Latter-day Saint Leaders Can’t Understand Why Teenagers Have Trouble Converting People to Their Church

Although the leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints spent decades instructing their official teenage representatives to rush to challenge everyone they meet to be baptized, they are apparently baffled as to why their official teenage representatives have for decades rushed to challenge everyone they meet to be baptized:

Church leaders don’t know where these practices began, but “it was never our intention to invite people to be baptized before they had learned something about the gospel, felt the Holy Ghost, and had been properly prepared to accept a lifelong commitment to follow Jesus Christ,” said President Ballard. “Our retention rates will dramatically increase when people desire to be baptized because of the spiritual experiences they are having rather than feeling pressured into being baptized by our missionaries.”

The paragraph occurs in an article from The Church News about a talk President M. Russell Ballard, acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, gave in June “to 164 new mission presidents and their companions” (companions meaning wives, since mission presidents are always male and married) about how to get missionaries to be more “Spirit-led,” or inspired by God, when asking people to be baptized.

The first thing I learned in the Missionary Training Center in the mid 1980s was the baptismal challenge, “because you’ll use it more than anything else.” It began, “When Joseph Smith and his scribe, Oliver Cowdery, translated the Book of Mormon, they learned that everyone must be baptized.” As it turned out I didn’t use the baptismal challenge more than anything else, because I felt it was unethical to ask people to commit to joining a church they didn’t know much about. However, I certainly knew it was the expectation:

Some missionaries have felt pressure to invite people to be baptized during the first lesson or even the first contact. “These missionaries have felt that inviting people to be baptized the very first time they meet them demonstrated the missionaries’ faith and supports their thinking that inviting people to be baptized early is what is expected,” [Ballard] said. “Other missionaries have felt that an invitation to be baptized early allowed them to promptly separate the wheat from the tares. In this case, some see the baptismal invitation as a sifting tool.”

Missionaries are typically exceedingly young—still in their teens or barely out of them. The virtues they are told to cultivate are obedience and orthodoxy, not innovation and invention. If missionaries have taken the first opportunity to challenge the people they’re teaching to be baptized, it’s because they were told to. Sure, we were told to listen to the Spirit about when to pop the baptismal question—but we were also told that the Spirit would likely lead us to do so sooner rather than later if we were doing our jobs properly and relying on inspiration about who to teach.

Don’t take my word for it. Check out the church’s website featuring the very first bit of text in the very first lesson for missionaries to teach: it’s all about preparing people for baptism.

Preach my gospel baptism 1

Scroll down for instructions about how to give someone an “Invitation to Be Baptized,” also in the first lesson:

Preach my gospel baptism 2

As explained in a history of Preach My Gospel, the church’s curriculum for missionaries since 2005, this emphasis on baptism was a deliberate, considered decision by Ballard, who became the chair of the Missionary Executive Council in 2002, and those he oversaw:

When Preach My Gospel was published, one of the main goals in a missionary’s teaching was to connect the baptismal interview questions with the content of what was being taught. Consequently, each of the five lessons in Preach My Gospel has the baptismal interview questions right at the beginning of the lesson.

Asking people to commit to joining the church shortly after they’re introduced to it is indeed problematic: it’s aggressive, confrontational, and creepy, and, as the article from the Church New notes, it makes people “feel like missionaries are more interested in the baptism event than in what they are really experiencing spiritually.”

But also problematic is claiming that adolescent missionaries turned people off from joining the church not because they were following flawed instructions but because they failed to hear and heed divine inspiration. You’d think, if nothing else, that Ballard et al could have asked for more inspiration in devising the missionary lessons, so the missionaries wouldn’t have screwed things up so badly.

For Ballard to feign ignorance of the role of his own work in this situation is a dodge and a deception so craven and contemptible that you have to be embarrassed for him. It would be so easy for him to say, “Our efforts didn’t work as well as planned, so we’re trying something new,” instead of blaming the crappy results on woefully inexperienced missionaries who were doing just what they’d been taught.

As things stand, M. Russell Ballard is gaslighting a bunch of kids who’ve believed that one way to receive inspiration is to listen to him. Clearly, he’s as lost and confused as anyone else.

Mormon Mission Impossible: William Shunn’s “The Accidental Terrorist”

Funny thing about Mormon missions: even though they’re voluntary, you can’t leave. Even though Mormon missionaries are adult volunteers, they can’t just say, “Sorry, this isn’t working, I’m going home now.” Have you ever wondered what happens if you try to leave? It’s rather surprising.

In The Accidental Terrorist, William Shunn recounts the exciting tale of how the Mormon mission machine mobilizes when a missionary attempts to escape — and the lengths they’ll go to stop him.

I don’t want to give any spoilers because this is suspenseful book, but I’d like to discuss (in vague terms) what I felt was the most interesting theme of the book: Mormon mission ethics. The author portrays the mission as a sort of alternate reality in which the normal ethical rules don’t apply. Or rather, they mostly apply, but the imperative to do what’s best for the mission and for the church trumps everything else.

There’s a sort of amazing sequence in the middle of the book in which the Mission President and other church leaders blatantly lie to Elder Shunn and manipulate him. Not only do they do it unapologetically, it’s like it doesn’t even occur to them that there are limits to what it’s OK to do for the sake of their higher purpose. Elder Shunn apparently internalizes this lesson, and later commits a felony himself (on his own initiative, but with the intention of helping the mission), and the shocking thing is how the entire Mormon community closes ranks around him — using every means, ethical and unethical — to smooth his path through the criminal justice system and minimize his punishment.

The author interweaves the parallel tale of Joseph Smith’s life with the primary narrative to illustrate the early influences that led to the formation of this remarkable community.

The Accidental Terrorist is an enjoyable read — far more action-packed than the typical mission memoir. You can find out how to order it from the book’s website where you will also find information about the author’s Science Fiction books and awards and his podcast.

The true meaning of service: Scott Miller and Mark Hubble’s “The Book of a Mormon”

Like many young Mormon adults, Scott Miller set off on a mission largely because he had always planned to — but wasn’t really prepared for what he was getting himself into.

This mission memoir takes place in the late 70’s — earlier than most others I’ve read. Amusing 70’s-specific tidbits include Elder Miller trying to explain the racist priesthood/temple ban and later finding out about the end of the ban from a non-member who had read about it in the newspaper. Curiously timely stuff if you’re interested in learning from history.

He also got the fun of experiencing the missionary uniform back when hats were obligatory. (Today they’re forbidden.) Aside from that, the mission experience has stayed remarkably constant over the years. Notably, it was already painfully obvious back then that tracting is ineffective, and consequently demoralizing. I wonder how many more decades it will take before the inspired leaders of the CoJCoL-dS will figure it out.

The central theme of the story is the contrast between real service and what the missionaries are expected to do. Early on his mission, Elder Miller has an experience that profoundly impacts him — he meets a clergyman of another faith who treats him with kindness and who jumps up to help someone else in an emergency, while Elder Miller does nothing… and asks himself why.

This story featured probably the most tyrannical mission president I’ve ever read about: a man devoid of compassion, full of calls to repentance, and so enamored with petty rules that he wrote an annex to the “white bible” for his missionaries. This extreme example naturally backfires and instead teaches Elder Miller the value of flexibility. His willingness to put people before rules allows him to perform an act of real service for his companion and even earns him an accidental conversion.

The Book of a Mormon is a good story with a well-constructed story arc and lively characters. For anyone who doesn’t know what a Mormon mission is like and wants to learn, this book is a good choice. For those of us who already have the general idea, it leans perhaps a little too far in the direction of being a documentary on Mormon missions and on the culture of Sweden, yet it is still quite an enjoyable story.

Review of City of Brick and Shadow

The novel by Tim Wirkus, City of Brick and Shadow, is a riveting tale of two missionaries in a sweeping Brazilian slum looking for a missing congregant they had recently baptized. All the characters are well-realized, from the unhappy local Mormons to the woman at the lanchonete to the mysterious Argentine, a kind of Satan figure who rules over Vila Barbosa. Further, the level of description is quite vivid, helping the reader feel like an unwilling visitor to the slum all along the way. In some respects, the mystery is pretty banal—a petty con artist is probably killed—but Wirkus raises several philosophical issues as well, all without making the story too heavy. Ultimately, the book raises a very Mormon question—what is the purpose of life, and what are we willing to pay to fulfill that purpose.

The two main characters, the missionaries, form a pair almost like Sherlock Holmes and John Watson, the main character being a slightly dull Watson dragged along by his energetic and condescending senior companion. And yet it’s much sadder than any story by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The climax is surprising and shocking, but the conclusion, not to give too much away, left me feeling quite unsettled and more than a little depressed. But that’s what good literature does, it makes one think and question and leave thinking things he or she hadn’t thought much about before, even if those thoughts aren’t always sunny. This is the kind of accomplishment Mormon literature should strive for. We don’t need to be told everything is wonderful for those who follow the Lord. We need to see life, and ourselves, as the imperfect creations we are, so that we can answer those difficult questions posed so clearly by this extremely well-written story.

Missionary Chat: Origins of the Bible

I’ll admit up front, this chat was basically just an attempt to show that Mormon missionaries are ignorant.  I wanted to know what they knew about the origins of the Bible.  Here we go:

Bailey: hi how are you?

Bart (me): I’m good. How are you?

Bailey: good

Bailey: what can we do for you?

Bart: I have a question.

Bailey: ok. go ahead.

Bart: What can you tell me about the origins of the bible – particularly the New Testament?

Bailey: Well we know that the new testament testifies of Christ’s life in Jerusalem. It was in that part of the world. The middle east.

Bart: Right. But how did those specific writings come to be considered canonical books in the Bible?

Bailey: Christ’s apostles where with him all the time and so they wrote the things that Christ did. They were special witnesses of Him.

Bart: And do you know who finally compiled them into the modern Bible.

Bailey: It was a man by the name of William Tyndale. It was in the early 1500’s I believe. He translated the Bible.

Bart: Okay. Thanks.

Bailey: Do you have any other questions?

Bart: Nope. That was it. Thanks for your help.

So, Bailey is clearly unaware of the fact that the Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – were not written by apostles of Jesus.  Of the books that bear the names of apostles, the authorship is in question for most of them (e.g., epistles of Peter, James, and John).  Bailey also didn’t answer my actual question but instead told me who translated the Bible into English, William Tyndale. This probably means that Bailey, like so many of my students, has no idea where the New Testament actually came from other than believing erroneously something like: the apostles wrote what they saw then bound it together in a nice little book when they were done, oh, around 32 CE – you know, right after Jesus was crucified.  I know this is kind of mean to do, but I think it’s interesting to note that Mormon missionaries are pretty oblivious about the origins of Christianity and the Bible that they are trying to convince people to believe in.

Missionary Chat: Native Americans cursed?

I had another question I wanted to run by “Mormons on the street”: Are Native Americans cursed?

Emily: Hello!

Sam (me): Hello!

Emily: What brings you to chat today?

Sam: I have a question about Mormon teachings.

Emily: Okay… we will do our best to help you

Sam: A friend of mine is LDS and he mentioned something that I thought was odd. I’m Native American, part of the Cherokee Nation. He said that the history of my ancestors is described in the Book of Mormon. That seemed interesting.

Emily: Oh wow! Well the Book of Mormon The Book of Mormon is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible. It is a record of God’s dealings with ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains the fulness of the everlasting gospel. oops said the book of mormon twice.. sorry! (She then posted this link.)

Sam: Well, I’ve been reading the Book of Mormon and found a passage disturbing: 2 Nephi 5:21: And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. Does that mean I’m cursed?

Martha: so the blackness of the skin was not the curse.. the curse was that the lamanites didn’t want to hear the words of God so they were cursed to be not of God meaning they can no longer feel his presence in their lives because they chose to live in their sin.. the color of their skin was just a sign, so that nephites could recognize them.. so the skin color at that time served as a reminder for them that they have chosen not to follow God

Sam: So, dark skin is just a symbol of a curse?

Martha: There is a difference between the mark and the curse. The mark placed upon the Lamanites was a dark skin (see Alma 3:6). The curse was not the dark skin but being “cut off from the presence of the Lord” (2 Nephi 5:20). Notice that in both Alma 3:7 and Alma 3:14 the conjunction and is used between the curse and the mark. This implies that they are not the same thing. The people brought the curse upon themselves: “And even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation” (Alma 3:19). Through righteousness the curse may be removed, but the mark may remain as it has with the Lamanites (see commentary for 2 Nephi 5:20–25 on page 62).

Martha: so we don’t believe that you are cursed.. unless you choose to disobey the Father willingly now.. and the same curse would come upon me if I would choose that.. but the mark was something that they needed to have in that time recognize the people.. that will not happen again.. the mark has remained in their ancestors.. but that shouldn’t affect you today if you choose to follow God.. does that make sense?

Sam: Yeah, sort of. But it seems kind of racist for god to mark people with dark skin to symbolize a curse, don’t you think?

Martha: well at that time those people were very wicked.. and God did that for various reasons.. one of them being to protect the people who followed God, so that they wouldn’t mix their blood with the wicked at that time.. but as you read in the book of mormon a lot of Lamanites changed but in several hundred years.. and accepted God.. but we don’t know all of the reasons why God needed to do that…

Martha: I don’t know the meaning of all things, but I do know that God loves His children and He wants them to be happy and His ways are higher.. and we with our minds cannot understand it all, but if you know that God loves you and you want to follow Him nothing can stand in your way

Sam: Okay. Thanks.

Martha: did this help you at all?

Sam: Yep.

Martha: so are you interested to learn more about the Church?  do you have other questions?

Sam: That was my only question for today. I may have others in the future, but that’s good for now. Thanks.

Martha: maybe you would like to keep in touch with us?  and we could help you in the future?

Sam: If I have more questions, I can always come back here, right?

Martha: but what makes you interested in our church?

Sam: I just thought what my friend said was interesting and what the Book of Mormon said was interesting. I might think differently about my friend if he really believes skin color is a curse from god.  But you said it wasn’t.

Martha: so have you been reading the Book of Mormon?

Sam: Parts of it, yes.

Emily: Well we hope we have been able to help you today. But as missionaries and members of the church we would love to invite you to pray and ask God if the Book of Mormon is true, we know that he can give you a personal witness that it truly is the word of God. We haven’t learned that this church is true and that the Book of Mormon is true from others telling us but from searching ourselves and asking God.

Martha: that is cool! we know that only through reading and praying about the Book you can find out if this is the truth

Martha: maybe you could read one chapter today ? it is in Moroni 10 it is in page 500 something.. 529  it talks about the promise that God has given to everyone who want to know if it is true

Sam: That seems like an odd way to determine whether or not a book is true. Why not study it from a scientific perspective to see if the factual claims the book makes are accurate?

Martha: well ,… we cannot convince you about the truthfulness of this word but we can invite you to ask God.. because there will be many opinions and “evidence” of different things.. but if you truly receive a witness from God you cannot deny it

Martha: do you believe in God?

Sam: Well, it depends on what you mean by God.

Martha: I just want to ask you Sam, what if you find out at the last day when you pass away from this life that everything we tell you was true.. and you never tried to find it out for yourself when you were here on earth?

Sam: That seems kind of like a manipulative tactic. You’re trying to induce me to feel fear to manipulate me into believing. That seems kind of disingenuous to me. Doesn’t it to you?

Martha: well , I don’t know.. I am just saying these things because I have received a witness from God.. and my life has been so blessed because of this Gospel.. my purpose is not to persuade you to believe in it but to invite you to try it for yourself.. I think me trying to persuade you with facts .. if I would pour different facts over you and tell you everything I know and would ask you to believe because I believe I think that would be manipulative.. but I am just inviting you to try it for yourself.. and then it is all up to you – your desire to know and your communication with God

Martha: but how can you know that these “facts ” are true or not?

Sam: Providing people with facts isn’t manipulative. It’s persuasive. It’s using evidence and logic and critical thinking. Praying relies on emotions. Emotions are manipulative. Well, I’m pretty sure the earth revolves around the sun, even though it doesn’t seem like it.  I think we know that is true.  Or are you saying the only way we can know that is by asking God?


Martha: I know that praying is more then emotions.. answers from God are not only emotion based..

Martha: well but people believed hundreds of years ago that the earth was flat.. and it was a fact to them

Martha: God knows everything

Martha: He created the universe

Martha: He has all of the answers even about science, because He is Father of that all

Martha: and again this is what I believe is a fact

Martha: but to you it is only my theory ..

Martha: so that is why we invite everyone to pray and to find out for themselves

Martha: if there is God .. if He loves you , you should be able to receive answers.. something that is hard to explain .. but it is up to you to try it or not

Sam: But how could you know the answer is from God?

Martha: that is a good question and it takes time and practice to really recognize, but something that helps you too recognize these answers and receive them is Faith.. faith – trust in something you don’t see but believe is there. and hope that God will answer

Martha: and this is again.. up to you.. if you have at least a little degree of faith .. or a desire to believe you can receive an answer

Sam: So, you don’t actually know if God is answering your prayers? Could it be aliens? Or evil gods? Or just emotional manipulation?

Martha: well I know it is God.. because of the scriptures, and because of the feelings I have felt .. and because of everything that has happend in my life.. and all of the experiences when I have received an answer from Him … that is why it is so important to get to know Him through scriptures.. .. yes it is scary to think all of what you are saying.. it could be but if you don’t ask you will never know.. and you can say that those are theories.. or facts based on something someone has said to you.. but do you really want to know for yourself?

Martha: do you want the answer to this question?

Martha: if you will study the book of mormon with real intent and will pray God humbly in the name of Jesus Christ you will receive a witness from the Holy Ghost

Martha: and Holy Ghost will manifest unto you the truthfulness of these things..

Martha: and it is not an emotion it is something greater.. and it is hard to explain it.. but it is something you have to experience to know

Sam: You seem really determined to convince me that praying to get an emotional response will actually work. Are you trying to convince me or you?

Martha: you keep talking about emotions.. I know that this witness is not based on your emotions.. yes they are there too but it is something grater as I said.. and I am not here to convince but to testify of something I have witnessed in my life.. I wouldn’t be here on my mission if I hadn’t felt an answer from God.. if I hadn’t got to know my Father and most of all if I hadn;t received my own testimony of the Atonement of Jesus Christ.. His Sacrifice and His love for me

Martha: and if you want to believe and know it for yourself you have to decide.. but I can’t deny what I have experienced and what I know.

Martha: because I have tried to do it before.. I wasn’t always so sure of what I belie in.. I tried deny these things and I was so unhappy.. I was lost.. I have never been happier ion my life , because I finally understand the truth

Sam: Is the response “something you feel”?

Martha: well it is hard to explain and describe it it is something you have to witness for yourself.. until then you will think that I am deceived or confused with my own emotions or something else .. of course it is easier to think that way

Martha: and I don’t blame you for it

Martha: all I can do is to invite you to try it for yourself

Sam: Well, I think you could do more. Like provide scientific evidence that the Book of Mormon holds up under critical inquiry. That would be pretty compelling.

Martha: so I was saying.. there are so many things I have studiesthat I could tell you and provide evidence.. but do you need them because you want to know that the book is true just because you are curious or because you would want to know if there is God and that the Christ lives? .. there were many people who saw the Golden plates in real life when they were here on the earth .. they wrote down their witness but then changed their minds and decided not to follow the teachings.. this proof really didn’t change their lives.. they never denied that they saw the plates

Martha: so the question is why do you want evidence? do you think you will follow God if you will have it?

Sam: So, where are the plates?

Sam: If there was overwhelming empirical evidence that God existed, I would follow that God.

Martha: well if everyone knew with perfect knowledge that there is God they wouldn’t want to sin , they would only make the choices they think God wants them to and that would take away their agency.. of you have faith and you want to believe and want to change your life and become better and you truly search for Him you become greater than the person who has full knowledge of that.. I don’t know how ot explain it

Martha: for example- if you knew there was a test in school on a certain date you would only prepare couple days before and wouldn’t really learn.. but if you would know that it will come sometime you would actually study and learn more and would gain more from that

Martha: so God is wise .. He knows why it was so important for us to come here on this Earth to grow and He knows what is the best way for us to grow

Martha: but we need this experience … we need tomake mistakes on our own and fix them and learn from them .. we need to feel sorrow and pain here so that we would know the difference..

Martha: but God can give you a witness that you are moving in the right direction He can send you a witness from Holy Gost so that you would know which book to read which Church to join to know what is the truth and what to follow in this Earth to return back to Him,..

Martha: one day everyone will know that God is real with perfect knowledge.. and they will look back on this life and will say – I wish I had done this and that.. I wish I had tried to known this before..

Martha: because I would have made other decisions

Martha: and the truth comes from the scriptures.. from the prophet.. and you have every right to ask God if this book is true.. if this is a direction that He wants you to go

Martha: because there are many ways to go in this life many opportunities to follow different if you want to know if there is one way.. if there is the surest way to happiness.. in this life and life to come God will bear a witness to you if you will ask Him.. but it depends on that if you really are searching for that.. so… it is up to you..

Sam (Martha paused for about a minute here, so I interjected): Okay. Thanks. Got to go now.

Martha: well I hope you will at least think about it and if you ever have questions.. you know that you can always turn to your friend..or here I guess.. it was nice talking to you!

Martha: if you ever want to talk to us again.. you can leave your e-mail or something

Sam: Bye.


Commentary: These missionaries were better prepared than the last ones.  I’ve never found the distinction between the “curse” and the skin color all that compelling, but at least they knew what apologetic argument to use.  Of more interest to me, however, was their clear belief that the Book of Mormon is a literal history of Native Americans.  I guess they missed the memo about it being about a book about some people “among” the ancestors of Native Americans.

And, I apologize for the length of this one.  Martha was really determined.  I wasn’t even trying to lead her on, but she wouldn’t let it go.

Young women, Missions, and Church Culture

According to a Trib article Ashley Farr, a former Miss North Salt Lake Teen Miss USA, now a missionary in South Korea, has every expectation of being a parent and a businesswoman. She has some specific goals including an internship at Goldman Sachs, and being the chief executive of a fashion or technology company. She also expects to be the wife of a mission president. The article doesn’t say if she intends to marry a sitting mission president, or a young man who is on the mission president trajectory.

It occurred to me as I thought about this young woman, a finance major at BYU, and probably hundreds, perhaps thousands others like her, was that it would probably be at least thirty years, and probably longer, before her husband would be in a position to be called as a mission president. If she accomplishes the other goals she has set, she might be the one called as the mission president. That may seems unlikely given the present church leadership’s position on the acceptable role of women in the church, and in particular their reaction to the ordain women movement. What I don’t think the leaders realize is that the OW movement is an artifact of sending women on missions, and they have just upped the ante by reducing the age requirement and now seeing thousands of young women seeking to serve missions.

Many of the women involved with OW are returned missionaries. These women, as well as most of the women who have served missions are well versed in church doctrine (to the extent that is possible these days), scriptures, and the process of church governance. They are much further up the ladder with the inside story than most LDS women, and they are equal in knowledge with the males. In addition, and this is based upon personal conversation with returned sister missionaries, they often were subject to what they considered domineering, if not mindless, supervision by their male missionary cohorts. They know that they have something to offer.

I suspect that a good proportion of the 23K young women on mission are like Sister Farr and openly acknowledge they have career ambitions, and that part of the reason they wish to serve a mission is to develop skills that will serve them in future careers. Even though the Church leadership has hammered away for at least forty years that men are the breadwinner, and women remain the homemaker (“Sister, come home” they cry), it apparently is losing traction. Some of the most outspoken female voices against the OW movement are women who have professional lives, working outside the home. There is a push back against the fixed role of women even by some who considered themselves the most faithful.

It will be interesting to see if church leaders ever come to see that their efforts to keep young men and women bound to the church with its male dominance by sending them off on missions will bring about, particularly among females, the very things they are trying to stem.

Missionary Chat: Omniscience vs. endowments

Today’s missionary chat is based on a question my wife raised that I always found interesting: If God is omniscient, then why do Mormons have endowments done?  Wouldn’t God know who to let into the Celestial Kingdom without evidence of having an endowment done?  Here’s the chat:

Angie: hi!

Bob (me): Hi Angie.

Angie: hello! how are today?

Bob: I’m well.  How are you?

Angie: Fantastic! :)

Angie: Is there anything that we can help you with?

Bob: Yep, I have a question.

Angie: alright! what is it?

Bob: First, do you believe that God is omniscient (i.e., knows everything)?

Melody: We know that he know every things

Bob: Okay. I just wanted to make sure. That leads to my primary question. If God is omniscient, then why do Mormons have to receive the endowment? If I’m not mistaken, the endowment is a gift of knowledge that includes learning handshakes and passwords to get past angels who stand as sentinels to the Celestial Kingdom. If God knows who is worthy and who isn’t, why the handshakes and passwords?

Angie: sorry, I really don’t know about that because as a purpose of a missionary is to invite others to come unto Christ. and we Share the Basic belief.

Bob: Hmm… Aren’t endowments required to get into the Celestial Kingdom?

Angie: yes all the I know that we need to do all the Temple ordinances,because it is a command to us

Angie: so you are a member in the church?

Bob: No. I’m just very interested in Mormonism and someone pointed out that this seems odd.  So I thought I’d ask a missionary.

Melody: Where are you from?

Bob: I live in Florida right now.

Angie: cool! so did you meet before the missionaries?

Bob: Yep. I’ve met with many missionaries.

Angie: so how is it?

Bob: Not sure what you mean.  If you’re wondering what I think of the missionaries, I’d say that I don’t find their arguments compelling enough to join the LDS Church.

[The chat session has ended.]

They killed the chat at this point.

So, this question was clearly too “deep” for these missionaries.  I’m not convinced they even knew what “omniscient” meant.  I also find it sad that people do things because it is a “commandment,” no questions asked.  And, finally, I am transcribing the chat exactly as it occurred.  So, the typos and grammar of the missionaries are exactly what they wrote.  I’m not sure how well they end up representing the LDS Church when they write so incoherently.

Missionary Chat: Polygamist God

In my ongoing pursuit to learn what “on the ground” Mormons believe, here’s another Missionary Chat.  This one on God the Father and his wife/wives.

Ken: Hello.

Marcel: welcome back (creepy that they know it’s me again)

Bob (me): Hi. I have a question for the two of you.

Marcel: sure

Bob: Do you, personally, believe that God the Father has multiple wives?

Ken: we are here to represent the Church’s official position-in regards to this question there is no official doctrine on the matter

Bob: I can appreciate that you represent the Church’s official position. But you have personal views on these issues, right? So, I’m wondering what your personal views are.

Ken: sure, but they are no more than speculation

Bob: Perfect!  I love speculation!

Marcel: what interest you about that topic?

Bob: Just wondering what actual Mormons believe about this.

Marcel: Just like ken said, there is no official belief

Ken: there are varying opinions on matters that are not clear-however, we know that there is no need to focus on such matters because they are not essential knowledge at this point-it is much more important to have a testimony of Jesus Christ and the Book of Mormon

Bob: I can grep that. What is your opinion on this?

Marcel: I do not have an opinion on this topic

Bob: Ken?

Ken: honestly, I haven’t given it enough thought to come to a certain stance-again because its not important to know at this stage in my life

Ken: have you had the opportunity to read and pray about the Book of Mormon?

Bob: Yep.

Marcel: ok, do you believe the book of mormon to be true?

Bob: What do you mean by “true”?

Marcel: I mean true, or its from God

Bob: That’s an intriguing definition of true. The dictionary defines it as: “in accordance with fact or reality”

Marce: you know what I mean, you can define it however you want

Ken: this is a talk that our church leader has given on the matter. we invite you to take a look!

Bob: Reading it now.

Ken: He does a great job of explaining what we mean by that term-and how it applies in our understanding of physical and spiritual matters

Ken: awesome-get back to us when you’re done

Bob: According to that article, truth is, “His gospel. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ.”  So, was Marcel asking me if the Book of Mormon is the gospel of Jesus Christ?

Marcel: Yes

Bob. Oh. Okay. Interesting question.

Marcel: why interesting?

Bob: Well, how can anyone “know” what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is? Christ was illiterate and didn’t write down his “gospel.” And the few records we have of his supposed teachings are very contradictory as they were written decades after his death by a variety of people with different agendas.  So, how could I know if the Book of Mormon is the gospel of Jesus Christ if I have no idea what the gospel of Jesus Christ is?

Marcel: You will know what the gospel of jesus christ is by reading the book of mormon and praying to God

Marcel: even though those men wrote after christ death, they were inspired by God to write the record

Bob: Hmmm… Marcel, your first point seems like circular logic. I’m supposed to determine if the Book of Mormon is the gospel of Jesus Christ without knowing what the gospel of Jesus Christ is by reading a book that is claiming to be the gospel of Jesus Christ.  What evidence is there that it is the gospel of Jesus Christ?  Did Jesus write it?  Do you have evidence external to the book itself indicating that Jesus wrote it?

And, no response…

So, according to Ken and Marcel, D&C 131 is not official doctrine (though I’m sure apologists would claim that “the new and everlasting covenant of marriage” is just “temple marriage” and not polygamy, even though it was originally polygamy).  The number of wives god has just doesn’t matter enough to have an opinion about it.

And according to a former airline pilot, truth is “the gospel of Jesus Christ.”  Take that Merriam-Webster!

Missionary Chat: Gods & Planets

I’m kind of enjoying chatting with the missionaries online.  Since it’s on my own terms, it’s kind of nice.  Here’s my discussion from this week:

Joey: Hello.

Sean: Hello!

Bob (me): Hi. I have a question for the two of you.

Sean: Ok.

Bob: Do you, personally, believe that, after you die, you will become gods and get to create your own planets?

Joey: We believe that we have the potential to inherit all that God hath. We don’t know what that will look like literally.  There is a great article on the subject if you would be interested in reading in more detail.  (posted link to recent article)

Bob: I read the article. I know what it says.  I want to know what Joey and Sean (you two) personally believe.

Joey: I believe that just as a seed grows up to be a strong tree just like the tree it fell from, we have the potential to grow up to be just like our Father in whose image we were created.

Bob: Nice metaphor, Joey.  Can I take that to mean that you believe you can become a god?

Joey: I believe I have divine potential to become like God. I don’t believe that I will replace God, nor do I believe that I know of all the powers I will have as far as creating worlds and such. I do believe, however, that I will be able to have children with my wife in heaven as an eternal divine being.

Bob: Excellent.  And Sean, what do you believe?

Sean: I’m not exactly sure what will happen in the next life, but I do know that God has told us we will become like Him. As far as what exactly this entails, I don’t know. It is His purpose, God’s purpose, to help us come back to Him. We are His children in the most real sense.  As His children, I don’t see how anything separates us in the essence of what we can become. Just as a child follows the example of their father on this earth.

Bob: Great! Thank you both.

Sean: No problem. Anything else we can help you with?

Bob: If you’re okay with it, can I clarify one point in what you wrote, Sean?  You wrote, “Just as a child follows the example of their father on this earth.” What about women?

Sean: Sure. I just said it like that because God is our Father in Heaven.  We’re following God. Him. The roles of men and women in heaven will be different, yes, but we will be together, one in purpose. Marriage is meant to be a binding union, where man and wife become one.

Bob: So, men will become something “like” God. What will women become?

Sean: The same.

Bob: Goddesses? Mothers in Heaven?

Sean: Yeah, pretty much.  Like I said, we don’t know exactly, but it’s safe to say yes to that.

Bob: Okay. Great. Thank you.

Sean: You’re welcome!

So, LDS, Inc. is downplaying the famous couplet, but the missionaries still believe it.  And they’re sexist.