The Truth about Mormons

[Avatar4321]

I did that.

I read the Book of Mormon, then asked in prayer if it was true.

I didn't get an answer.

I was told I did it wrong: I should have asked God to make me believe that it was true.

I think you could make yourself believe practically anything by first wanting to believe it, then praying earnestly to god to tell you that it is true.

But, none of that makes a thing true. Wanting to believe a thing, earnestly praying for it to be true, that doesn't make a thing true. If you pray with an open mind and ask whether a thing is true, you're likely to get a different answer.

Or, no answer at all.

I don't agree taht you should have asked God to make you believe it was true. That's not the promise He made. The problem with your analogy is that there are those who are hostile and don't want the Book of Mormon to be true who test the Word and end up believing. I know a man, served in a local Bishopric, he read the Book of Mormon to prove it wrong. He was a hard core evangelical. He read it, took the challenge for himself and was soon baptized.

The promise is given as follows:

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. (Moroni 10:3-5)

So there are several steps to asking. I can't tell you whether you did them correctly or not because I don't know your experience. But questions to ask:

1) Did you remember the mercies of God from the days of Adam until the days you recieved the Book of Mormon?
2) Did you ponder them in your heart?
3) Did you ask God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ?
4) Did you ask with a sincere heart?
5) Did you ask with real intent? (Meaning did you ask with the intention of acting in a way to change your life when you recieved the answer?)
6) Did you have faith in Christ?

Faith is a key ingredient in recieving answers. you have to exercise faith. I can tell you about my personal experience. I didn't know whether there was a God. I didn't know whether Jesus was the Son of God. I didn't know whether the Bible or Book of Mormon were true. I didn't even know whether God would reveal the truth to me.

I thought about it alot and i reasoned that if there was a God, and that if He loved us as the scriptures said, I could attempt to ask in faith. I told Him that I didn't know if He was there or that If He could answer. But that I would try an exercise faith that He could reveal Himself to me if He so chose in His own time and manor. I also promised that if He would, I'd be willing to follow Him no matter where He took me. I tried praying many times and many days. I didn't have a clue how He would answer me or even if I would know if He did. Or even if there was anyone to answer me. But I experimented on the Word the best I could.

I figured if Faith was the price to pay before I could get knowledge, I would try exercising faith. The worst that could happen is nothing in which case I would be no better or worse off than I was before.

I looked at arguments online between those who argued for God and those who argued against. I read all I could on the topic. Eventually I realized that only God could truly answer my questions and started reading the scriptures in depth. I just wanted to know God if there was a way to know Him so badly.

It was while reading the scriptures that the Spirit started enveloping me. I didn't recognize what He was at first. I just felt good. I felt love. I felt my mind and my heart expanding. So I kept reading because I liked what I was feeling. I ended up devouring all the knowledge I could even though I didn't really understand it.

Ultimately it was when I was reading D&C 135, which is John Taylor's account of the Martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith that I was really hit over the head. I finally recognized the Spirit for what He is and I was told that it was indeed true. I was told that I already knew it and then I was asked if now that I know whether I was going to keep my promise and live what I was being taught.

I can honestly tell you that there is nothing as humbling or eye opening as when you the Spirit of God touches you and speaks. It was just the overpowering love, and glory, and power that made it so amazing. It literally had me dropping to my knees. I had never experienced anything like that before. But Ive seen incredible things since then reinforcing that experience every day of my life.

That experience happened almost 13 years ago to the day. I will never forget it because it changed the course of my life. It changed who I became and who I wanted to become.

I can tell you that if you've asked God, you will get an answer. When is up to Him. But He answers every prayer. I have no clue why He answered me quickly, well if you count several months as quickly. But He did. I know I don't deserve it any more than anyone else. Maybe I was prepared with the work I did before hand. Maybe it was just dumb luck. Regardless, by the grace of God, I know He lives. And I cant help but invite others to likewise find out for themselves in Christ's name.

I hope I haven't bored anyone too much.

 

[Skeptik]

I did that.

I read the Book of Mormon, then asked in prayer if it was true.

I didn't get an answer.

I was told I did it wrong: I should have asked God to make me believe that it was true.

I think you could make yourself believe practically anything by first wanting to believe it, then praying earnestly to god to tell you that it is true.

But, none of that makes a thing true. Wanting to believe a thing, earnestly praying for it to be true, that doesn't make a thing true. If you pray with an open mind and ask whether a thing is true, you're likely to get a different answer.

Or, no answer at all.

I don't agree taht you should have asked God to make you believe it was true. That's not the promise He made. The problem with your analogy is that there are those who are hostile and don't want the Book of Mormon to be true who test the Word and end up believing. I know a man, served in a local Bishopric, he read the Book of Mormon to prove it wrong. He was a hard core evangelical. He read it, took the challenge for himself and was soon baptized.

The promise is given as follows:

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. (Moroni 10:3-5)

So there are several steps to asking. I can't tell you whether you did them correctly or not because I don't know your experience. But questions to ask:

1) Did you remember the mercies of God from the days of Adam until the days you recieved the Book of Mormon?
2) Did you ponder them in your heart?
3) Did you ask God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ?
4) Did you ask with a sincere heart?
5) Did you ask with real intent? (Meaning did you ask with the intention of acting in a way to change your life when you recieved the answer?)
6) Did you have faith in Christ?

Faith is a key ingredient in recieving answers. you have to exercise faith. I can tell you about my personal experience. I didn't know whether there was a God. I didn't know whether Jesus was the Son of God. I didn't know whether the Bible or Book of Mormon were true. I didn't even know whether God would reveal the truth to me.

I thought about it alot and i reasoned that if there was a God, and that if He loved us as the scriptures said, I could attempt to ask in faith. I told Him that I didn't know if He was there or that If He could answer. But that I would try an exercise faith that He could reveal Himself to me if He so chose in His own time and manor. I also promised that if He would, I'd be willing to follow Him no matter where He took me. I tried praying many times and many days. I didn't have a clue how He would answer me or even if I would know if He did. Or even if there was anyone to answer me. But I experimented on the Word the best I could.

I figured if Faith was the price to pay before I could get knowledge, I would try exercising faith. The worst that could happen is nothing in which case I would be no better or worse off than I was before.

I looked at arguments online between those who argued for God and those who argued against. I read all I could on the topic. Eventually I realized that only God could truly answer my questions and started reading the scriptures in depth. I just wanted to know God if there was a way to know Him so badly.

It was while reading the scriptures that the Spirit started enveloping me. I didn't recognize what He was at first. I just felt good. I felt love. I felt my mind and my heart expanding. So I kept reading because I liked what I was feeling. I ended up devouring all the knowledge I could even though I didn't really understand it.

Ultimately it was when I was reading D&C 135, which is John Taylor's account of the Martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith that I was really hit over the head. I finally recognized the Spirit for what He is and I was told that it was indeed true. I was told that I already knew it and then I was asked if now that I know whether I was going to keep my promise and live what I was being taught.

I can honestly tell you that there is nothing as humbling or eye opening as when you the Spirit of God touches you and speaks. It was just the overpowering love, and glory, and power that made it so amazing. It literally had me dropping to my knees. I had never experienced anything like that before. But Ive seen incredible things since then reinforcing that experience every day of my life.

That experience happened almost 13 years ago to the day. I will never forget it because it changed the course of my life. It changed who I became and who I wanted to become.

I can tell you that if you've asked God, you will get an answer. When is up to Him. But He answers every prayer. I have no clue why He answered me quickly, well if you count several months as quickly. But He did. I know I don't deserve it any more than anyone else. Maybe I was prepared with the work I did before hand. Maybe it was just dumb luck. Regardless, by the grace of God, I know He lives. And I cant help but invite others to likewise find out for themselves in Christ's name.

I hope I haven't bored anyone too much.

No, not at all. I'm convinced (faith?) that what you're describing is a personal experience, quite a profound one at that.

Perhaps it's the faith in Jesus Christ part that is my problem.

I've thought for some time that if Christianity (capital C, meaning that Christ was the son of God who died for our sins) was correct, then Mormonism is most likely correct as well.

Mormonism teaches that there was an apostasy and a restoration. Looking at the history of Christianity, it is undeniable that there was an apostasy. The question is whether there was really anything to restore.

The Old Testament is full of stories that have to be allegorical tales, along with nonsense and laws that end in putting people to death for minor transgressions. The New Testament is full of stories that were written down decades after the crucifixion of Christ. How many of those stories are actual accounts?

If we read stories today about an itinerant preacher claiming divinity and having done miracles, but those stories were third and fourth hand and not even written down for years after the fact, who would believe them?

Why is it so easy to believe tales of similar things that happened long ago, but no one would believe such stories today?

I don't know what the truth is. I'm not convinced that anyone else does either, even though quite a few people have told me that they know that Jesus lives. I'm convinced that they think that they know, but have they done a good job of convincing themselves over the years?

I guess I have more of an empirical proof sort of mind, as opposed to a basing belief in feelings.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't see why you can't look at all evidence, empirical and revelatory. I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive. I can understand your doubt and confusion. Id be there if I hadnt had the experiences I've had.

 

[Avatar4321]

I was reading this a few minutes ago. I just wanted anyone who comes across it no matter whether you are a latter day saint or not to remember: You matter to Him.

You matter to me too. But sadly, I am not as reliable.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't see why you can't look at all evidence, empirical and revelatory. I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive. I can understand your doubt and confusion. Id be there if I hadnt had the experiences I've had.

All evidence empiracal and revelatory condemns Joseph Smith, at the very best, as a fallen prophet, Avatar43211. At the worst, JS was a conman who ended up believing and dying for his own con. Shame.

 

[Skeptik]

Here's an interesting editorial by a non Mormon regarding the Perry supporter who called Mormonism a "cult" and said they aren't really Christian.

The irony is that as embodiments of America's civic religious ideal, Mormons put adherents of every other group to shame. They're patriotic, highly educated, entrepreneurial, conservative to a fault and obedient to authority.

Because of their reputation for "clean living," Mormons are disproportionately represented in our foreign and intelligence services, although not in the military. They're self-disciplined, multilingual and optimistic. Until the 1970s, they even had a problem with black people, which is also very American.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't see why you can't look at all evidence, empirical and revelatory. I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive. I can understand your doubt and confusion. Id be there if I hadnt had the experiences I've had.

All evidence empiracal and revelatory condemns Joseph Smith, at the very best, as a fallen prophet, Avatar43211. At the worst, JS was a conman who ended up believing and dying for his own con. Shame.

God says otherwise. Who should I believe. You with your general accusations, or God?

 

[Avatar4321]

Here's an interesting editorial by a non Mormon regarding the Perry supporter who called Mormonism a "cult" and said they aren't really Christian.

The irony is that as embodiments of America's civic religious ideal, Mormons put adherents of every other group to shame. They're patriotic, highly educated, entrepreneurial, conservative to a fault and obedient to authority.

Because of their reputation for "clean living," Mormons are disproportionately represented in our foreign and intelligence services, although not in the military. They're self-disciplined, multilingual and optimistic. Until the 1970s, they even had a problem with black people, which is also very American.

I'd take issues with the "had a problem with black people" comment. because it's not true.

 

[Skeptik]

Here's an interesting editorial by a non Mormon regarding the Perry supporter who called Mormonism a "cult" and said they aren't really Christian.

The irony is that as embodiments of America's civic religious ideal, Mormons put adherents of every other group to shame. They're patriotic, highly educated, entrepreneurial, conservative to a fault and obedient to authority.

Because of their reputation for "clean living," Mormons are disproportionately represented in our foreign and intelligence services, although not in the military. They're self-disciplined, multilingual and optimistic. Until the 1970s, they even had a problem with black people, which is also very American.

I'd take issues with the "had a problem with black people" comment. because it's not true.

You don't think that the doctrine that black men couldn't hold the priesthood because they had been less valiant in the war in Heaven, and so had to settle for coming to Earth in a black body could qualify, in the mind of a non member black man mind you, as "having a problem with blacks"

 

[JoeB131]

Here's an interesting editorial by a non Mormon regarding the Perry supporter who called Mormonism a "cult" and said they aren't really Christian.

I'd take issues with the "had a problem with black people" comment. because it's not true.

You don't think that the doctrine that black men couldn't hold the priesthood because they had been less valiant in the war in Heaven, and so had to settle for coming to Earth in a black body could qualify, in the mind of a non member black man mind you, as "having a problem with blacks"

OR holding that black skin was the "Curse of Ham", that God had cursed them with that dark skin because of Ham's sin against Noah.

(And what was this sin? Ham saw his dad naked after the guy got stone drunk after the flood.)

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't see why you can't look at all evidence, empirical and revelatory. I don't see why the two have to be mutually exclusive. I can understand your doubt and confusion. Id be there if I hadnt had the experiences I've had.

All evidence empiracal and revelatory condemns Joseph Smith, at the very best, as a fallen prophet, Avatar43211. At the worst, JS was a conman who ended up believing and dying for his own con. Shame.

God says otherwise. Who should I believe. You with your general accusations, or God?

You only believe God says otherwise. All evidence empirical and revelatory negate your belief. It is what it is.

 

[Skeptik]

I'd take issues with the "had a problem with black people" comment. because it's not true.

You don't think that the doctrine that black men couldn't hold the priesthood because they had been less valiant in the war in Heaven, and so had to settle for coming to Earth in a black body could qualify, in the mind of a non member black man mind you, as "having a problem with blacks"

OR holding that black skin was the "Curse of Ham", that God had cursed them with that dark skin because of Ham's sin against Noah.

(And what was this sin? Ham saw his dad naked after the guy got stone drunk after the flood.)

I don't believe that was ever Mormon doctrine.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If not doctrine, the policy was to keep the African (American) from the priesthood because of the color of his skin.

The church authorities deal with this as the do with the history of polygamy. They will ignore if it possible. However, if they are asked, they will confirm both were taught at one time.

 

[Skeptik]

If not doctrine, the policy was to keep the African (American) from the priesthood because of the color of his skin.

The church authorities deal with this as the do with the history of polygamy. They will ignore if it possible. However, if they are asked, they will confirm both were taught at one time.

If a belief is not doctrine, then it wasn't taught at one time. Polygamy was doctrine at one time. The idea that black people had been less valiant in the pre existence was doctrine at one time. The idea that a black skin was due to the "Curse of Ham" was never doctrine. Some individual members may have believed it, but it was never official doctrine.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are mistaken but that is OK. You can read BY, JT, GAS, Rudger Clawson, Stapley, Romney, Lee and others, and make your mind about the doctrine part. A belief can be doctrine at one time and not doctrine at another.

 

[Avatar4321]

Here's an interesting editorial by a non Mormon regarding the Perry supporter who called Mormonism a "cult" and said they aren't really Christian.

I'd take issues with the "had a problem with black people" comment. because it's not true.

You don't think that the doctrine that black men couldn't hold the priesthood because they had been less valiant in the war in Heaven, and so had to settle for coming to Earth in a black body could qualify, in the mind of a non member black man mind you, as "having a problem with blacks"

Considering we've always welcomed everyone of all races. That has been the doctrine despite any theories otherwisel then no. I dont think we've "had a problem" with blacks.

They might have had a problem with us. Most probably have never bothered to care.

Christ restricted the Twelve to preaching to the Jews and the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel until the command came in Acts to go to the Gentiles. Are we to interpret that God has a problem with Gentiles? or are we to conclude that God has a plan that will take the Gospel to different people at different times?

Blacks have always been welcome to come to Christ and be baptized. There was a proscription on being ordained to the priesthood, which was based on lineage and not on race or skin color. And from the beginning of that prosciption, it was promised and prophesied that at some day in the future the Priesthood would be eligible to all those who are worthy of it.

Unlike it other Churches, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in the work to Redeem the dead. That's why we build Temples. To allow our kindred dead to recieve the blessings of baptism, Priesthood, and sealings that they didn't have the opportunity to recieve while they were alive.

That means when the priesthood restrictions were removed, as was prophecied, that it was removed for both the living for the dead. As was promised from the beginning, all mankind is entitled to the blessings of the Gospel.

At the time of Moses, the Priesthood was limited to one tribe of the House of Israel. At the time of Christ when the Melchesidek Priesthood was distributed to the Saints then, the blessings of the Priesthood were given to both Jew and Gentile.

It's always been an issue of timing. And I can see some of the wisdom of the Lord in it:

1) It prevented the Church from segregating in a time when much of the nation had racist sentiment.
2) It focused the missionary effort of the Church away from Africa during the colonial and revolutionary period. Thereby the people don't have colonialism or imperialism connection with the Church and without those stigmas people it makes it easier to preach the Gospel there now. Which is probably why the Church has had much success there lately.
3) The Church recieved severe persecution as it was while in Missouri because we were there. Much of it was because we were anti-slavery and had a favorable disposition to blacks. The rest was due to our sins. If we had been actively preaching to and ordaining people who were slaves at the time, the Church may not have survived.

Why it was in place specifically, whether it was one of the above reasons or something else. I have no clue. It's never really been a big issue for me because I've studied how the Lord has worked in the past and most of those who do have issue with it cant seem to get past the present and see the Eternal perspective behind it. Which is understandable if you dont believe in God or the Eternal perspective. If you don't believe in Redeeming the dead, it does seem unfair.

Once you realize that everyone will be able to recieve every blessing they choose to recieve and that the real question isn't if they have the opportunity, but when, it really isn't as big a concern. It's certainly not the way I would have done things. But I don't know everything God knows. I believe He has a reason for everything and that someday He will explain it all. Until then, I can be patient.

I would also note that we don't actively proselyte among muslims. Even in nations we can do so. This isn't because of any proscription against arabs or anyone else. Nor is it for lack of concern for their salvation. But we realize they will all have their opportunity to accept or reject the Gospel when the Lord wants it. And when He is ready for us to preach among them actively, we will.

I fear that many times people fail to see the long term plan because of a soundbyte, a slogan, or just an immediately look.

 

[Avatar4321]

All evidence empiracal and revelatory condemns Joseph Smith, at the very best, as a fallen prophet, Avatar43211. At the worst, JS was a conman who ended up believing and dying for his own con. Shame.

God says otherwise. Who should I believe. You with your general accusations, or God?

You only believe God says otherwise. All evidence empirical and revelatory negate your belief. It is what it is.

I dispute that claim. And Ive provided more evidence than you have.

 

[Avatar4321]

If not doctrine, the policy was to keep the African (American) from the priesthood because of the color of his skin.

The church authorities deal with this as the do with the history of polygamy. They will ignore if it possible. However, if they are asked, they will confirm both were taught at one time.

Which is blatantly untrue because it was a matter of lineage. How else do you explain the times when people with dark skin recieved the priesthood while those with light skin were banned? It was always a matter of lineage, not color.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If not doctrine, the policy was to keep the African (American) from the priesthood because of the color of his skin.

The church authorities deal with this as the do with the history of polygamy. They will ignore if it possible. However, if they are asked, they will confirm both were taught at one time.

Which is blatantly untrue because it was a matter of lineage. How else do you explain the times when people with dark skin recieved the priesthood while those with light skin were banned? It was always a matter of lineage, not color.

Which is: ignore or admit today, or the church's history of its leaders and their words?

That you don't like it means nothing, Avatar4321? Call your priesthood file leader and take it up the chain of command until you get a definitive answer, which, if you want to know, is going to agree with what I have written.

Doctrine changes in all organizations from time to time.

 

[Avatar4321]

If not doctrine, the policy was to keep the African (American) from the priesthood because of the color of his skin.

The church authorities deal with this as the do with the history of polygamy. They will ignore if it possible. However, if they are asked, they will confirm both were taught at one time.

If a belief is not doctrine, then it wasn't taught at one time. Polygamy was doctrine at one time. The idea that black people had been less valiant in the pre existence was doctrine at one time. The idea that a black skin was due to the "Curse of Ham" was never doctrine. Some individual members may have believed it, but it was never official doctrine.

Actually, I would say that the ban was doctrine. The reasons why were speculative. One of the things I like about the Church is that we are allowed to speculate. The problem is sometimes these speculations are wrong even if they become popular. Im not going to judge them harshly for speculating on issues the Lord didn't fully reveal until later.

The doctrine on polygamy is the same as it was when it was established in the Book of Mormon: When God commands it, do it. Otherwise, the default is don't do it.

There was a period in Early LDS history where the Lord commanded it. So the Saints practiced it. We also have the doctrine to obey the laws of the lands. So when the Government outlawed it and made it clear that they were going to enforce it. And when the Saints had exhausted legal avenues to fight the laws. We had a conflict. What command do we follow? What does the Lord wants us to do?

So the President of the High Priesthood inquired of the Lord. He revealed what the Lord said and the people decided to follow it.

The Lord commands what He wants, when He wants it. And He revokes the commands He wants when He wants it. God can do as He pleases when it comes to Commanding us. As the Ultimate Soveriegn of the Universe, that's his right and responsibility.

Read what President Woodruff wrote concerning the revelation he recieved to stop plural marriage. Does this sound like someone who is insincere?

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all. …

I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. …

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for … any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

… I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. …

I leave this with you, for you to contemplate and consider. The Lord is at work with us. (Cache Stake Conference, Logan, Utah, Sunday, November 1, 1891. Reported in Deseret Weekly, November 14, 1891.)

Is there any reason to doubt that the reason he gave for the revelation is not true?