and have such power if they didn't have certain kinds of appeal to them.
JulieFebruary 9, 2015
BRILLIANT article! This outlines all of the conversations that are going in my ward and stake currently. Everyone is saying that the dissident going on in the church right now is exactly what happened in Korihor's times. Most people are getting the comparison and yet when they point out (even gently) that there are male and female Korihors and their followers in our day, they are called judgmental and un-Christlike. So are those who point out these tactics in the Book of Mormon also judgmental and not Christlike? I don't think so. For so many years we have been warned about false prophets and false teachers and yet when we see it happening in real-time, we are slammed by their followers and shut down. Nothing shuts down a religious conversation faster than "stop being so unChristlike and judgmental!" They know this and are ironically abusing the very name of Christ and the very essence of judgment to stop the Korihor and anti-Christ dialogue they so want to teach.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I have been thinking about writing this article for a long time because the nature of deception is fascinating and worrisome to me. It is not specifically about John Dehlin or Kate Kelly. What is interesting is how seductive certain arguments are--specifically because they appeal to some of our best instincts. We truly want all of us to be with the Lord again. That's why Nehor's argument was intriguing to so many. I used to think it was only because people wanted to do whatever they wanted and then be saved in the kingdom of God that people followed Nehor. But I've come to believe his argument also played upon their sympathies for their fellows--which is about some of our kindest instincts. We kid ourselves if we think our instincts are kinder or more loving than the Lord's.
NickFebruary 9, 2015
What would it be like if the Pharisees and Sadducees had a magazine? Would they be accusers or would they silence opposition? Would they hold councils and decide how to get rid of the dissenters? Not posting this comment due to being a different opinion shows how scared LDSMag is of any differing views and ultimately weakens your arguments.
BrettFebruary 9, 2015
Declaring Dehlin & Kelly to be modern day antichrists still doesn't move us forward in addressing the important concerns that they have brought attention to. The issues those two discussed on their blogs and podcasts continue to create faith crises, inactivity, resignations, and marital/family strife. Maybe we should set aside criticisms of Dehlin, Kelly, and others and actually engage with the issues.
CarolineFebruary 9, 2015
Some of us inarticulate, cowardly folks truly do hope that these modern day Nehors and Korihors will become modern day Zeezroms. He is one of my favorite Book of Mormon heroes---searching, misguided for a time, but humble and honest and willing to change. He was able to tame his natural man and become a missionary for the cause he once tried to destroy. One of his companions, Amulek, also gave up popularity, riches, and even some of his family and friends, to repent and follow the Spirit he had allowed to enter his careless heart.
RyanFebruary 9, 2015
At times John has crossed the line into what you would probably consider heretical. However, Mormon Stories Podcast has had guests from across the belief spectrum. For a doubting, heterodox, or liberal believer in Mormonism many of the podcasts are extremely helpful and thought provoking.
John isn't really a great orator, but he has created a platform for a great dialogue about faith and doubt. His foundation has also created other podcasts like Momon Matters (hosted by Dan Wotherspoon) that help people hold onto their beliefs and activity in the church despite heterodox beliefs.
A person can listen to Mormon Stories and disagree, just as a person could listen to a General Conference talk and disagree. Most of us are just trying to find a way to live a good life. Some people find that in Mormonism, some people don't.
No need to compare him to the Antichrists in the Book of Mormon.
JRPFebruary 9, 2015
Perhaps you should consider running a correction. I think you are calling Kate Kelly a Korihor and I do, in fact, think that you would.
But in return, she has (perhaps even more) accurately compared you to the "Pharisees & Sadducees having a magazine."
BrettFebruary 9, 2015
Okay, so you've now compared Dehlin & Kelly to Book of Mormon antichrists. Declaring them as such and kicking them out of the church may well be justified. But Dehlin & Kelly didn't create the issues that they worked to address. The vilification of those working to engage with the problems we face as a church and a faith community won't move us forward. It won't reduce inactivity rates or resignation letters. It won't help marriages torn apart by faith crises. And it won't comfort those who have found themselves in the dark and lonely place of uncertainty.
Maybe now that we have discisplined those you apparently consider to be "antichrists" we can turn to the important challenges they hoped we'd face.
Captain KiddFebruary 9, 2015
What if the LDS church published articles on difficult issues related to its claims but members were too afraid to read them? What if Joseph Smith gave contradictory statements about his First Vision and the church punished people for discussing it? What if Joseph Smith used a rock in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon and the church punished people for discussing it? What if Joseph was completely wrong in translating Egyptian and the church punished people for discussing it? What if the church actively worked against the truth and vilified people who knew their history? What if it was easier to call someone an anti-christ than to have a serious conversation about real history?
TinaFebruary 9, 2015
I would totally read a blog by Korihor. He's my favorite character in the book!
CosetteFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine, I love your articles and this one really hit the nail on the head. Thank you.
KimFebruary 9, 2015
Wow! I appreciate seeing the contemporary comparison to the old arguments. You nailed it!
Liberal MormonFebruary 9, 2015
Dig a pit for your neighbor much?
Tom BarrattFebruary 9, 2015
Your play on Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, and others marks a clear line in the sand. I would hope your readers would not classify them as anti Christ. They are indeed objectors to certain aspects of the mortal Church they claim to love. The church in Alma's day as well as in our day has the inherent right to ask people to leave but this same church and those who support it have no right to stifle agency and freedom. If I may ask, have the readers had their Born Again experience and their overcoming by the Holy Ghost? If they had they would take Kate, John, and others by the hand and look into their eyes and with true intent and love feel their pain and see their goodness. If we have truly been spiritually reborn why would we be so offended to put them aside as if they were dross? The mortal Church can act within its bounds and laws but we individually must act within the spiritual rebirth we have experienced. One must ask, how would our Savior treat Kate, John, and others who have likewise objected to the mortal Church? You decide that question.
Lloyd EldredgeFebruary 9, 2015
This saddens me. I've read Meridian faithfully for years, and used the Gospel Doctrine materials with my lessons almost every week I taught. But this article is so unfortunate. Is it truly impossible for one to be moral and supportive and be critical (or questioning) of the Church? I really thought what I'd learned in my 60+ years as a member was pretty much the opposite of the heartless position you espouse here. Perhaps the better title for this article would be "What if a Pharisee wrote and article and had it published in LDS mag?"
Tom JohnsonFebruary 9, 2015
Very good insight, Maurine.
KathythebraveFebruary 9, 2015
Thank you so much for this article Maurine! It is what is so much in my heart but so much better articulated than I could. I have been personally affected by some of these Korihors in the church as my husband fell prey to the "teachings" of the John Dehlin types who pointed fingers at those who were believing, and faithful. He embraced the Kate Kelly attitude of being of a superior mindset to all the rest of those who believe. The sad thing I have observed is that those who think they are "wise" do not see the sad loss of their perhaps once held wisdom and light. It did not end well for my husband nor my family. I hope I can be as brave as Gideon.
One OpinionFebruary 9, 2015
Once again, marvelously on target!
hollandparkFebruary 9, 2015
So True. Great article.
Pres. Benson: "Each of the major writers of the Book of Mormon testified that he wrote for future generations...If they saw our day and chose those things which would be of greatest worth to us, is not that how we should study the Book of Mormon? We should constantly ask ourselves, “Why did the Lord inspire Mormon,or Moroni or Alma to include that in his record?What lesson can I learn from that to help me live in this day and age?”"
Pres Uchtdorf: “The thing about truth is that it exists beyond belief. It is true even if nobody believes it...There is indeed such a thing as absolute truth—unassailable, unchangeable truth. Absolute truth is not dependent upon public opinion or popularity. Polls cannot sway it. Not even the inexhaustible authority of celebrity endorsement can change it....To make matters worse, we have an adversary, ‘the devil [who] as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.’
Because Satan is the great deceiver, he has many cunning strategies for keeping mortals from the truth. He does this by offering the belief that truth is relative, appealing to a sense of tolerance and fairness, and keeping the real truth hidden by claiming that one person’s “truth” is as valid as any other. Soon he entices to believe that there is an absolute truth out there somewhere but that it is impossible for anyone to know it. For those who already embrace the truth, his primary strategy is to spread the seeds of doubt".
ObserverFebruary 9, 2015
This spot on.
lorquilFebruary 9, 2015
HUZZAH!
AleceFebruary 9, 2015
Oh, Maurine. I would like to stand up and applaud. You have SO nailed the philosophies of our current Nehors and Korihors on the head! The expressions that make me the saddest, which come from such bloggers, etc., are that we can't reach the ideal in this lifetime, so we should just throw it out. Kudos, Kudos, Kudos for your comments on this timely and important subject!
RamboFebruary 9, 2015
I am saddened by all these things that are happening with quite a number of our fellow saints. I did see Korihor too really and it is a sad scene to witness his spirit lives in our time.
Kim BurnsFebruary 9, 2015
Another superbly written article on current events. That insightfully show up the sophistries of men and devils.
Thank you Maureen for sharing your gifts with us who find it harder to articulate what they see and feel. so accurately.
Comments | Return to Story
AnnieFebruary 20, 2021
Have you ever tһought about adding a little bit more than jᥙѕt your articles? I mean, what you say is imрortant and all. Nevertheless imagine if you addеd some great visuals or videos to give yοur posts more, "pop"! Your content is excellent but with pics and clips, tһis bloɡ coᥙld certainly be one of the most Ƅeneficiɑl in its niche. Тerrific blog! Check out my webpage; lantern
DaveFebruary 10, 2016
What if the Pharisees had a multi billion dollar corporation? What if we had digital rameumptums?
ShaneFebruary 23, 2015
I would just point out that we should also pay attention to how "the church" or the "prophets" handled both Korihor and Nehor. They simply taught correct principles. They taught by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile--Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, (D&C 121:41-43 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121?lang=eng ) They didn't try to exercise control or dominion or compulsion (D&C 121:37) on either of the two or anyone else like them. They merely taught truth and bore their testimony and invited people to repent and come into Christ, but left it up to the hearers or receivers of the words to have to choose who to believe. It was left to them to recognize the voice of God in either teaching.
KittywaymoFebruary 16, 2015
Excellent article!
Kittywaymo/Sister Sheila Hunter Ogden Utah MissionFebruary 16, 2015
Very well written and clever analogy to today's modern day counterparts. As a former CNN Headline newscaster and journalist for 16 years in radio and TV, it amazes me what has past as "news" this last month in regards to antiMormonism and disaffected LDS. The laws and commandments are clear: people are free to stay or go. They are NOT free to claim " member in good standing" while trashing the principles of the Gospel. The Church is incredibly patient and Christlike. Recording private conversations without people's knowledge is deceptive and in certain if not most cases illegal. Providing transcriptions in self-distributed press releases is poor judgement and smacks of a vindictive nature often seen in disgruntled former Mormons. Korihor would be proud:)
BradFebruary 13, 2015
I got the sense from the Book of Mormon account that Nehor and Korihor were trying to form their own movements and persuade other groups to join, not reform a particular movement from within. Kate Kelly (as well as John Dehlin, although he is not mentioned in the article) was trying to reform the LDS church from within. Plus, Nehor killed Gideon, so comparison of Nehor to any non-violent LDS church critics, whoever they are, is unfair. If you're trying to compare the arguments of Dehlin and Kelly to those of Nehor and Korihor, it is really apples to oranges. Dehlin and Kelly should have the right to form their own religious movements based on almost whatever doctrines and ideas they please (provided they aren't preaching direct violence against others). Of course, the LDS church should have the right to excommunicate them if they so desire.
RobFebruary 13, 2015
Although I agree with the article I must say that there is a distinctive difference between Korihor, Nehor and Kelly and John. The record says that both were anti-Christ, both consistently testifed that there is no Christ, that Christ wouldn't come or simply does not exist. John and Kelly never stated that.
NicoleFebruary 12, 2015
While a certain name may not have been mentioned, I think everyone reading this thought of John Dehlin. His supporters say that you need to go to his site to see what he is saying. I just tried to go on his Mormon Stories Facebook page. Guess what? It's a closed group. In order to see anything on the page, you have to be approved to be a part of the group by an administrator. And you have to agree to follow the rules set by the administration of the group. If you don't, you'll get kicked out. I have also seen plenty of comments from those that don't agree with him that have gone to his actual podcost or blog or whatever is and say that they have posted comments that disagree with John and those comments get deleted. Seems that Mr. Dehlin's followers are quite good at telling the LDS church that they have no right to tell a man that he is no longer a member of the church, but they remain completely silent about the fact that the man they are supporting is doing exactly what they say the church can't do.
MikeFebruary 12, 2015
This article was very well written.
Mother of 4February 12, 2015
You hit the nail on the head! Thank you for writing my thoughts exactly. We must hold on to the iron rod with the tightest of grips. Satin is ever so cunning in his tactics to deceive.
No AuthorFebruary 11, 2015
Debra, This article was designed to talk specifically about the kinds of deception that the Book of Mormon warns us against. I have been thinking about writing it and a companion piece long before John Dehlin or Kate Kelly were in the news. I think the Book of Mormon is a warning to us about ideas that will be seductive to us in the latter days. If I had wanted to write an article specifically about them instead, I would have taken their own arguments one by one. I agree that it is a sad day when any one is excommunicated and I completely agree that these courts should be kept confidential. Unfortunately, both Dehlin and Kelly made their Church courts a public matter by engaging the national press and sending out press releases. The Church responded to John Dehlin's excommunication in a press release because they felt obliged to correct the public record. I did not bash anyone in this article, nor did I intend to. You will notice that there was no mention of John Dehlin and I would not have quoted Kate Kelly except that her derisive comment about Church members was a surprising parallel to Korihor's statement. I think it is important to discern the kind of ideas that are seductive to pull one away from faith as a way of arming ourselves in a world where we will be bombarded by them.
Debra Oaks CoeFebruary 11, 2015
This was a pointed article to specific people and bashing them publicly. I am not saying I agree with them or their philosophies, but I strongly believe that anytime a member is excommunicated, no matter what the reason, it is a sad day even for those who agree with the action. If the church doesn't talk about the proceedings publicly and considers it a private matter then I believe articles like this are also quite inappropriate. The article shows disregard for sacred church procedures where such things are private matters. They are called “courts of love” for a reason and bashing people publicly afterwards is just wrong and mocks the title “court of love.” I don't believe you would see Christ doing anything like this. An article that is more general on the subject may have been quite good and timely but this one is just too pointed and clearly just person bashing. It is beneath the dignity of any good Latter-day Saint.
KristinFebruary 11, 2015
Thank you . . . it never fails to impress upon me as I read and study from the scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon, the similarities we face in society today, the persecution and challenges that face the members of the Church and people who cling tightly to gospel principles. The tools and names are just different but the messages are very similar. I'm grateful for the prophet Moron who did caution us to use wisdom, "o be wise" . . .
Ryan GFebruary 11, 2015
I am an active and devout LDS member. Although this article isn't directly stating that the LDS church is always right and all others are wrong, it indirectly comes across that way. I think it is important to recognize that the Gospel is always right, but that does not mean that the LDS church is always right. It hasn't been in the past (e.g., blacks and the priesthood) and it won't always be that way in the future (of course I think the church is right most of the time). Thus, I don't think we should consider someone who says something negative about the church to be a bad person, an apostate, or a Korihor. Spiritually mature and humble people can take information from various sides of an argument, and weigh them appropriately. In fact, we make the best decisions when we seek information contrary to our beliefs. If we don't seek that information, we usually make a biased and flawed decisions. So, by ignoring sources from outside mainstream LDS thought, I believe we actually limit ourselves. Additionally, I find it interesting that many commenters praise this post for exposing "the sophistries of men and devils," yet many statements in this blog post can be flipped slightly and used to argue the opposite. For example, the author states, "This Internet age means we are swamped with ideas that are as old as sand and as corrosive as a salt sea. They will be sold to us appealing to our care for the downtrodden and marginalized—to which we can’t help but emotionally respond. They will suggest that we have been duped into our religious beliefs and that the truly enlightened know better." This could easily be changed to be a criticism of members of the LDS church by someone not of our faith: "This Internet age means we are swamped with ideas that are as old as sand. They will be sold to us appealing to our care for the downtrodden and marginalized—to which we can’t help but emotionally respond. They will suggest that we have been duped into our beliefs and that the truly enlightened know better."
DanielFebruary 11, 2015
Thank you. This is wonderful and exactly what we need right now.
Al MillerFebruary 11, 2015
1 Cor. 6:2 know ye not that the saints will judge the world?
SeekTruthFebruary 11, 2015
Wonderful article saying so much of what we have all been feeling! Way to go!! Regarding the challenge of having children, friends or others that struggle with same-sex attraction, we love them. If they are sexually active, we love them but we do not condone this behavior just as we do not condone adultery or fornication. Matthew 10, in the last 10-15 verses, tells us what the Lord expects parents, children and all family members to do when they have relatives that are committing or advocating the acceptance of sinful, miserable behavior. We must not be tempted to put the 2nd commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves before the 1st which is to love God. The 1st commandment must remain first. Thanks again for standing up for truth and that which brings great happiness.
Del BensonFebruary 11, 2015
When individual members take the public stand and criticize the church, how should we respond? Silence, loving correction or join the fray? How many individuals have been aided in leaving the church? As apostates have a voice that are free to share, so do those who stand for true and gospel covenants. Those who choose to leave the church have such rights...sad to see.
KarenFebruary 11, 2015
Mom of 3, The Church teaches us to hate the sin but to LOVE the sinner. My brother is transgender and I love him dearly, but I do not like how his actions have hurt not only himself but also his (ex) wife, children, parents, siblings, and extended family. I do not consider it sinful or apostate to continue to love him. In fact, I believe that our Heavenly Father and our Saviour continue to love and care for him as well. When Christ was on the earth, he visited those who were considered the basest of sinners. I wonder if it would not be these very folk that He would visit today, calling them--LOVINGLY--to repentance, and showing them the road back to our heavenly home. You might wish to consider attending a local Family Support Group run by LDS Family Services, and if that is not available in your area, look up the Addiction Recovery Group. I realize that what these groups are dealing with will not be an exact match for your situation, but both of these groups use a gospel-based 12-Step program that emphasizes the power of the Atonement in our lives to help us overcome whatever our challenges in mortality may be. Your sister in the gospel, Karen
Harold StuartFebruary 11, 2015
Mom of 3: No, it's not apostasy to love your children. Our Heavenly Father loves each of his children, including those who openly rebel against him. We may not take our rebellion to the degree that Dehlin or Kelly did, but if we are unrepentant we are rebellious still the same. However, love does not mean that he condones our rebellion. To quote Hebrews 12: My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby. It's not OK to do whatever you want. At the time of judgment, excuses like "I was born that way" or "I had the right to do what I did" will not be an effective defense. The only thing the Lord will be interested in is whether or not we tried our best to do things his way.
DFebruary 11, 2015
Yaaaass!!! I was thinking about this recently and am so glad you wrote this.
Gregg HammerquistFebruary 10, 2015
No you would not be apostate for loving your children. The Church specifically says TO love them. As far as the rest, as a Temple Recommend holding member who experiences same-sex attraction, I can say that much of what we see and feel while in Church varies and is largely up to interpretation by the individual. My mom and her sister had the same mother yet my aunt says my grandma used to beat her, my mother tells a different story. She says they all were spanked but her sister ran instead of taking her punishment and so she got a number of half-swats. Our experiences are largely viewed from our own point of view. Also Jesus never said only to 'judge not'; he said not to judge unless you planned on be judged with the same judgment. Most intend to be.
Mom of 3February 10, 2015
What about those of us who have a child/children who are part of the LGBT community? Are we apostate because we choose to love our children? Are we apostate because we no longer will allow our child to be suicidal and severely depressed and have felt abused because of the teachings that are offered every day? Where is the compassion that the Lord teaches us? Where is the refusal to judge not?
JenniferFebruary 10, 2015
Maureen is not calling Dehlin and Kelly "anti-christ," "Korihor," etc. She is highlighting the fact that Dehlin and Kelly, among others, are using the same arguments as those Book Of Mormon dissenters. She is also exploring what might have occurred if the Book Of Mormon dissenters had been able to spread their ideas through the powerful media entities we have today. It is a meaning comparison and one that is worth exploring. I have recently gone back and re-read the arguments presented by Korihor, et al, and it is fascinating (and concerning) how similar the arguments and the tactics are to Dehlin's and Kelly's approach. The prophets of the Book Of Mormon were writing for our day, and their prescient choice to include those stories is all the more evidence to me that they were inspired and that the Book Of Mormon is true scripture. How ironic that the very book that Dehlin disses as "fan-fiction" is actually predicting and describing, in very accurate detail, his own tactics and arguments.
John EFebruary 10, 2015
The difference is Nehor and Korihor were insincere from day 1 about their intentions. There's no chance of persuading Kelly and Dehlin to rejoin the church if we demonize them now.
Sasha Bill KwapinskiFebruary 10, 2015
I would venture to say that if Mormons really are the kind of people that Kate Kelly describes them to be (least fit, least intelligent, least nuanced, etc.), they probably would have all died before reaching Utah.
BridgetFebruary 10, 2015
Thanks for helping me recognize and understand the teachings of those anti-Christs in our day. Things are clearer now, thanks.
JulieFebruary 10, 2015
I think it would be pretty fair to say that anyone who preaches "loyal opposition" to the church and who writes against it and preaches against its teachings is very much "like unto" a Korihor or Nehor. It isn't a far stretch to note that we have many of these in our midst and we need to not be so afraid to call it for what it is.
Carv WilsonFebruary 9, 2015
Dear Maurine, I love that you point out the similarities to the arguments in the Book of Mormon that seem to be all the vogue today. It is amazing to me that those who purport to believe in divine revelation, prophets in our day, and apostles who commune with the Savior that you would argue with them over doctrine. One of your other posters, argued that 1978 changed the order of the Priesthood, but that is untrue. No one was advocating for the church to change. God inspired His prophet to extend the blessings of the priesthood to those to whom it had previously been denied. This is much different from the very vocal minor minority that seeks to force change on the church that has clearly been stated from the pulpit and from their own local leaders to be contrary to the Lord's will. I don't understand everything, (heck sometimes I think my understanding is very limited!), but being obedient, especially when counseled in love and kindness to do differently would certainly encourage me to change. Being critical, either in the guise of one of these "teachers" of the leaders the Lord has placed over His church seems a slippery slope towards apostasy. May the Lord continue to write about the subjects that inspire. Carv Wilson
MichaelFebruary 9, 2015
Thank you Maureen for connecting the dots of those who promote dissent today with the characters in the Book of Mormon so that we can view the truths of their deceptions. We can now clearly see their suffering and the suffering of the people of the land because of the many who follow(ed) them. Allen Wyatt writes about them because they don't know "To Whom Does this Church Belong". https://www.allenwyatt.com/blog/to-whom-does-this-church-belong/
BeccaFebruary 9, 2015
Now THIS is a well-crafted essay. Concise, insightful, and needed--thank you.
Sasha Bill KwapinskiFebruary 9, 2015
When I left the Unitarian Church several years ago (before becoming LDS), I did not launch off onto a years-long vendetta or make a public spectacle of myself. I certainly did not make any money off of it or grab media attention. Rather, due to various religio-political concerns and objections, I simply did the appropriate thing and took my religious direction elsewhere. I continue, moreover, to regard my experience in the Unitarian church as a valuable and integral part of my spiritual journey.
Sarah ParksFebruary 9, 2015
I have always had questions about doctrine, but have ultimately resolved that this is the whole point: for me to learn. Sometimes I am empowered by what I learn and at other times I am also depressed. It's taken most of my adult life to learn to create space for that learning, and to give myself permission to reason through in addition to prayerful consideration of what I believe and how I choose to act. It's what I did before writing this comment. Ultimately, I cannot adopt the view that because some one else acted differently than myself, I have to vilify them to feel a measure of security in my belief. My relationship with deity would be compromised if I did. While difficult, I feel that all that is required of me is to choose to give the author, John Dehlin, Kate Kelly, and every commenter the benefit of the doubt that I will never know enough about the journey of their stories to judge the veracity of their point of view. However, neither does that mean my point of view is so concrete to assume I have to choose judgement over compassion to maintain my belief. That being said, hurt and pain still happen and it is difficult to not internalize how human beings treat each other, even how Mormons treat other Mormons. The author claims that while she is not calling the excommunicated or members in review, Nehor or Korihor, she claims she is exposing their 'arguments'... as I'm assuming "anti-Christ?" Using this logic, in my opinion, she should have also included the rest of the human race. Christ is the only one who is capable of claiming the constant character of being Christlike. Humanity can only attempt to do so. This article makes me grateful for the fact that God is omniscient, and as such knows the intent of my heart, and Korihor, and Nehor, and Kate Kelly, and John Dehlin and all the rest of us in our difficult moments as fellow 'anti-Christs'. It makes me grateful that at the end of the day He is the only One I have to answer to, because as it is exercising hope and compassion are already, most of the time, too overwhelming.
KarinFebruary 9, 2015
I find it so interesting that some of those that join in this argument (here or elsewhere), are so quick to say that those who feel a call to expose or discuss or even bring to light the practices and aspects of history that may and sometimes do cause members to stumble, should be supported in their quest to do so without question or rebuttal. I do maintain their right to question and discuss, to look for answers and explanations of things that trouble them. I also maintain the rights of those who refute those arguments with their own beliefs, experiences, or explanations. Yet they are accused of being judgmental or narrow minded. When members who do not have the same concerns question how the questioners go about disseminating their arguments, questioning the prudence of shouting from a media pulpit, causing some who did not have a stumbling block before to crash in a mighty way, and they do so with scriptural comparisons (not comparing the person to the Antichrists but comparing the similarity of their arguments) they are called judgmental, hateful, and are compared to different, negatively viewed figures in the scripture. I do not think the questions should not be asked and I know from personal experience that some of the issues that individuals like John and Kate bring up do cause people to leave the Church. But I also know that when I say that I have experienced many of the same questions, and been concerned by many of the same issues, and I have found answers for me from studying both scripture, history, the prophets, and the dissenters that don't just allow me to live with things that are seen as wrong, but I have actually gained acceptance, and yes even some understanding as to why certain thing that appear to be wrong or confusing are actually powerful faith building occurrences. As a simple example I struggled with the need of the Israelite's need to kill all of the children as well as everyone and everything else upon coming to the promised land, after years of study and prayer I came to understand that because of the doctrine of the age of accountability these children where actually are saved in Christ and where removed from being brought down by temptation. It became a blessing and a confirmation of Christ and the Father's mercy. I am not saying that I have received all of the answers or that my answers will comfort others. But when I say that I have found answers and individuals like Kate Kelly respond that I belong to a group of "only the least talented, least articulate, least nuanced thinkers, least likely to take a stand against abuse, and the least courageous people" yes I am offended. Yes I cease listening to her arguments because she has just called me an idiot. If I reply with any faith based argument as to why I see validity in certain practices, I must be a numb, naive pleb, unable to look at things rationally or objectively.Well guess what I accuse individuals like this of the same things and more. They are narrow minded, only willing to listen to the sound of their own voices. They refuse to accept spiritual, faith based evidence (coupled with reasoned logic) as proof of something that is inherently spiritual. When disagreed with they resort to name calling, derogatory insults, and never actually give answer to the response. And yes articles like this should be written and read, because you can point out the fallacies of their arguments by pointing out the similarities with other scriptural examples, and not in any way say that the individual is the same as the Antichrist sighted. And we are the ones who aren't nuanced thinkers? Even someone as stupid as Kate Kelley believes me to be can see that there is a difference between comparing an argument that two people make and comparing the people themselves. Oh wait, I forgot, because I don't agree with her anything I say is dismissed as irrelevant, and therefore my opinions, worries and concerns can be completely ignored and discounted just like she accuses the Church of doing to her. And just to clarify I do not actually group John with Kate, even though many see them as the same. While in the recent past John podcast has slipped farther and farther into only listening to the voice of dissent, and that personally bothered me enough to stop listening, I have often sought out his voice as one who was balanced and clear. In earlier times for any one discussion focusing on opposition to the Church, he included and equally vocal and articulate discussion of faith, and the validity of the faithful practice of members. While that balanced approach has become less evident in recent times, I do believe that it is Johns nature to be fair and well balanced and that he should be acknowledged and appreciated for all of the people who's faith he actually sustained, and strengthened through crisis, including mine.
Gary LawreceFebruary 9, 2015
Good job, Maurine. The twaddle of your challengers only strengthens your points.
KathrynFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine, your insights are inspired and absolute truth. How I appreciate your ability to articulate distinctly on selected moral issues of our day. In 1 Nephi when Laman and Lemuel are in one of their rebellious moods, Nephi invites them to return to Jerusalem--- paraphrasing, “You have choice, go on back”. To those today, that do indeed appear as Nehor and Korihor, I say, you too have choice. Yes, carry on with your blogs and arguments and your rebellions and your attempts to discredit and debunk the doctrines of Jesus Christ—in essence go on back to Jerusalem if you will where wickedness reigns. But remember Nephi’s warning “And now, if ye have choice, go up to the land, and remember the words which I speak unto you, that if ye go ye will also perish; for thus the Spirit of the Lord constraineth me that I should speak.”
Survivor of DeceptionFebruary 9, 2015
Well written, Maurine. What you wrote about deception needed to be said and I hope your readers will take the message to heart. Once a person has been deceived and recognizes the error, they can see deception from a mile away. I know this firsthand. Coming out from under it is no easy thing. My family has been drastically harmed by the teachings of both John Dehlin and Kate Kelly. My son left the church over the things they taught and took his wife and 4 children with him. I am heartbroken, but hopeful because I know in whom I have trusted.
Carolyn in UtahFebruary 9, 2015
Wow. Thank you for saying what needs to be said, Maureen. Perhaps in the beginning, Dehlin and Kelly were sincere in their questioning. I'm not arguing with that & think that our faith is shallow indeed if we don't ask questions. However, it is glaringly obvious that in the end their motives are praise, adulation, and most importantly, CREATING A FOLLOWING. Every press conference and candlelight vigil feeds their egos. They start to see and rank-and-file of the Church as unthinking cattle while only they see The Truth. They are raised up in the pride of their hearts. Period. It's the same song, one millionth verse.
Renaissance NerdFebruary 9, 2015
Kelly is quite right that the Church is for the weak. It is not a showplace for the righteous but a hospital for sinners. For those who reckon themselves so very strong and wise, it is certainly pointless. As Joseph Smith said: "...and I say unto you there is more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth than over the ninety-and-nine just persons who are so righteous; they will be damned anyway, you cannot save them." The self-righteousness of the leftist set really astonishes me, and it runs the gamut. Whether they are religious or anti-religious, they do seem to bask in the glow of their own overweening self-esteem. I suppose it must feel nice to KNOW you're right about everything, that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid or wicked or both, and that every whim that pops into your mind is not only not wrong, but completely right! However I don't see how you can learn once you already know everything, so I'm happy to remain ignorant and always learning instead. And I'll bow to their claims of superiority over the rest of us once they can go a year without paying their tribute to the porcelain throne. Until then, they're just ordinary human beings with delusions of grandeur and ironbound self-righteousness.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine Proctor here. I've tried to answer some of these comments directly, but our content manager has lumped my responses altogether and called them "No Author." So sorry for the confusion. If you see a "no author" comment, that is from me and is actually addressing an earlier response.
Travis WhitsittFebruary 9, 2015
"...the Church and the God it represents is narrow and that asserting standards is bigotry. Maybe tomorrow when the Church becomes more progressive and international, it will drop its outmoded doctrines." How do you classify what occurred in 1978, especially in light of the Church's recent essay in which past prophetic declarations that the Priesthood ban was doctrinal were merely "theories?" Is it really so heretical to believe that what admittedly happened once could happen again?
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I don't believe that in pointing out the fallacy of some ideas that I am digging a pit for my neighbor.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I can't understand why Korihor, who admitted himself that he was operating under deception would be a favorite character.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
Kudos to the Church for publishing articles on difficult issues. I am thoroughly familiar with all of the accounts of Joseph Smith's vision and feel grateful we have the additional information on what he experienced. He still told us only a very small part of what happened there and said, "I can keep a secret until doomsday," and he did. We only have the smallest part. On translating the Book of Abraham, you should read Kerry Muhlstein's interesting articles, published on Meridian. I do not see that the Church actively works against the truth of its own history. What could be more comprehensive than the effort put forth on the extensive Joseph Smith Papers project.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
As I've stated above, I don't call either Kate or John anti-Christs. I think where there are problems we need to address them. However I also think that some people do lead other people out of the Church. For instance, Joseph Smith is a particular expertise of mine and when I hear the way he is caricatured I think that people who know little are often led away without putting circumstances in context.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I was unaware that she had referred to Meridian that way, but ultimately I feel that name-calling in any direction is not helpful. I don't call Kate or John Korihors. I really tried to state that clearly. But I think what we see in the arguments of Nehor and Korihor are the common attacks of our time on the Church. These arguments wouldn't fly and have such power if they didn't have certain kinds of appeal to them.
JulieFebruary 9, 2015
BRILLIANT article! This outlines all of the conversations that are going in my ward and stake currently. Everyone is saying that the dissident going on in the church right now is exactly what happened in Korihor's times. Most people are getting the comparison and yet when they point out (even gently) that there are male and female Korihors and their followers in our day, they are called judgmental and un-Christlike. So are those who point out these tactics in the Book of Mormon also judgmental and not Christlike? I don't think so. For so many years we have been warned about false prophets and false teachers and yet when we see it happening in real-time, we are slammed by their followers and shut down. Nothing shuts down a religious conversation faster than "stop being so unChristlike and judgmental!" They know this and are ironically abusing the very name of Christ and the very essence of judgment to stop the Korihor and anti-Christ dialogue they so want to teach.
No AuthorFebruary 9, 2015
I have been thinking about writing this article for a long time because the nature of deception is fascinating and worrisome to me. It is not specifically about John Dehlin or Kate Kelly. What is interesting is how seductive certain arguments are--specifically because they appeal to some of our best instincts. We truly want all of us to be with the Lord again. That's why Nehor's argument was intriguing to so many. I used to think it was only because people wanted to do whatever they wanted and then be saved in the kingdom of God that people followed Nehor. But I've come to believe his argument also played upon their sympathies for their fellows--which is about some of our kindest instincts. We kid ourselves if we think our instincts are kinder or more loving than the Lord's.
NickFebruary 9, 2015
What would it be like if the Pharisees and Sadducees had a magazine? Would they be accusers or would they silence opposition? Would they hold councils and decide how to get rid of the dissenters? Not posting this comment due to being a different opinion shows how scared LDSMag is of any differing views and ultimately weakens your arguments.
BrettFebruary 9, 2015
Declaring Dehlin & Kelly to be modern day antichrists still doesn't move us forward in addressing the important concerns that they have brought attention to. The issues those two discussed on their blogs and podcasts continue to create faith crises, inactivity, resignations, and marital/family strife. Maybe we should set aside criticisms of Dehlin, Kelly, and others and actually engage with the issues.
CarolineFebruary 9, 2015
Some of us inarticulate, cowardly folks truly do hope that these modern day Nehors and Korihors will become modern day Zeezroms. He is one of my favorite Book of Mormon heroes---searching, misguided for a time, but humble and honest and willing to change. He was able to tame his natural man and become a missionary for the cause he once tried to destroy. One of his companions, Amulek, also gave up popularity, riches, and even some of his family and friends, to repent and follow the Spirit he had allowed to enter his careless heart.
RyanFebruary 9, 2015
At times John has crossed the line into what you would probably consider heretical. However, Mormon Stories Podcast has had guests from across the belief spectrum. For a doubting, heterodox, or liberal believer in Mormonism many of the podcasts are extremely helpful and thought provoking. John isn't really a great orator, but he has created a platform for a great dialogue about faith and doubt. His foundation has also created other podcasts like Momon Matters (hosted by Dan Wotherspoon) that help people hold onto their beliefs and activity in the church despite heterodox beliefs. A person can listen to Mormon Stories and disagree, just as a person could listen to a General Conference talk and disagree. Most of us are just trying to find a way to live a good life. Some people find that in Mormonism, some people don't. No need to compare him to the Antichrists in the Book of Mormon.
JRPFebruary 9, 2015
Perhaps you should consider running a correction. I think you are calling Kate Kelly a Korihor and I do, in fact, think that you would. But in return, she has (perhaps even more) accurately compared you to the "Pharisees & Sadducees having a magazine."
BrettFebruary 9, 2015
Okay, so you've now compared Dehlin & Kelly to Book of Mormon antichrists. Declaring them as such and kicking them out of the church may well be justified. But Dehlin & Kelly didn't create the issues that they worked to address. The vilification of those working to engage with the problems we face as a church and a faith community won't move us forward. It won't reduce inactivity rates or resignation letters. It won't help marriages torn apart by faith crises. And it won't comfort those who have found themselves in the dark and lonely place of uncertainty. Maybe now that we have discisplined those you apparently consider to be "antichrists" we can turn to the important challenges they hoped we'd face.
Captain KiddFebruary 9, 2015
What if the LDS church published articles on difficult issues related to its claims but members were too afraid to read them? What if Joseph Smith gave contradictory statements about his First Vision and the church punished people for discussing it? What if Joseph Smith used a rock in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon and the church punished people for discussing it? What if Joseph was completely wrong in translating Egyptian and the church punished people for discussing it? What if the church actively worked against the truth and vilified people who knew their history? What if it was easier to call someone an anti-christ than to have a serious conversation about real history?
TinaFebruary 9, 2015
I would totally read a blog by Korihor. He's my favorite character in the book!
CosetteFebruary 9, 2015
Maurine, I love your articles and this one really hit the nail on the head. Thank you.
KimFebruary 9, 2015
Wow! I appreciate seeing the contemporary comparison to the old arguments. You nailed it!
Liberal MormonFebruary 9, 2015
Dig a pit for your neighbor much?
Tom BarrattFebruary 9, 2015
Your play on Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, and others marks a clear line in the sand. I would hope your readers would not classify them as anti Christ. They are indeed objectors to certain aspects of the mortal Church they claim to love. The church in Alma's day as well as in our day has the inherent right to ask people to leave but this same church and those who support it have no right to stifle agency and freedom. If I may ask, have the readers had their Born Again experience and their overcoming by the Holy Ghost? If they had they would take Kate, John, and others by the hand and look into their eyes and with true intent and love feel their pain and see their goodness. If we have truly been spiritually reborn why would we be so offended to put them aside as if they were dross? The mortal Church can act within its bounds and laws but we individually must act within the spiritual rebirth we have experienced. One must ask, how would our Savior treat Kate, John, and others who have likewise objected to the mortal Church? You decide that question.
Lloyd EldredgeFebruary 9, 2015
This saddens me. I've read Meridian faithfully for years, and used the Gospel Doctrine materials with my lessons almost every week I taught. But this article is so unfortunate. Is it truly impossible for one to be moral and supportive and be critical (or questioning) of the Church? I really thought what I'd learned in my 60+ years as a member was pretty much the opposite of the heartless position you espouse here. Perhaps the better title for this article would be "What if a Pharisee wrote and article and had it published in LDS mag?"
Tom JohnsonFebruary 9, 2015
Very good insight, Maurine.
KathythebraveFebruary 9, 2015
Thank you so much for this article Maurine! It is what is so much in my heart but so much better articulated than I could. I have been personally affected by some of these Korihors in the church as my husband fell prey to the "teachings" of the John Dehlin types who pointed fingers at those who were believing, and faithful. He embraced the Kate Kelly attitude of being of a superior mindset to all the rest of those who believe. The sad thing I have observed is that those who think they are "wise" do not see the sad loss of their perhaps once held wisdom and light. It did not end well for my husband nor my family. I hope I can be as brave as Gideon.
One OpinionFebruary 9, 2015
Once again, marvelously on target!
hollandparkFebruary 9, 2015
So True. Great article. Pres. Benson: "Each of the major writers of the Book of Mormon testified that he wrote for future generations...If they saw our day and chose those things which would be of greatest worth to us, is not that how we should study the Book of Mormon? We should constantly ask ourselves, “Why did the Lord inspire Mormon,or Moroni or Alma to include that in his record?What lesson can I learn from that to help me live in this day and age?”" Pres Uchtdorf: “The thing about truth is that it exists beyond belief. It is true even if nobody believes it...There is indeed such a thing as absolute truth—unassailable, unchangeable truth. Absolute truth is not dependent upon public opinion or popularity. Polls cannot sway it. Not even the inexhaustible authority of celebrity endorsement can change it....To make matters worse, we have an adversary, ‘the devil [who] as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.’ Because Satan is the great deceiver, he has many cunning strategies for keeping mortals from the truth. He does this by offering the belief that truth is relative, appealing to a sense of tolerance and fairness, and keeping the real truth hidden by claiming that one person’s “truth” is as valid as any other. Soon he entices to believe that there is an absolute truth out there somewhere but that it is impossible for anyone to know it. For those who already embrace the truth, his primary strategy is to spread the seeds of doubt".
ObserverFebruary 9, 2015
This spot on.
lorquilFebruary 9, 2015
HUZZAH!
AleceFebruary 9, 2015
Oh, Maurine. I would like to stand up and applaud. You have SO nailed the philosophies of our current Nehors and Korihors on the head! The expressions that make me the saddest, which come from such bloggers, etc., are that we can't reach the ideal in this lifetime, so we should just throw it out. Kudos, Kudos, Kudos for your comments on this timely and important subject!
RamboFebruary 9, 2015
I am saddened by all these things that are happening with quite a number of our fellow saints. I did see Korihor too really and it is a sad scene to witness his spirit lives in our time.
Kim BurnsFebruary 9, 2015
Another superbly written article on current events. That insightfully show up the sophistries of men and devils. Thank you Maureen for sharing your gifts with us who find it harder to articulate what they see and feel. so accurately.
ADD A COMMENT