Have you ever seen Satan? Have you ever seen God or Jesus? If you are honest, you will answer, “no.” I have to ask myself whether or not Mormons should believe Joseph Smith did. The church doesn’t like us to talk about it, but he did have a reputation for telling tall tales. Why should Mormons believe him?

M.J.

Dear M.J.

Many derogatory things have been said about the Prophet, Joseph Smith. As a matter of fact, he was told by the Angel Moroni, whom he saw, “that [his] name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people” (Joseph Smith-History 1:33). If I were you, I would check my sources very carefully before I subscribed to such derogatory comments about the Prophet.

There are about ten million Mormons who not only believe that Joseph Smith actually saw God the Father, and his Son Jesus Christ, but who have themselves received witnesses from God that he actually did see them. You could also come to know these things, receiving a true witness of them from the Father if you sincerely desired to know, rather than trying in a vain attempt to prove that they are not so.

-Gramps

I’ve written before and I have another question. Is there an official church position in regard to tatoos? Before I joined the church I had one and am considering having it removed. Also, how about things like rhinoplasty and other cosmetic surgery? I can see how it would be considered wrong but just wondered if there was any official statement. Thanks,

Tanya, from New Jersey

Dear Tanya,

If we consider who we are as children of our Father in Heaven, we come to understand that the body itself is a sacred organism, as it is made in the very likeness of God. It then becomes rather obvious that mutilation or desecration of the body in any form is a sacrilege and should be avoided. I would imagine that tattooing and body piercing (so much in vogue today) would be considered as defiling the body, against which Paul spoke in 1 Corinthians 3:17.

If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

In some cases, to correct deformities or other abnormalities, cosmetic surgery would seem to be an appropriate procedure. However, if a person would change his or her appearance merely out of vanity, the vanity itself would be the sin. I would imagine that the decisions to undergo cosmetic surgery would rest with the individual involved; and, as suggested above, may be justified in some cases and not in others.

-Gramps

What is the Church’s belief on Suicide? A Catholic friend of mine recently took his own life and his wife and child asked me what our church believed is his fate. Their Priests said because he took his own life he was going to hell. How can I help this family?

Michael, from Washington

Dear Michael,

In the first place, I believe that the only way that you could help your Catholic friend in such a circumstance as this is to have the missionaries teach him the truth about heaven and hell, about the three degrees of glory, and about the loving mercy of our Father in Heaven in providing all the blessings for His children that they are capable of receiving. The deep grieving of the adherents of the secular religions over what appears to be the tragic loss of loved ones is understandable in view of their mistaken beliefs of the nature of God and man, and of the great plan of salvation.

Concerning the Church’s view on suicide, Let me quote from a message of the First Presidency–

“There is another evil that is growing amongst the peoples of the world that is not unfelt amidst the Latter-day Saints. It is the crime of self-murder. Suicide should be made odious among the people of God, it should be emphasized as a deadly sin, and no undue feelings of tenderness toward the unfortunate dead, or of sympathy towards the living bereaved, should prevent us denouncing it as a crime against God and humanity, against the Creator and the creature. It is true that the exact enormity of the act is not defined with minute detail in the Holy Scriptures, or the limits of its punishment given; but to believers in the God whom we worship it has always been regarded as a sin of great magnitude” (James R. Clark, Messages of the First Presidency, Vol.3, p.88 – p. 89.)

And from President Spencer W. Kimball–

“Suicide is no escape. Suicide can only add another great crime to those already committed. It cannot alleviate any distress but can double or treble or quadruple it. It does not postpone the day of retribution nor of sorrow very long, for one plunges immediately from time into eternity, from mortality into the spirit world, and he goes with all his faculties, his mentality, his attitudes, his weaknesses, and his strengths” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p.187.)

Withall, we should be careful in making judgment. While we can easily differenciate between righteous and unrighteous actions, we may not always be in a position to judge if a person is responsible for his actions. We read in Samuel that

“The Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7.)

-Gramps

Is there any official Church statement or quote from the brethren concerning talking about Church doctrine outside of Church sanctioned meetings. It seems I heard something like this, that it is requested so we don’t start talking about things we shouldn’t or start making speculations, etc.

Steve, from Utah

Dear Steve,

If we weren’t to talk about Church doctrine outside of Church sanctioned meetings, we might as well leave all the scriptures and official Church publications in the church buildings. We could assign missionaries different class rooms in which to teach, and the members could bring the investigators there to be taught. They could progress from one classroom to another for each of the six lessons, then proceed to the baptismal font to be baptized. We could then swear them to secrecy to never mention outside of the Church building what they had learned.

Perhaps, however, you didn’t mean Church doctrine, but rather speculations about doctrinal issues. To speculate about doctrine suggests that we are talking about things that we don’t really understand, and are guessing at what they may mean. If this is what you refer to, it would probably be a good idea not to propound any ideas, whether religious or not, unless we felt that we knew what we were talking about. The amazing amount of misinformation that is passed around about Church doctrine and practice is more than evident by the many questions we entertain in this column.

-Gramps

I remember in talking about Satan having dominion over the waters, who said this? and someone else saying that in the last days even the airways will will be cursed. Do you know who said this?

Dear Linda,

On 9 August, 1831, the Prophet Joseph Smith, with ten elders of the Church, began a journey from Independence, Missouri to Kirtland, Ohio. The Prophet recorded the following about this experience in his journal:

“Many of the dangers so common upon the western waters, manifested themselves; and after we had encamped upon the bank of the river, at McIlwaine’s Bend, Brother Phelps, in open vision by daylight, saw the destroyer in his most terrible power, ride upon the face of the waters; others heard the noise, but saw not the vision” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Church History and Modern Revelation, Vol 1, p. 206.)

Following the recording of this account, on August 12, the prophet received the revelation identified as Section 61 in the Doctrine and Covenants. Part of that revelation refers specifically to the power of the Adversary “upon the waters.”

Behold, I, the Lord, in the beginning blessed the waters; but in the last days, by the mouth of my servant John, I cursed the waters. Wherefore, the days will come that no flesh shall be safe upon the waters. And it shall be said in days to come that none is able to go up to the land of Zion upon the waters, but he that is upright in heart. . . . And now I give unto you a commandment that what I say unto one I say unto all, that you shall forewarn your brethren concerning these waters, that they come not in journeying upon them, lest their faith fail and they are caught in snares; I, the Lord, have decreed, and the destroyer rideth upon the face thereof, and I revoke not the decree. Wherefore, let those concerning whom I have spoken, that should take their journey in haste–again I say unto you, let them take their journey in haste. And it mattereth not unto me, after a little, if it so be that they fill their mission, whether they go by water or by land; let this be as it is made known unto them according to their judgments hereafter. (D&C 61:14-22).

That statement about the airways being cursed is a new one on me.

-Gramps

I have heard that in the Council Room of the Twelve Apostles (which is in the Salt Lake Temple, I believe), there hangs a portrait of every prophet of this dispensation… but at the head of the table, alongside the portrait of Joseph Smith, there is a portrait of Hyrum.

Question 1: NOBODY I have asked locally knows which portraits these are, and I would really like to know which exact images are there, and who the artist(s) is/are.

Question 2: If indeed, Joseph and Hyrum are the duel key-holders to this dispensation, and hold a shared position of honor, why is Hyrum so little mentioned? I know he is honored, just by the fact that his posterity have played major roles in leading this church even to the present day (Elder Ballard is his descendant.) You can therefore understand why I was very pleased to see the Feb. 2000 Ensign feature about Hyrum. The only other real resource about Hyrum is the book by Brother Corbett… but there is not a source to be found on the Internet, not a web page, nothing, which specifically deals with the life of Hyrum Smith. I guess I just want to know why he isn’t honored more, or spoken of more, like Brigham and Joseph and Parley P. Pratt and all the other early “greats.”

Kate, from Michigan

Dear Kate,

Hyrum, who chose to remain out of the limelight in service to his brother and to the Church, probably would have wanted it that way, and perhaps the Lord is acceeding to his wishes in the matter.

As to portraits of the prophets in the Council Room in the Salt Lake Temple, I could not tell you. However, there are portraits of both Hyrum and Joseph in the grand hallway on the first floor, both apparently executed by the same artist.

-Gramps

I am pretty worry, because in all my friends’ patriarcal blessing it’s written that the Lord prepares a good husband for them n’ that one day they gonna get married. But in mine, there is nothing about that. Does it mean that I won’t get married?

Gloria, from the Univsity of Geneva

Dear Gloria,

Not at all!! The patriarchal blessing is a revelation of God to the person receiving the blessing. It may be used for instruction, guidance, direction and comfort in one’s life. However, all the blessings mentioned in a partriarchal blessings are conditioned upon the faith and obedience of the recipient, and a patriarchal blessing never pretents to be a predictor of all things. Much will happen in your life that is not mentioned in your patriarchal blessing. And those things what will happen will be the result of your own faith, diligence and obedience, or they will be the result of the lack of those life-giving qualities.

So, if you live a life of faith and obedience, and appeal to the Lord for his guidance and direction in achieving the worthy goals to which you aspire, God will surely help and guide you in bringing them about.

-Gramps

I do have a question for you! I remember being taught at some point that as LDS we were discouraged from being organ doners. If this is correct (and I might have just heard something wrong) could you please tell me why? Are there scriptures or have the prophets said something to this effect? Thank you in advance.

Margaret, from Utah

Dear Margaret,

If you have been taught that the Church discourages organ donation, you were being taught the opinion of some individual. Here is the statement from the General Handbook of Instructions on organ donation. “Whether an individual chooses to will his own bodily organs or authorizes the transplant of organs from a deceased family member is a decision for the individual or the deceased member’s family. The decision to receive a donated organ should be made with competent medical counsel and confirmation through prayer” (General Handbook of Instructions, 11-6).

-Gramps

In my Patriarchal Blessing there was not a tribe mentioned. Do you know what this means? Thanks

Lorraine, from California

Dear Lorraine,

It has no significance. Normally, one’s tribe is mentioned in a patriarchah blessing. It would not be out of place for you to visit your patriarch, and ask him if it would be appropriate for him to declare your lineage as an addendum to the blessings.

-Gramps

Bob, from Utah

Dear Bob,

Certainly at least some of the General Authorities receive a compensation for their services, as may be needed to sustain themselves and their families. However, although it could be said that they are employed in the ministry, nevertheless, they are all administrators. The lay ministry of the Church consists of its bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents and all those who under their direction preach the gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof. None of them receive a salary for their services, and all service is provided on a voluntary basis.

To accuse the church of not having a lay ministry because of the few general administrators who receive a compensation is no more logical than to claim that the sectarian churches do have a lay ministry because there may be here and there an individual priest or pastor who donates his services to their church.

-Gramps

Last month I was baptized into the LDS church. I would like to know if it is appropriate for an LDS family to display in their home a picture of The Last Supper. I notice that this is not a picture sold in the local LDS bookstore.

Barbara, from Washington

Dear Barbara,

Congratulations on your new membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a new member, let me suggest something to you about this column. We are happy to give our opinion on matters that people write in about, and we will attempt to answer your question; but this column is nothing more or less than the opinion of one individual, without any authoritative connection to the Church. (In fact, it was started merely as a family affair, to try to answer some of the questions of my own grandchildren, but has grown like Topsy to something unrelated to its original purpose). If you have any concerns as you begin your travels in the Lord’s kingdom (and, by the way, it will be an exciting and eye opening journey, whose destination is even beyond our own imagination) the place to go for the answers to all your questions is to your own bishop. He has been ordained and set apart with special gifts of discernment, and is actually the Lord’s representative to the members of his ward. He will give you authoritative answers to all your questions.

Now to an unauthoritative answer- There are no restrictions in the Church to displaying in the home any representation of the Savior or of his activities. There is no doubt in my mind that the great artists and the composers of great music were inspired by the Lord in their work, and have done much to elevate and ennoble mankind; and we can be lifted toward God by our appreciation of their great work.

-Gramps

I am always arguing with my mother on The Book of Mormon and other LDS issues. She is a nonmember who tries to prove that Joseph Smith is a fraud and that the whole church is a fraud. I love her arguing because it makes my testimony stronger every day. My question is that last night I had a dream that we were arguing about Joseph Smith and she told me he was in it for the money and that is the only reason he conned every one. I told her that he wasn’t in it for the money. I said “He was born a poor man and he died a poor man.” After waking up this morning I could not believe how real this was. But I keep questioning my dream. Did he die a poor man? I am not sure if he did. But if he did then I will be calling my mother to let her know.

Jesse

Dear Jesse,

The Prophet Joseph was in no way a wealthy man. He had only three years of formal schooling because of the necessity of working to help support his family. He was told by the Lord in a revelation that gaining wealth was not his strength. He was told that in temporal labors thou shalt not have strength, for this is not thy calling (D&C 24:9). He was in debt at the time of his death. In fact, In January 1851 a judgement was entered against his heirs requiring foreclosure on the property that he had owned in order to pay off his debts. (Dallin H. Oaks and Joseph I. Bentley, BYU Studies, Vol. 19).

-Gramps

My husband and I teach an adult institute class on the History of the Church. Someone asked us what happened to Hyrum Smith’s five children that he had by his first wife Jerusha. Jerusha died and then Hyrum married Mary Fielding who was the mother of Joseph F. Smith our sixth president of the church. Can you help us?

Dina in Colorado

Dear Dina,

Actually, Hyrum and Jerusha had six children. The following information is from–

Smith, Lucy Mack. “The Revised and Enhanced History of Joseph Smith by his Mother.” Edited by Scot Facer Proctor and Maurine Jensen Proctor. Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1996.

Children of Hyrum Smith and Jerusha Barden Smith (died Oct. 13, 1837, at Kirtland, Ohio),

1) Lovina, Born Sept. 16, 1827; died Oct. 8, 1876

2) Mary, Born June 27, 1829; died May 29, 1832

3) John, Born Sept. 22, 1832

4) Second Hyrum, Born April 27, 1834; died Sept. 21, 1841

5) Jerusha, Born Jan. 13, 1836

6) Sarah, Born Oct. 2, 1837; died Nov. 6, 1876

Children of Hyrum and Mary Fielding Smith, his second wife.

1) Fourth Joseph F. Born Nov. 13, 1838

2) Martha Ann Born May 14, 1841

-Gramps

I was wondering, what is the church’s stand on hypnosis? Or do they have one? Is it okay to use to overcome bad habits? Would you be making yourself vulnerable to someone else’s suggestion, thus your free agency? I’m just not clear on this. Would it depend on the idividual, the situation, and a prayerful decision? Any enlightenment on this would be appreciated. Thanks,

LN, from Utah

Dear LN,

Hypnosis is often used in the entertainment world, frequently to invoke embarrassing situations that are supposed to be perceived as humorous. I would recommend staying completely away from all such demonstrations. However, in the hands of trained and responsible professionals hypnotism can be a valuable tool in restoring memory, influencing the involuntary response system, and in treating certain ailments. In a letter addressed to Dr. Leslie Cooper on 7 October 1974, Church Commissioner of Health, Dr. James O. Mason, noted that the First Presidency had cleared the following statement on hypnosis: “The Church regards the use of hypnosis under competent, professional supervision for the treatment of disease as wholly a medical question. The Church advises members against participation in hypnosis demonstrations.”

-Gramps

What does the initial F. stand for in Joseph F Smith, and how did he get that name??

John, from Ohio

Dear John,

The F. in President Smith’s name stands for Fielding, which was the maiden name of his mother, Mary Fielding, who was born in England on July 21, 1801. Mary emigrated to Canada where she was converted to the Church in Toronto by Parley P. Pratt. She then came to Kirtland, Ohio where she married Hyrum Smith, the Prophet’s brother in Kirtland on December 24, 1837. Joseph was born in Far West, Missouri on November 13, 1838.

-Gramps

If we are punished for our own sins and not for Adam’s (or Eve’s) transgression, then why is it that we must work by the sweat of our brows and in sorrow bear children?

Chip @deseretonline.com

Dear Chip,

When Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden, the earth was in a terrestrial state, to which it will be returned during the millennium. Eve, being deceived by Satan, partook of the forbidden fruit and therefore would be cast out of the Garden of Eden. Adam, realizing that it would be better to partake of the forbidden fruit and remain with Eve so that they could procreate and begin the race of earth’s inhabitants rather than remain in the Garden alone, knowingly partook of the fruit so that the human family could follow.

It is essential to God’s plan that Adam’s children work out their salvation on a telestial sphere where Satan has power so that they could learn to overcome opposition and choose by their own volition to follow God in an environment of adversity. The opposition we experience in mortality– temptation, pain, suffering, disappointment, the necessity to labor to overcome an adverse environment–was not designed as a punishment but rather as a blessing. Our task is to become like the Savior. In fact, the Lord has commanded, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect”‘ (Matthew 5:48). In order to do so, we must overcome the world. The Lord has said “For verily I say unto you, I will that ye should overcome the world; wherefore I will have compassion upon you” (D&C 64:2).

Mortality in the telestial kingdom was not given as a punishment to man because of the acts of Adam and Eve, but as an opportunity to develop and exhibit faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ, and to live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God. In mortality we will be punished for our own disobedience and rewarded for our own righteousness, and to him who overcomes the greater opposition will come the greater reward.

Gramps

What is the church’s position on the death penalty? If the atonement was made for all, why is it necessary for the church to believe in sustaining the law for the death penalty rather than taking a position against it, as it seems inconsistent with the principle of forgiveness? I understand we uphold the law whereby we are governed but it would seem we should be able to forgive all men and let the Savior do the judging when it comes to the taking of life.

Monika

Dear Monika,

In the first place, as you pointed out, we believe in being obedient to the law of the land. The fact that a criminal is bound by the laws of the land has nothing to do with our attitude of forgiveness. We have no right nor reason to condemn or forgive someone who has committed an offense against someone other than ourselves. We could only condemn or forgive if we were in a position of judgement, which of course we are not. Your question should be, would I forgive a murderer if he had killed my spouse or one of my children? Then it would be meaningful to forgive the offense.

However, apart from your attitude of forgiveness, especially if the offender is unrepentant, society must be protected; and that is one of the legitimate functions of government– “to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare.”

You seem to imply that in letting the Savior be the judge, we should hold no one accountable for their actions. If such a course were taken, there would be no punishment for breaking the law or for violating the legitimate rights of another. It would give those with criminal intent a free hand, and would lead to anarchy. We have a responsibility before the Lord to uphold righteousness and to denounce wickedness. In the words of Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address, “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in.”

-Gramps

I hope you can answer a question that has always elicited a horrified expression from others before, but no one has ever been able to answer it in the 36 years that I have been an active member of the church. Why, in particular, are we cautioned against the use of face cards? It just can’t be that it wastes time, because we have had church game nights, where other card games like PIT have been played. I know that some have said that it leads to gambling, but when I was little I quite enjoyed my great grandmother playing cards with me, and never was gambling part of it. If there is something really evil about the face cards, especially, I would surely like to know. Thank you for any enlightenment that you can shed on this subject.

Sheila, from Alabama

Dear Sheila,

By face cards, I assume you mean the regular deck that is commonly used for gambling. President Joseph F. Smith recorded the following counsel in 1903.

“While a simple game of cards in itself may be harmless, it is a fact that by immoderate repetition it ends in an infatuation for chance schemes, in habits of excess, in waste of precious time, in dulling and stupor of the mind, and in the complete destruction of religious feeling. These are serious results, evils that should and must be avoided by the Latter-day Saints. Then again, there is the grave danger that lurks in persistent card playing, which begets the spirit of gambling, of speculation and that awakens the dangerous desire to get something for nothing” (Improvement Era, Vol. 6, August, 1903, p. 779).

My assumption is that there has been no change in the position of the Brethren with respect to card playing from that time to this.

-Gramps

I was wondering why we celebrate Christmas in December instead of in April when Jesus Christ was really born?

Ann, from California

Dear Ann,

No definite date has been established for the birth of the Savior. Our notion that he was born in April comes from D&C 20:1, which states

The rise of the Church of Christ in these last days, being one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh, it being regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country, by the will and commandments of God, in the fourth month, and on the sixth day of the month which is called April.

This statement only specifies that the Church was organized 1830 years after the birth of the Savior. The statement, however, specifies April 6 as the day of the organization of the Church, not the day of the Savior’s birth.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie has made the following statement on the subject:

“We do not believe it is possible with the present state of our knowledge-including that which is known both in and out of the Church-to state with finality when the natal day of the Lord Jesus actually occurred” (The Mortal Messiah, Vol.1, Footnotes, p.349).

If, indeed, the Savior was born in the month of April, the official birthday was designated by the Roman emperor Constantine in 325 A.D. to coincide with the winter solstice. This was done to placate the Pagans who worshiped the seasons of the year. So, when the Church was organized Christmas was well established as December 25. The Church has not taken issue with the traditional date for the celebration of Christmas.

-Gramps

This reminded me, however, of another subject with which I am uncomfortable, and that is the curse of dark skin on the Lamanites. Perhaps it is having been raised in the 1960′s, in the midst of the civil rights movement, but the idea of “dark skin” being a curse bothers me. Has any general authority discussed this issue? I sometimes suspect that the characterization of “white” and “fair” as positive and good, and of “dark” as negative and bad, is a metaphor for cleanliness and filthiness, but that does not explain why people who are not “filthy” would bear the symbol of filthiness. Can you help me out?

Dear Dennis,

It is altogether natural to try to make sense of the world from the perspective of our own experience. However, where we are dealing with the things of God and eternity, they surpass the judgement criteria that we build up out of our own experience. The scriptures and the words of the prophets are the standard by which all other things are judged. The descendants of Cain were blessed with a black skin and the descendants of Laman and Lemual were cursed with a dark skin. So that is evidence in itself that no curse is intrinsically related to skin color. The purpose of the curse on the Lamanites was to make them immediately identifiable to the Nephites so that there would be no interracial mixing. This was important because the descendants of Laman and Lemual inherited the seeds of disobedience from their parents, figuratively speaking, “to the third and forth generation.”

The color, white, is a symbol of purity. The Father and the Son have been described as being white in their appearance. Again, a white cloth is no more pure that a dark cloth, so purity is not in the whiteness, but whiteness is in the purity.

-Gramps