Prophet: Title or Description?

Joseph Smith taught that the attainment of knowledge and intelligence in this life is a factor of the diligence and obedience exerted by the individual. He taught that blessings come commensurate with obedience to God’s law.¹ In contrast to this idea there is a notion that the receipt of a church calling automatically entitles an individual to spiritual gifts not previously obtained. Members would like to think that church leaders either receive some special gift upon selection, or that God specifically chooses men for leadership callings who already possess certain spiritual gifts. Bruce R. McConkie taught that the former assertion is false:

The idea is prevalent that with the call to the prophetic office comes an endowment of spiritual ability, understanding, and power that was not previously experienced and that exceeds that which is enjoyed generally by righteous men. Challenging that conclusion, Elder Bruce R. McConkie has written that a call to positions of leadership 'adds little knowledge or power of discernment to an individual, although every person called to a position in the Church does grow in grace, knowledge, and power by magnifying the calling given him.'(Joseph Fielding McConkie, “Seeking_the_Spirit,” p. 33.)

The falseness of the second assertion is by the fact that, according to President Joseph F. Smith, apostles since Joseph Smith’s death have been called by men and not by God.²

The Lord said that it is the duty for the President of the church to be a seer, a prophet, a translator, and a revelator, just like Moses.

And again, the duty of the President of the office of the High Priesthood is to preside over the whole church, and to be like unto Moses—Behold, here is wisdom; yea, to be a seer, a revelator, a translator, and a prophet, having all the gifts of God which he bestows upon the head of the church....Wherefore, now let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence. He that is slothful shall not be counted worthy to stand, and he that learns not his duty and shows himself not approved shall not be counted worthy to stand. Even so. Amen. (D&C 107:91-92,99-100.)

Note that God did not say that these gifts would be given automatically to the person deemed by the hierarchy to be the next president of the church (or, as the case may be, the next apostle). He said it was the duty of the individual thus selected to obtain those gifts. This is a description of a responsibility to obtain, not a description of a gift bestowed.

Though God charges the president of the church to become a prophet, seer, and revelator, and though history suggests the wisdom in voting for a man who already possesses these gifts, the concept that a man will be given the gifts of prophecy, seership, and revelation simply because he is ordained president of the church is not supported by scripture or history.

Brigham Young distinguished between the right to administer the church and the ability to obtain God’s word:

Perhaps it may make some of you stumble, were I to ask you a question—Does a man's being a Prophet in this Church prove that he shall be the President of it? I answer, no! A man may be a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and it may have nothing to do with his being the President of the Church. Suffice it to say, that Joseph was the President of the Church, as long as he lived: the people chose to have it so. He always filled that responsible station, by the voice of the people. Can you find any appointing him the President of the Church? The keys of the Priesthood were committed to Joseph, to build up the Kingdom of God on the earth, and were not to be taken from him in time or in eternity; but when he was called to preside over the Church, it was by the voice of the people; though he held the keys of the Priesthood, independent of their voice. (Brigham Young, JD 1:133.)

A seer is someone to whom God communicates through the use of “Urim and Thummim”—physical media into which a seer gazes.³ Urim and Thummim can mean the specific glasses used by Joseph Smith and ancient seers, but properly refers more generally to other objects used for the same purpose, such as Joseph’s seer stones and Joseph of Egypt’s goblet. Joseph Smith used both the Urim and Thummim and several seer stones. Though the church possesses several of Joseph Smith’s seer stones, none have been used since his death.⁴ Orson Pratt lamented the lack of the gift of seership in post-Joseph church leaders:

This failure to realize all the blessings and powers of the Priesthood does not apply to the elders and lesser Priesthood only; but it applies to the higher quorums, and comes home to ourselves, who are Apostles of Jesus Christ. We are presented before the Church, and sustained as prophets, seers and revelators, and we have received oftentimes the gift of prophecy and revelation, and have received many great and glorious gifts. But have we received the fullness of the blessings to which we are entitled? No, we have not. Who, among the Apostles have become seers, and enjoy all the gifts and powers pertaining to that calling? (Orson Pratt, JD 25:145.)

Joseph Smith taught that “a prophet is a prophet only when he was acting as such.” (Joseph Smith, DHC-5: 265.) In other words, one who prophesies can be called a prophet. One who does not, cannot. There is no such thing as a true prophet who does not prophecy. “There is no calling of God to man on earth but what brings with it the evidences of its authenticity.” (Brigham Young, JD 9:27.)

Do our leaders receive prophecy or receive revelation? Joseph F. Smith stated:

I have never pretended nor do I profess to have received revelations. I never said I had a revelation except so far as God has shown to me that so called Mormonism is God’s divine truth; that is all. (Reed Smoot Hearings Vol.1, p. 483, 1904.)

But is President Joseph F. Smith’s experience general among church leaders? There have been four canonized revelations to the successors of Joseph Smith: D&C 136, D&C 138, and Official Declarations 1 and 2. Brigham Young received D&C 136 on Jan. 14, 1847, nearly a year before he was sustained as President of the Church on Dec 27[th] , 1847. According to church doctrine, he did not have the authority to receive revelation for the church at the time. D&C 138 was received by Joseph F. Smith on October 3[rd] , 1918. He read the words in the section as a conference talk the next day. A few weeks later, it was “accepted” by his counselors, the Twelve, and the Patriarch. However, the section was not sustained by the church for another 57 years. The first official declaration is the manifesto of Wilford Woodruff, which was meant as a deceitful appeasement to the U.S. government—it did not actually end plural marriage.⁵ The second official declaration is a report of President Kimball lifting the priesthood ban. Most members assume that President Kimball received a revelation where God stated to lift the ban. Instead, President Kimball decided to lift the ban, and prayed that God would speak to him if that was not his will.⁶ In absence of a message from God, he lifted the ban.⁷ The claim of only four revelations over more than

150 years does not make a strong case for the persistence of modern prophecy. The substance and circumstances of the four revelations weaken the argument further. More than half the current church membership has joined or been born since 1978, meaning that, even if the lifting of the priesthood ban was a bona fide revelation, most modern Mormons find themselves in the awkward position of preaching the need for modern revelation without ever having witnessed an example of it.

For fear of the implications, Modern Mormons rationalize away the lack of revelation by redefining the term to mean emotional impressions, supposing that the same God who dictated hundreds of pages of written revelation in less than 20 years of Joseph’s ministry now only communicates through feelings. The brethren do not think “something is wrong with or lacking in [them]” if “they do not receive frequent, miraculous, or strong” revelations from God. In fact, expecting such is “look[ing] beyond the mark.” Instead, it is “quite normal” to only experience God’s “customary pattern” of communication as “small an incremental impressions...over time.”⁸ These are not revelations, but opinions. Joseph Smith taught of opinions:

We all form opinions on spiritual matters. Every man has a right to believe whatever his conscience will bear; but, we must seek that straight and narrow path which leads into the kingdom of God and offers the opportunity to be resurrected in the celestial glory. ‘Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.’ (Matthew 7) Opinions, where we have the word of the Lord, are worth nothing. Since the days of the Savior, they have strangely divided men into almost as many sects, as the number of the name of the beast that John saw. All men have a right to their opinions, but to adopt them for rules of faith and worship, is wrong, and may finally leave the souls of them that receive them for spiritual guides, in the telestial kingdom. (Evening and Morning Star, Vol. 1, p. 69.)

In the lack of prophecy from leaders today, we see the fulfillment of this prophecy from Isaiah:

All you wild beasts, you animals of the forest, come and devour! Their watchmen are altogether blind and unaware; all of them are but dumb watchdogs unable to bark, lolling seers fond of slumber. Gluttonous dogs, and insatiable, such indeed are insensible shepherds. They are all diverted to their own way, every one after his own advantage. Come, they say, let us get wine and have our fill of liquor. For tomorrow will be like today, only far better! (Isaiah 56:9-12, Gileadi Translation.)

Modern Mormons would here object by claiming that everything church leaders say is revelation from God. It is a mistake to assume this. The Lord said that the words of leaders are only his word when given by the Holy Ghost:

And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost. And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. (D&C 68:3-4.)

That this is not always the case is readily apparent. President Harold B. Lee said,

It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they write. (Harold B. Lee, “Stand Ye In Holy Places” p. 162-163.)

Elder B.H. Roberts taught similarly:

Sometimes, the servants of God stand on planes infinitely lower than the one here described. Sometimes they speak merely from their human knowledge, influenced by passions; influenced by the interests of men, and by anger, and vexation, and all those things that surge in upon the minds of even servants of God. When they so speak, then that is not Scripture, that is not the word of God, nor the power of God unto salvation; but when they speak as moved upon by the Holy Ghost, their voice then becomes the voice of God. So that men, even some of high station in the Church, sometimes speak from merely human wisdom; or from prejudice or passion; and when they do so, that is not likely to be the word of God....In any event it must be allowed by us that many unwise things were said in times past, even by prominent elders of the Church; things that were not in harmony with the doctrines of the Church; and that did not possess the value of Scripture, or anything like it; and it was not revelation. (B.H. Roberts, “Defense of the Faith and the Saints” [Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1912], 2:455-61.)

Some claim that impressions are the same as revelation.⁹ Modern Mormon leaders consider any impression they receive to be just as good as God’s transcribable voice:

Most of the revelation that comes to leaders and members of the Church comes by the ‘still small voice' or by a feeling rather than by a vision or a voice that speaks specific words to our hearing. (Dallin Oaks, “In His Own Time, in His Own Way,” New Mission Presidents' Seminar, June 27, 2001.)

Yet, President Joseph F. Smith would not consider Elder Oaks’ experiences as revelation:

...I am susceptible, I think, of the impressions of the spirit of the Lord upon my mind at any time, just as any good Methodist or any other good church member might be. And so far as that is concerned, I say yes; I have had impressions of the spirit upon my mind very frequently, but they are not revelations. (Reed Smoot Hearings Vol.1, p. 483, 1904.)

Promoting one’s impressions to the status of revelation is indeed dangerous. Joseph Smith taught:

...nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God. Thousands have felt the influence of its terrible power and baneful effects. Long pilgramages have been undertaken, penances endured, and pain, misery and ruin have followed in their train; nations have been convulsed, kingdoms overthrown, provinces laid waste, and blood, carnage and desolation are habiliments in which it has been clothed. (Joseph Smith, TPJS 205.)

George Cannon said:

There is one thing that we have all got to be very careful about, and that is this: I have seen Elders in my experience that when they got their own spirit moved very much they imagined that it was the Spirit of God, and it was difficult in some instances to tell the difference between the suggestions of their own spirit and the voice of the spirit of God. This is a gift of itself, to be able to distinguish that which suggests itself to our own hearts and that which comes from God. (George Q Cannon JD 22:104.)

What are the implications of no revelation among leaders of the church after Joseph Smith? Joseph said,

All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which is after the order of the Son of God. (Joseph Smith, TPJS, p. 375-376.)

Orson Pratt said about revelation:

In all ages and dispensations, when the Church of God has been on the earth, the gift of revelation has been one of the most important gifts of the Spirit. It is essential to the very existence of the Church; for without it, the Church would become as lifeless as the human body without food, drink, or air. As the mortal body would die and become disorganized without these necessary elements, so the body of Christ---the Church---would die, become disorganized, and cease to exist on the earth, if this essential spiritual gift were taken from it. The gift of revelation is the spiritual food, and drink, and the very life of the Church. Without it, God never has accepted nor ever will recognize any Church, as His own, in any age or generation, or among any people, nation, or tongue. (Orson Pratt, “Spiritual Gifts”.)

If God does not change, and the restoration’s purpose was to bring Zion, and Zion is not yet here, shouldn’t we expect just as many revelations today as in Joseph’s day? Joseph described the reason for religious leaders' lack of revelation:

What is the reason that the Priests of the day do not get revelation? They ask only to consume it upon their lusts. Their hearts are corrupt, and they cloak their iniquity by saying there are no more revelations. But if any revelations are given of God, they are universally opposed by the priests and Christendom at large; for they reveal their wickedness and abominations. (Joseph Smith, April 10, 1842. DHC 4:588.)

What about visions? God said “If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.” (Numbers 12:6.) Sidney Rigdon preached that visions were “one of the most important parts (of the Spirit’s work) in the salvation of men.” He said it was a necessary quality of any people of God, and that the lack thereof always signaled apostasy from God:

There is no society of which we have an account in the revelations of God, that he acknowledged as his own, except they had visions among them, and that as long as they continued to walk according to the directions of the Holy Spirit...We readily admit that a corrupt religion can exist, and false prophecies exist, and sectarian dogmas abound; men-made worshipers increase, and the world abound in a religion that the Lord was not the author of, and yet no visions be among them; but wherever the truth of heaven abounds, there will visions abound also; for it is a part of heaven’s scheme to save men, and without it, we are not authorized to say there is salvation (Sidney Rigdon, “Faith of the Church,” Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate 1:9.)

Lehi, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and other prophets of the scriptures were capable of teaching others how to come back into the presence of God because they had been there themselves and thus knew the way. In Lehi’s vision of the tree of life, it is not until after he reaches the tree of life that he attempts to lead his family there. Yet, none of Joseph’s successors have publicly claimed to have been in the Lord’s presence (see “Witnesses”). For instance, Brigham Young said:

I have flattered myself, if I am as faithful as I know how to be to my God, and my brethren, and to all my covenants, and faithful in the discharge of my duty, when I have lived to be as old as was Moses when the Lord appeared to him, that perhaps I then may hold communion with the Lord, as did Moses [it was believed Moses spoke to God face-to-face at age 80]...I am not now in that position, though I know much more than I did twenty, ten, of five years ago...If I am faithful until I am eighty years of age, perhaps the Lord will appear to me and personally dictate me in the management of his Church and people. (JD 7:243.)

Leaders’ lack of obtaining God’s presence does not imply that being in God’s presence is not important, as certain leaders have recently taught. God does not change. If it was important for men to be restored into God’s presence in the scriptures and during Joseph’s life, it is important now. Instead, the lack of experience in these men is a witness that they do not know the way.

And by this you may know they are under the bondage of sin, because they come not unto me. For whoso cometh not unto me is under the bondage of sin. And whoso receiveth not my voice is not acquainted with my voice, and is not of me. And by this you may know the righteous from the wicked, and that the whole world groaneth under sin and darkness even now. (D&C 84:50-53.)

Modern Mormons follow men who purport to lead them to a place they have never been themselves.

O ye wicked and ye perverse generation; ye hardened and ye stiffnecked people, how long will ye suppose that the Lord will suffer you? Yea, how long will ye suffer yourselves to be led by foolish and blind guides? Yea, how long will ye choose darkness rather than light? (Helaman 13:29.)

What is a blind guide, if not he who has never been to where he claims to lead others? There is only one outcome for blind leaders and their followers.

Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. (Matthew 15:12-14.)

Our present condition is well described by the prophets of the Old Testament. Isaiah 59 describes in detail the reasons why a people would cease to receive institutional revelation. Isaiah proclaims, “surely Jehovah’s hand has not become too short to save, nor his ear dull of hearing!” No, it is not a changing God that has caused the silence, but a rebellious people. Isaiah says that it is our iniquities that have caused God to stop speaking to us. He says our “palms are defiled with blood” because we do works of evil. Our “lips speak guile” and our “tongue utters duplicity.” Instead of preaching the gospel, we repeat platitudes and self-praise. We “rely on empty words, deceitfully spoken.” These empty teachings are like “vipers’ eggs and...spiders’ webs” that bear no fruit and do not stand up to investigation: “whoever eats of their eggs dies, and if any is smashed, there emerges a serpent.” The teachings are hypocritical, preaching one thing and doing another “their cobwebs are useless as clothing; their fabrications are worthless for covering themselves.” “Their works consist of wrongdoing; they manipulate injurious dealings.” They have modified God’s word and therefore do not encounter God’s peace: “willfully denying Jehovah, backing away from following our God.” “They have made crooked their paths; none who treads them knows peace.” Having abandoned God’s word, we are left with ignorance and the consequences thereof: “havoc and disaster follow in their wake....They are unacquainted with the way of perfection; integrity is not within their bounds. We look for light, but there prevails darkness; for a glimmer of hope, but we walk amid gloom.” In place of wisdom we receive the philosophies of men. “We grope along the borders like the blind; we flounder like those without eyes. We stumble at noon as in the dark of night; in the prime of life we resemble the dead.” Instead of all this, we ought to be fighting for the cause of the poor and the oppressed: “None call for righteousness; no one sues for an honest cause.”

In Amos 8 we find another apt description of our present situation:

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. In that day shall the fair virgins and young men faint for thirst. (Amos 8:11-13.)

Not only do we find ourselves in a famine of the word of God, but the damage from the want of revelation seems disproportionately levied against our “fair virgins and young men.” Tech-savvy youth, who are more likely to find historical misrepresentations and fabrications, are among those leaving the church in highest numbers, with many losing all faith in God through having lost all faith in the church.

Throughout history, God’s silence has been interpreted as divine disfavor—an invitation to repent and request forgiveness in order to restore communication from heaven. The scriptures are replete with examples of people who, finding themselves in heavenly silence, assumed they had retained their standing with God, forcing the promotion of their own thoughts as God’s word in order to cover the consequence of their sins. In reality, the obvious thing to do was and is to ask God why he has ceased speaking, with the assumption that something is gravely wrong. Instead, “the people do not turn back to him who smites them, nor will they inquire of Jehovah of Hosts.” The penalty is that God ratifies his separation from the leaders:

Therefore Jehovah will cut off from Israel head and tail, palm top and reed, in a single day; the elders or notables are the head, the prophets who teach falsehoods, the tail. The leaders of these people have misled them, and those who are led are confused. (Isaiah 9:13-16, Gileadi Translation.)

Brigham Young erroneously taught that God’s silence in response to a question is not a sign of divine disfavor, but a witness that he trusts and will own any decision you make without his word.

If I do not know the will of my Father, and what He requires of me in a certain transaction, if I ask Him to give me wisdom concerning any requirement in my life, or in regard to my own course, or that of my friends, my family, my children, or those that I preside over, and get no answer from Him, and then do the very best that my judgement will teach me, He is bound to own and honor that transaction, and He will do so to all intents and purposes. (Brigham Young, JD 3:205.)

Unfortunately, this principle guides those in the leading councils of the church today.

What about those times when we seek revelation and do not receive it? We do not always receive inspiration or revelation when we request it. Sometimes we are delayed in the receipt of revelation, and sometimes we are left to our own judgment. We cannot force spiritual things....Even in decisions we think very important, we sometimes receive no answers to our prayers. This does not mean that our prayers have not been heard. It only means that we have prayed about a decision which, for one reason or another, we should make without guidance by revelation. (Oaks, “Revelation”, Sep 29, 1981 BYU devotional)

We should study things out in our minds, using the reasoning powers our Creator has placed within us. Then we should pray for guidance and act upon it if we receive it, and upon our best judgment if we do not. (Dallin Oaks, “Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall,” BYU Speeches June 7, 1992.)

The Doctrine and Covenants demonstrates that questions of church administration occur with regularity. In the absence of revelation, the ideas of the leaders, usually with debate, are substituted as the word and will of God. First Presidency councilor Hugh B. Brown described how decisions are made by the brethren:

When a question arises today, we work over the details and come up with an idea. It is submitted to the First Presidency and Twelve, thrashed out, discussed and rediscussed until it seems right. Then, kneeling together in a circle in the temple, they seek divine guidance and the president says, 'I feel to say this is the will of the Lord.' That becomes a revelation. It is usually not thought necessary to publish or proclaim it as such, but this is the way it happens. (Hugh B. Brown, quoted in: Firmage, “An Abundant Life”, p. 125.)

Feelings are used as if they were God’s voice. They need not be particularly notable feelings, just impressions or hunches.¹⁰ This is seen as just as valid as the actual voice of God. When God speaking is seen as a rare occurrence,¹¹ and when leaders don’t think they need much revelation,¹² deviate from God’s gospel¹³ is certain to follow; “without [revelation] we can neither know nor understand anything of God.” (TPJS, p. 205)

The understanding that the lack of revelation is a signal that God desires you to act on your own creates the perfect environment for deviating from God’s will and from God’s word as already received. This is the exact environment that enabled the great apostasy: men refusing to heed the revelations that had already been received, thinking they understood more about God than those preceding men who actually spoke with him. Seeking to obtain revelation to support a system that deviates from what God has already revealed will never lead to God speaking.

What is the reason that Priests of the day do not get revelation? They ask only to consume it upon their lusts. Their hearts are corrupt, and they cloak their iniquity by saying there are no more revelations. But if any revelations are given of God, they are universally opposed by the priests and Christendom at large; for they reveal their wickedness and abominations. (Joseph Smith, TPJS 217.)

No man is entitled to fabricate God’s word in the absence of his giving it:

Everything that God gives us is lawful and right; and it is proper that we should enjoy His gifts and blessings whenever and wherever He is disposed to bestow; but if we should seize upon those same blessings and enjoyments without law, without revelation, without commandment, those blessings and enjoyments would prove cursings and vexations in the end, and we should have to lie down in sorrow and wailings of everlasting regret. (Joseph Smith, TPJS, p. 256.)

The results of acting under the auspices of God’s command without his having spoken are demonstrated in 1 Samuel 13. Here, king Saul—distressed with many Philistine armies threatening his meager forces—called for Samuel, who said he would come in 7 days, but didn't. With his army deserting, Saul offered a burnt offering himself. Samuel announced that God would remove the kingdom from Saul as a result (see 1 Samuel 13).

Modern Mormonism offers many examples of acting without God’s word. The first occurred during the succession crisis. Without acknowledging the possibility of Joseph’s death as a sign of divine disapproval, the Saints assumed that one of the several leaders campaigning to take over church leadership was divinely appointed to do so. Instead of inquiring of the Lord on the topic, they listened to speeches from each candidate and then took a vote, with the Quorum of the Twelve winning a majority. Since then, history provides a constant chain of decisions and changes made by man’s judgment without God’s word on the matter.

Because God’s word is not being dispensed, those in leadership must claim some other mechanism for the authority of their words. Nephi, foreseeing this, explained it as follows:

For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord’s...and their priests shall...teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. And they deny the power of God, the Holy One of Israel; and they say unto the people: Hearken unto us, and hear ye our precept; for behold there is no God today, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men; Behold, hearken ye unto my precept...Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines....Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted. (2 Nephi 28:3-11.)

Today we see the claim to authority in terms of claims to keys or callings or unanimity of those in callings. One way church leaders justify making decisions without God’s word is through the understanding that God has given his authority to them to act without his speaking to them. In other words, “and the Redeemer hath done his work, and he hath given his power unto men; Behold, hearken ye unto my precept.” (2 Nephi 28:5-6.) The leaders refer to this paradigm with a repurposed term from the scriptures: “keys.”¹⁴

The divine nature of the limitations put upon the exercise of priesthood keys explains an essential contrast between decisions on matters of Church administration and decisions affecting the priesthood. The First Presidency and the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, who preside over the Church, are empowered to make many decisions affecting Church policies and procedures—matters such as the location of Church buildings and the ages for missionary service. (Dallin Oaks, April 2014 General Conference.)

Not even one true messenger in the scriptures ever claimed keys as a source of their authority. For example, Jesus came without any pretense to church calling or keys. Instead, when given the opportunity, he listed examples of miracles performed as evidence of his divine role:

Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples, And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another? Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. (Matthew 11:2-5.)

In modern Mormonism, keys are incorrectly taught as the catalyst of the great apostasy.¹⁵ Yet, less than 100 years ago, apostle James E. Talmage and others instead claimed that the great apostasy came not from the loss of ephemeral “keys,” but because the ancient church supplanted scripture with council decisions and other worldly wisdom. The great apostasy was not the result of a loss of authority, but a loss of power. Ordinations still occurred. Offices continued. Vacancies were filled. However, even before the death of the apostles, the doctrine had become corrupted through the false teachings of leaders (see “The Great Apostasy” by James Talmage), despite their possession of “keys.”

The Catholics' claim to authority seems to be vindicated by history. They can trace their authority in an unbroken chain to a bishop who appears to have been legitimately ordained by the church established by Christ.

Priesthood lineage is not enough.¹⁶ When the membership of the church appointed men to declare what was doctrine who trusted in their own wisdom rather than obtaining the word of God (or leaving the word of God as it has already been revealed), apostasy followed. These men conducted councils where they decided what doctrine was and wasn't using their own learning. It is likely that they may have prayed about things, but God did not give them his word. They were left to assume that their feelings and impressions were God’s revelation to them. Yet—in a telltale sign of false revelation—councils were still necessary to settle the differing views. God’s revelation is self-consistent. Arguments are not necessary when men are led by God’s voice because he will reveal the same information to each council member.¹⁷ Thus the church of God was severed from the true vine and became nothing more than a shadow of the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.

True messengers do not charge those they serve to follow them. They, like Nephi, teach their people to seek God's word—not theirs—in order to avoid being led astray:

And I said unto them that it was the word of God; and whoso would hearken unto the word of God, and would hold fast unto it, they would never perish; neither could the temptations and the fiery darts of the adversary overpower them unto blindness, to lead them away to destruction. (1 Nephi 15:24.)

Confide in God, and do what he says. That will protect you from doctrines of devils and commandments of men:

But ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils. (D&C 46:7.)

If church leaders had the word of God, concepts proclaimed as essential for salvation by one leader would not be called unnecessary by another.¹⁸ What one leader called immutable doctrine from God would not be dismissed by later leaders as a limited and inconsequential policy.¹⁹

If church leaders had the word of God, quoting it would carry far more weight than justifying their decisions based on keys. Instead, keys are considered sufficient to promote leaders’ opinions over scripture—the same mistake made by the church leaders that precipitated the great apostasy.

...never follow those who think they know more about how to administer the affairs of the Church than...the priesthood leaders who have the keys to preside... (M. Russell Ballard, October 2014 General Conference.)

Using this reasoning, a normal member citing revelation through Joseph Smith can be overruled by the contrary opinion of a leader simply by virtue of keys.

Another way church leaders justify making decisions without God’s word is through promoting the unanimous decision of their councils to be equal to God’s revealed word.²⁰ The church has repeatedly insisted that the leading councils of the church have authority to “establish doctrine” without revelation.

With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. (Official Statement, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “Approaching Mormon Doctrine” May 4, 2007.)

...when the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve speak with a united voice, it is the voice of the Lord for that time. (M. Russell Ballard, October 2014 General Conference.)

The church teaches that unanimity implies God’s revealed will, as if a group of men couldn’t agree without God’s intervention:

The calling of 15 men to the holy apostleship provides great protection for us as members of the Church. Why? Because decisions of these leaders must be unanimous. Can you imagine how the Spirit needs to move upon 15 men to bring about unanimity?... Trust me! These 15 men—prophets, seers, and revelators—know what the will of the Lord is when unanimity is reached! (Elder Russell M. Nelson, “Sustaining the Prophets,” April 2014 General Conference.)

Unanimity does not equate to God's word. Consider how many times King Noah’s priests were in unanimous support of Noah’s wicked doctrines. Similarly, God's word can be spoken even if only one speaks it. Consider that Alma was right even though he was the only voice on the council of King Noah's priests.

What is quite remarkable about the assertion that unanimity equates God’s word is the frequency with which the brethren are not unanimous, and can only gain unanimity through sideways means. The minutes of the meetings of the brethren reveal unexpected tactics to achieve “unanimity.”

These include dissenting members’ abstinence from voting, sending dissenting members abroad, and exerting seniority in order to facilitate a unanimous vote.¹⁶

In any case, to assume that the prevailing opinion of a group of men mirrors God’s will without his having spoken is to assume that the mind of man is equal to the mind of God, an assumption clearly refuted by scripture. Such an assumption guarantees that the laws of the church will follow the ever sliding moorings of society. Hence, that which is decided by a council of men in one generation will be replaced by that which is decided by a council of men in the next, with the small lag between the world’s standards and the church’s standards due to the previous generation status quo embedded in the aging brethren, rather than the undeviating standard of God’s word.

Attributing to God what came from a committee or your own mind is taking strength unto yourself. This was prophesied to happen in the latter days in Jacob 5.

And it came to pass that the servant said unto his master: Is it not the loftiness of thy vineyard? have not the branches thereof overcome the roots which are good? And because the branches have overcome the roots thereof, behold they grew faster than the strength of the roots, taking strength unto themselves. Behold, I say, is not this the cause that the trees of thy vineyard have become corrupted? (Jacob 5:48.)

Because we are “taught by the precepts of men,” “in many instances” we err in doctrine. (2 Nephi 28:14.) To assume that God does not give revelation today like he always has is to deny the power of God and the gift of the Holy Ghost. To listen to men who claim they have the authority to declare the word of God without God speaking it to them is to hearken to the precepts of men. This is exactly what Nephi was talking about when he said,

Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!....Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. (2 Nephi 28:26,31.)

Without any new revelation, and with apparent disdain for the words of God through Joseph Smith, prescribed conferences and publications are filled instead with platitudes, gimmicks, and self-help advice. Recent conference talks feature less than 2 verses of scripture on average. Instead of turning to revelation, scripture, or the teachings of Joseph Smith, leaders instead quote each other in a reductive cycle.²¹ This repetition, predicted by Isaiah,²² is explained away by faithful members who notice it,²³ and actually celebrated by leaders:

When the words of prophets seem repetitive, that should rivet our attention and fill our hearts with gratitude to live in such a blessed time. (Elder Henry B. Eyring, “Finding Safety in Counsel,” April 1997 General Conference.)

How can we approach Zion if our current teachings have not brought us there, and our future teachings will simply repeat our current teachings? If “a man is saved no faster than he gets knowledge,”²⁴ as Joseph taught, how can we become saved if we receive less of God’s word with each passing generation of General Authorities, less versed in Joseph’s doctrines and the scriptures than the last?

Though church leaders have made valiant public assertions of the independence of God’s will from public opinion,²⁵ the LDS church has been heavily influenced by public opinion through surveys, focus groups, and outside public relations consulting for decades.²⁶ Many changes in the last few decades were catalyzed by public opinion polling, including the church’s logo, the subtitle to the Book of Mormon, the “I’m a Mormon” campaign, the change of missionary age, and the decision to remain in the Boy Scouts despite the latter’s pro-homosexual posture. Public opinion polling has catalyzed more than superficial changes. Societal pressure was the onus for the 1990 changes to the endowment ceremony²⁷ and the recent litany of concessions to feminist progressives.²⁸ This is not a new pattern, with history dotted with other similar examples such as the lifting of the priesthood ban, the repeated modifications to garments, and the cessation of plural marriage²⁹ Most recently, the church has changed its position on homosexual marriage as a result of public opinion polling,³⁰ and continues to survey members to reflect changing sentiments in leaders’ statements, doctrine, and policy.

The will of the Lord is not obtained through public polling or public relations consulting. Relying on PR firms and surveys as a surrogate for God’s word is at least a partial fulfillment of scriptural prophecies that speak of relying on mystics, soothsayers, and spiritists—experts sought after in ancient days as a more accessible avenue of obtaining advice than inquiring of the Lord.³¹ Just as ancient Israel relied on the arm of the flesh in the form of militarily mighty Egypt, the church is allying itself with the world—not only through the methods employed to survey the feelings of the people, but in the act of using popular will to supplant God’s commandments.³² What is right for God’s people is given by his word, not the opinion of the people. The dispensation of God’s word should not depend on whether a critical majority of church members will favorably accept it or not.³³ Moses did not dispatch Aaron to poll focus groups to see how they would react to the Ten Commandments. After delivering them, Moses did not repeal them simply because the Canaanites found them offensive.

While some rightly point out that popularity with a fallen world can only be achieved by jettisoning foundational doctrines of the restoration,³⁴ some hail the lack of persecution in modern Mormonism as a blessing and a sign of divine favor.³⁵

What is more important: the church's public image in a fallen society, or the transmission of saving (but unpopular) truths? Some would contend that popularity is necessary for preaching the gospel. Earlier church leaders would vehemently disagree.³⁶

“If the Latter-day Saints do not desist from running after the things of this world, and begin to reform and do the work the Father has given them to do, they will be found wanting, and they, too, will be swept away and counted as unprofitable servants” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 18:262).

“Our failure to be a “peculiar” people in maintaining our standards, despite the jeers and the criticisms of the crowd, will be our failure to be chosen for that calling to which we are called. The Lord has told us, 'Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen' (D&C 121:34), and then in the same revelation points out two reasons why men fail of their blessings. The first reason he gives is that their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and the second is that they aspire so much to the honors of men. So then as Church members let us beware lest we set our hearts upon the things of this world and lest we aspire so much to the honors of men that we compromise our standards. If we do so, we will be cut off in the Day of Judgment and will lose our blessings. Our reward for daring to live the gospel despite the oppositions from the outside world will be to have blessings added upon our heads forever and forever.” (President Harold B. Lee, “Our Responsibility before God and Men,” General Conference October 1945.)

Since 1890, leaders have contorted doctrine, misrepresented history, and wrested scripture to whittle the peculiarity of the saints into something appeasing to ever-changing societal sensibilities. This continuing chain has been and will continue to be ineffective to stem the negative rewards of abandoning God's standards—like all deals with the devil, the outcome is never as rosy as promised.³⁷

O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world? (Mormon 8:38.)

Protection from the world is given by God, not men. It is wrong to strategize in anticipation of societal pressure, making accommodations to the world even before they are demanded.³⁸ Abandoning God's standards to gain perceived protection from earthly threats is uniformly decried in scripture and likened unto whoredom (see, for example Ezekiel 23:1-21, Hosea 4:1-19, Hosea 7:1-16, and Hosea 9:1.) Some would define this as apostasy.³⁹

We ought to fear God, and not manipulate the gospel in a bid to buy protection from persecution.⁴⁰ Isaiah predicted the outcome of allying with the world, and we see its fulfillment unrolling today:

As for my people, babes subject them; women wield authority over them. O my people, your leaders mislead you, abolishing your traditional ways. Jehovah will take a stand and contend with them; he has arisen to judge the nations. He will bring to trial the elders of his people and their rulers....Jehovah says, moreover, Because the women of Zion are haughty and put on airs, painting their eyes, ever flirting when they walk and clacking with their feet, my Lord will afflict the scalps of the women of Zion with baldness; Jehovah will expose their private parts. (Isaiah 3:12-14,16-17, Gileadi Translation.)

This pattern will continue as the church continues to allow society to dictate doctrine.

The scriptures tell us how God feels about attributing his name to the words of men. They say God has not sent the men who do so:

For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, deceive you...For they prophesy falsely unto you in my name: I have not sent them, saith the Lord.” (Jeremiah 29:89.)

They say God is against these men:

Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words every one from his neighbour. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord. (Jeremiah 23:30-32.)

They say God will reprove those who do so. “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Proverbs 20:5-6.) They say how God will reprove them, by calling real prophets to speak against them:

And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel that prophesy, and say thou unto them that prophesy out of their own hearts, Hear ye the word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord God; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!...They have seen vanity and lying divination, saying, The Lord saith: and the Lord hath not sent them...whereas ye say, The Lord saith it; albeit I have not spoken? Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because ye have spoken vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord God. (Ezekiel 13:18.)

They say how words spoken in God’s name in vain have no strength, and should be expected to fall apart in due time:

And her prophets have daubed them with untempered mortar, seeing vanity, and divining lies unto them, saying, Thus saith the Lord God, when the Lord hath not spoken. (Ezekiel 22:28.)

They say we should not listen to these vain messages:

Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord. (Jeremiah 23:16.)

The nature and disposition of all men, including leaders, is fallen. Revelation is needed to elevate our thoughts to God’s thoughts. Joseph called the Holy Ghost “the mind of the Lord”. Without revelation, a leader’s opinion is almost certainly wrong.⁴¹ Countering God’s revealed word should only be considered with great trepidation and absolute certainty of new revelation.⁴² Supplanting God’s word with a man’s opinion is folly. “Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil.” (Proverbs 3:5-7.)

Modern church leaders have received honors from world leaders, medals from U.S. presidents, honorary degrees from universities, have buildings and camps named after them, own multiple homes, and receive new luxury cars yearly. They are revered by their subordinates, take the chief seats in the synagogues,⁴³ receive hero’s welcomes by members in their travels, and are treated to lavish birthday celebrations. None of this behavior is seen in the prophets of the scriptures. Joseph Smith was hated by at least as many members as he was beloved, and even among those who claimed to sustain him, the word of God delivered through him was difficult enough to accept that it was largely ignored.

Is this the pattern provided in scripture? Joseph Smith wrote:

The world always mistook false prophets for true ones, and those that were sent of God, they considered to be false prophets, and hence they killed, stoned, punished and imprisoned the true prophets, and these had to hide themselves ‘in deserts and dens, and caves of the earth,’ and though the most honorable men of the earth, they banished them from their society as vagabonds, whilst they cherished, honored and supported knaves, vagabonds, hypocrites, impostors, and the basest of men. (Joseph Smith, History of the Church 4:574.)

True prophets have to hide from society or face pain or death as a result of hatred for the message they bear. True prophets do not preach easy messages that are compliant with modern sensibilities.⁴⁴ They do not use popular gimmicks. They do not cry that all is well⁴⁵ or that what we are doing is good enough.⁴⁶ True prophets are not hypocrites.⁴⁷ The Lord’s watchmen do not cry “tomorrow will be like today, only far better!”³²⁰³²¹ The Lord’s watchmen do not ignore the prophecies he has given of destruction⁴⁸ by crying “peace,”³²³³²⁴ erroneously assuming that the Lord is with them and will protect them.³²⁵³²⁶ They do not say that the Lord delays his coming.³²⁷³²⁸ True prophets do not teach for money.³²⁹³³⁰ True prophets do not neglect the poor.⁴⁹ True prophets do not feel threatened by others who are receiving revelations from God or visitations from God.⁵⁰ False prophets⁵¹ do, because their competitors, like Jeremiah, Elijah, Isaiah, and Amos, receive true revelations and bear tangible fruits of being true messengers, posing a threat to their priestcraft.

They are a rebellious people, sons who break faith, children unwilling to obey the law of Jehovah, who say to the seers, See not! and to those with visions, Predict not what is right for us: flatter us; foresee a farce! Get out of the way; move aside, off the path! Cease confronting us with the Holy One of Israel! Therefore, thus says the Holy One of Israel: Because you have rejected this word, and rely on manipulation and double dealing, and on them are dependent, this iniquity will be to you as a perilous breach exposed in a high wall which suddenly and unexpectedly collapses. (Isaiah 30:9-13, Gileadi Translation.)

Those who stand as prophets have an obligation to point out sin, and will be held accountable by God to the extent that they do not.⁵²

Conclusion

Ezekiel saw a day when the people would “seek a vision of the prophet; but the law shall perish from the priest, and counsel from the ancients.” (Ezekiel 7:26, KJV). Do people seek visions from the prophet today? Does President Monson give it? Do we receive the word of the Lord from our “ancients” (Elders)? Do priests speak the law? Or are we instead nourished on everchanging PR-firm-written policy?

They are a rebellious people, sons who break faith, children unwilling to obey the law of Jehovah, who say to the seers, See not! and to those with visions, Predict not what is right for us: flatter us; foresee a farce! Get out of the way; move aside, off the path! Cease confronting us with the Holy One of Israel! Therefore, thus says the Holy One of Israel: Because you have rejected this word, and rely on manipulation and double dealing, and on them are dependent, this iniquity will be to you as a perilous breach exposed in a high wall which suddenly and unexpectedly collapses. (Isaiah 30:9-13, Gileadi Translation.)

The word “prophet” is not a title, but a description. It is a term defined repeatedly and clearly in the scriptures, as is its opposite, “false prophet.” Modern Mormons are in the uncomfortable position of having to reconcile their tradition of equating the 15 governing men in the church to the description of prophet in an absolute absence of any of the associated gifts and responsibilities. These actions align very well to the scriptural description of false prophets.

LDS leaders after Joseph Smith have taught their own ideas and feelings as the word of God. They have promoted their own words and the decisions of their councils as equal to God’s word, and used this to rationalize a systemic turn away from the revelations given through Joseph Smith.