Gramps,
Can you provide comparisons and differences between Japanese Shinto shrines and temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, when Church missionaries are assigned to Japan to teach investigators who are practitioners of the Japanese national religion, Shinto? Godspeed you in your research.
Samuel
Samuel,
At first glance, a temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Japanese Shinto shrine seem to have very little in common. One belongs to a Christian restorationist faith that began in nineteenth-century America, while the other reflects religious traditions that have existed in Japan for centuries. Their doctrines, purposes, and histories are very different.
Yet when we look beyond the surface, some fascinating parallels emerge. Both places are viewed as sacred spaces set apart from ordinary life. Both encourage worshippers to prepare themselves before entering. Both connect people with heaven in symbolic ways. And both remind visitors that there are places where the divine and the mortal meet.
Of course, the similarities should not be stretched too far. LDS temples and Shinto shrines serve different religious functions and are built upon different theological foundations. Nevertheless, comparing them can help us appreciate how people across cultures seek sacred experiences.
One of the most obvious similarities is the idea that certain places are holy.
For Latter-day Saints, temples are considered the “House of the Lord.” They are dedicated buildings where sacred ordinances are performed and where members seek a closer relationship with God. Temples are distinct from regular meetinghouses, where weekly worship services are held.
Similarly, Shinto shrines are sacred places dedicated to the worship and veneration of kami. The word “kami” is often translated as gods, spirits, or divine beings, though none of those terms perfectly captures the concept. Shrines are viewed as places where people can approach the sacred and offer prayers.
In both traditions, there is a clear distinction between ordinary space and holy space. Crossing onto temple grounds or passing through a shrine’s entrance carries symbolic meaning. It marks a movement from the everyday world into a place devoted to spiritual matters.
Another interesting similarity is the emphasis on preparation.
Before entering an LDS temple, members are expected to live according to certain spiritual standards and receive a temple recommend through interviews with local priesthood leaders. This preparation is intended to help worshippers approach sacred ordinances with faith and reverence.
At a Shinto shrine, visitors often participate in ritual purification before approaching the main sanctuary. A common practice is to wash the hands and rinse the mouth at a purification fountain called a temizuya. This act symbolizes cleansing before entering a sacred environment.
The purposes of these preparations differ, but the principle remains the same: sacred experiences deserve thoughtful preparation rather than casual participation.
Both traditions also use physical movement to teach spiritual truths.
In many LDS temples, worshippers progress through rooms and ceremonies that symbolize humanity’s relationship with God and the journey back into His presence. Temple worship is designed to be deeply symbolic and instructional.
Likewise, a visit to a Shinto shrine often involves a symbolic path. Visitors may pass through one or more torii gates, walk along designated approaches, and move gradually toward the shrine’s most sacred areas. Each step helps create a sense of leaving the ordinary world behind.
Neither tradition sees sacred space as merely a building. The approach itself becomes part of the spiritual experience.
Architecture plays an important role in both traditions.
LDS temples are often designed to inspire feelings of peace, reverence, and holiness. Their carefully maintained grounds, artistic details, and symbolic features encourage reflection and worship.
Japanese Shinto shrines also place great emphasis on beauty and harmony. Many are located in forests, near mountains, or alongside other natural settings. Their architecture frequently reflects simplicity, balance, and a connection to nature.
Although the styles differ dramatically, both traditions recognize that physical surroundings can influence spiritual feelings. Beautiful sacred spaces invite worshippers to slow down, reflect, and focus on things of eternal significance.
Many religions hold that certain places serve as points of connection between heaven and earth.
Latter-day Saints often view temples as places where God’s presence can be felt in a special way. Temples are also associated with covenants that connect families across generations and link mortality with eternity.
In Shinto tradition, shrines are places where humans may approach the kami and seek blessings, guidance, protection, or gratitude. Shrines serve as important points of contact between the human and spiritual realms.
Again, the theology behind these beliefs differs significantly, but both traditions recognize sacred places as locations where people seek divine connection.
While the similarities are fascinating, the differences are even more significant.
The most important distinction is theological.
LDS temples are centered on worship of God the Eternal Father and faith in Jesus Christ. Temple ordinances focus on covenants, salvation, exaltation, and eternal family relationships. Everything that occurs in an LDS temple is connected to the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Shinto shrines, by contrast, are not Christian institutions. They focus on reverence for kami, ancestral traditions, community worship, and harmony with the natural and spiritual worlds. Concepts such as salvation, atonement, and covenant relationships with God are not central to Shinto belief as they are in Latter-day Saint theology.
Access also differs. Most areas of a Shinto shrine are generally open to the public and often welcome visitors regardless of religious background. LDS temples, after dedication, are reserved for members of the Church who meet established standards of worthiness. However, temples are opened to the public during open-house periods before dedication.
The activities performed within these sacred spaces also differ. Temple ordinances such as baptisms for the dead, endowments, and sealings have no direct equivalent in Shinto practice. Likewise, many shrine rituals and traditions have no counterpart in Latter-day Saint worship.
Perhaps the most meaningful lesson from comparing LDS temples and Japanese Shinto shrines is not that they are the same—they clearly are not. Rather, people from very different cultures often express a common desire to seek the sacred.
Whether it is a temple rising above a city skyline or a shrine nestled among ancient trees, sacred places remind us that human beings have long searched for connection with something greater than themselves.
Latter-day Saints would see the ultimate purpose of temple worship as drawing closer to God through Jesus Christ and making eternal covenants. Followers of Shinto approach shrines with different beliefs and expectations. Yet both traditions demonstrate the powerful role that sacred spaces can play in helping people pause, reflect, worship, and seek divine influence in their lives.
In a world that often feels hurried and noisy, both temples and shrines stand as reminders that some places are meant to lift our thoughts beyond the ordinary and toward the eternal.
]]>
Gramps,
Joseph Smith was foreordained to become a prophet. Did he become a prophet when he had the First Vision or when he received the Priesthood? Thank you.
Bonnie
Bonnie,
In the Book of Mormon, Joseph of Egypt prophesied:
“A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins” (2 Nephi 3:6).
A few verses later, he added:
“His name shall be called after me; and it shall be after the name of his father” (2 Nephi 3:15).
Latter-day Saints understand these verses to refer specifically to Joseph Smith Jr. That means Joseph’s prophetic mission did not begin accidentally or unexpectedly. He was foreordained by God before he was born.
But that leads to an interesting question: When did Joseph Smith actually become a prophet? Did it happen when he experienced the First Vision in 1820? Or did it happen later when priesthood authority was restored?
According to LDS theology and doctrine, the answer is not entirely one or the other. The First Vision marked Joseph’s divine calling as a prophet, while the later restoration of priesthood authority enabled him to officially carry out that prophetic mission in its fullness.
The Restoration unfolded step by step.
Joseph’s First Vision in the spring of 1820 was undeniably prophetic in nature. As a fourteen-year-old boy seeking truth and forgiveness, Joseph entered a grove of trees to pray. There he saw God the Father and Jesus Christ.
Elder Craig C. Christensen stated plainly:
“Joseph Smith saw God, the Eternal Father, and Jesus Christ.”
That moment changed religious history forever. Heaven opened again after centuries of apostasy, and revelation resumed through a living prophet.
President Gordon B. Hinckley emphasized just how foundational this event was when he taught:
“Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision.”
Likewise, President Ezra Taft Benson declared:
“It was the greatest event that has ever happened in this world since the resurrection of the Master.”
Those are powerful statements. Church leaders consistently point to the First Vision as the beginning of the Restoration and the beginning of Joseph Smith’s prophetic ministry.
In many ways, Joseph fits the biblical pattern of prophetic calling. Moses encountered God at the burning bush before leading Israel. Isaiah saw the Lord in vision before being commissioned. Jeremiah was foreordained before birth and called while still young.
Joseph’s First Vision follows that same pattern. He did not simply receive a personal spiritual experience. He received a revelation for the world. He was told that the existing churches lacked the fullness of Christ’s gospel and that God would restore truth again through him.
That is what prophets do.
However, LDS doctrine also places enormous importance on priesthood authority. While Joseph had been called by God through revelation and vision, the authority necessary to officially act in God’s name for the Church had not yet been restored.
That came later.
In 1829, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery prayed about baptism while translating the Book of Mormon. In response, John the Baptist appeared and restored the Aaronic Priesthood. Joseph Smith—History records his words:
“Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron” (Joseph Smith—History 1:69).
Shortly afterward, Peter, James, and John restored the Melchizedek Priesthood.
Elder David A. Bednar explained:
“Ancient prophets and apostles personally conferred priesthood authority upon Joseph Smith.”
This restoration of priesthood authority mattered deeply because, in LDS theology, God’s Church must operate through divinely authorized priesthood keys and ordinances. A person may receive revelation without a priesthood office, but official authority to administer ordinances and govern the Church is conferred through the priesthood.
That distinction helps answer the question.
Joseph Smith was called as a prophet through the First Vision, but he received the priesthood authority necessary to formally organize and lead the restored Church later through heavenly messengers.
The Restoration itself unfolded gradually. It did not all happen in a single moment.
After the First Vision came Moroni’s visits. Then came the translation of the Book of Mormon. Then the restoration of priesthood authority. Finally, the Church was formally organized on April 6, 1830.
Even then, revelation and priesthood keys continued to unfold over time.
The Book of Mormon describes this pattern beautifully:
“I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept” (2 Nephi 28:30).
That phrase perfectly describes the Restoration process.
President Ezra Taft Benson once referred to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and said:
“The only thing that preceded it was the First Vision.”
In other words, the First Vision was the opening event that launched everything else.
The official Restoration proclamation issued by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles summarizes it this way:
“We affirm that under the direction of the Father and the Son, heavenly messengers came to instruct Joseph and reestablish the Church of Jesus Christ.”
Notice the sequence there. First came the appearance of the Father and the Son. Then came additional heavenly messengers and the restoration of the priesthood. Together, these events formed the Restoration.
This is why many Latter-day Saints would say Joseph became a prophet in calling at the First Vision and became fully empowered to function as the prophet of the restored Church through priesthood restoration.
The two events are not competing answers. They are connected parts of the same divine process.
Without the First Vision, there would have been no Restoration to begin with. Without priesthood authority, the Restoration could not have been formally established and administered.
Together, they show how God prepares, calls, authorizes, and guides His servants.
Perhaps there is something meaningful in the fact that Joseph’s prophetic role unfolded gradually. The Restoration itself was never intended to be a single dramatic event and then finished. It was, and still is, an ongoing work directed by Jesus Christ.
Joseph Smith grew into his prophetic ministry line upon line, just as the restored Church itself continued to grow under divine revelation.
]]>
Gramps,
Is it appropriate for an LDS member to play the organ at a different church for compensation on Sundays?
Michael
Michael,
According to the theology and teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the answer often depends on motives, circumstances, and whether the activity aligns with the spirit of keeping the Sabbath day holy.
The Church does not have a specific commandment that forbids a member from playing music for another church on Sunday. In fact, Latter-day Saints generally respect and appreciate sincere worship wherever it is found. The Church’s Articles of Faith declare:
“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege.”
That principle has often encouraged positive relationships between Latter-day Saints and other faith communities. Music, especially sacred music, can be a powerful way to build goodwill and uplift others. Many LDS members who are professional musicians have participated in community choirs, weddings, funerals, and religious events of other denominations without conflict with their beliefs.
However, the question becomes more complex when compensation and Sunday observance are involved.
Latter-day Saints believe the Sabbath is sacred. In the scriptures, the Lord taught:
“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” (Exodus 20:8)
Modern revelation reinforces that principle. In Doctrine and Covenants 59:9-10, the Lord explains the purpose of the Sabbath:
And that thou mayest more fully keep thyself unspotted from the world, thou shalt go to the house of prayer and offer up thy sacraments upon my holy day;
For verily this is a day appointed unto you to rest from your labors, and to pay thy devotions unto the Most High;
For many members, that phrase “rest from your labors” becomes central to the discussion. If playing the organ is simply employment—another professional obligation undertaken primarily for income—some Latter-day Saints might feel uncomfortable with it on Sunday. Church leaders have frequently encouraged members to avoid unnecessary work on the Sabbath whenever possible.
For example, Russell M. Nelson taught:
“In addition to your going to church, partaking of the sacrament, and being diligent in your specific call to serve, what other activities would help to make the Sabbath a delight for you?” The Sabbath Is a Delight
In that same message,Elder Nelson also asked:
“What sign will you give to the Lord to show your love for Him?”
That perspective matters because LDS theology generally addresses Sabbath questions through principles rather than exhaustive regulations. Rather than publishing a list of forbidden activities, Church leaders encourage members to seek the companionship of the Holy Ghost and thoughtfully evaluate whether an activity invites spirituality or distracts from it.
So, could playing the organ at another church actually fit within the spirit of Sabbath worship?
In some cases, many Latter-day Saints would likely say yes.
If the music is sacred and uplifting, and serves to help others worship Jesus Christ, a member might feel that the service itself is spiritually worthwhile. Organ music has historically played an important role in Christian worship, and Latter-day Saints deeply value sacred music themselves. The introduction to the Church hymnbook teaches:
“Music is given of God to further his purposes.”
Someone who prayerfully uses musical talents to bless others could reasonably feel they are offering service rather than merely performing a secular job.
There are also practical realities to consider. Some musicians rely on Sunday religious services as part of their livelihood. Organists and pianists are often hired specifically because churches need trained musicians. LDS theology recognizes that not all work on Sunday is avoidable. Medical workers, emergency personnel, caregivers, and others frequently serve on Sundays out of necessity. While playing organ music may not rise to the same level of necessity, Church teachings generally leave room for individual judgment in employment situations.
At the same time, there are important cautions.
A Latter-day Saint should honestly ask: “Is this drawing me closer to Christ and helping me honor the Sabbath, or is it turning Sunday into an ordinary workday?” That distinction matters. If the commitment regularly interferes with attending LDS meetings, partaking of the sacrament, fulfilling Church callings, or spending meaningful time with family, many would see that as a concern.
The Church’s handbook teaches:
“Those who attend should avoid disruptions or distractions contrary to worship.” General Handbook 38.1.1
Again, the emphasis is on spirit and intent rather than rigid prohibition.
There is also the matter of appearance and priorities. Latter-day Saints covenant to take upon themselves the name of Christ and to be examples of discipleship. If a member accepted Sunday work solely for its financial rewards while neglecting spiritual responsibilities, it could gradually weaken their Sabbath observance. On the other hand, if the opportunity allowed them to share uplifting music, maintain respectful relationships with other Christians, and still faithfully honor their own worship commitments, many leaders would likely view the situation differently.
Interestingly, LDS history includes examples of cooperation and friendship with other faiths. Church leaders have often encouraged members to participate in community efforts that promote goodness and faith in God. Gordon B. Hinckley stated:
“We simply say to those who may be of other faiths or of no faith, ‘You bring with you such truth as you have and let us see if we can add to it.’” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Gordon B. Hinckley, Chapter 20
That attitude has shaped much of the Church’s interfaith approach. Playing sacred music in another Christian setting would not automatically be viewed as disloyal to LDS beliefs. In fact, many members would see it as an opportunity to demonstrate kindness, professionalism, and Christian fellowship.
Ultimately, LDS theology places significant responsibility on personal revelation. A member facing this question would likely be encouraged to pray, study the scriptures, and, if uncertainty persisted, seek counsel from local priesthood leaders. Different circumstances may lead faithful members to different conclusions.
One organist may decide that accepting compensation for Sunday worship services feels incompatible with how they personally honor the Sabbath. Another may feel peace in using God-given talents to assist reverent worship while still keeping covenants and attending their own meetings. Both individuals could be acting sincerely within the framework of LDS teachings.
That balance between commandments and individual spiritual guidance is an important part of Latter-day Saint belief. President David O. McKay often quoted the statement:
“No other success can compensate for failure in the home.” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: David O. McKay, Chapter 16
That reminder often influences how LDS members evaluate Sunday commitments. Even good activities can become spiritually unbalanced if they consistently crowd out worship, family, or rest.
So, is it appropriate for an LDS member to play the organ at another church for compensation on Sundays?
According to LDS theology, it is neither inherently forbidden nor automatically encouraged. The appropriateness depends largely on the spirit in which it is done, the effect it has on Sabbath worship and family life, and whether the individual feels they are honoring the Lord through the decision.
For Latter-day Saints, the deeper question is usually not simply “Am I allowed to do this?” but rather, “Will this help me keep the Sabbath holy and draw closer to Jesus Christ?” When approached prayerfully and sincerely, that question often leads to the clearest answer.
]]>
Gramps,
My grandma wants to go to the temple more than anything, but her bishop says she isn’t allowed because her husband (who isn’t a member and has never been) won’t let her. Why does a non-member get to dictate her eternal salvation simply because she’s married? If she weren’t married, she’d go get her endowments like anyone else. They won’t even allow her to do baptism for the dead. Why does she need her husband’s permission at all?
Annie
Annie,
The answer depends on how the Church views marriage, agency, family harmony, and sacred covenants.
First, it is important to clarify something. A member whose spouse is not a member is generally still able to attend the temple for ordinances, such as baptisms for the dead, or for other approved worship, if they hold a valid recommend. The issue of spousal permission historically applied most directly to receiving one’s own endowment or entering into sealing covenants when the spouse was not endowed or not a member. Bishops and stake presidents were instructed to consider whether the ordinance could seriously disrupt the marriage relationship.
An older Church handbook policy stated:
“When a man or woman is married to someone who is unendowed, the bishop must receive written permission from the spouse.”
That policy was referenced in Church instructional materials and discussions by priesthood leaders.
While the handbook’s wording and procedures have evolved over time, the principle behind them helps explain the Church’s reasoning.
One of the clearest reasons is that the Church places enormous emphasis on protecting marriage. Latter-day Saint theology teaches that marriage is sacred and ordained of God. The Church does not want temple participation to become a source of secrecy, betrayal, manipulation, or division inside a home.
The Apostle Paul taught:
“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband” (1 Corinthians 7:14).
Paul also counseled Christians to preserve peace within mixed-faith marriages whenever possible. That same spirit exists in Latter-day Saint teachings today.
The Church Handbook teaches:
“A married person must have the consent of his or her spouse before being baptized.”
That policy surprises some people, but it reveals an important principle: the Church does not want conversion or covenant-making to destroy family trust. Baptism, temple covenants, garments, tithing, and religious commitments can significantly affect a marriage. Because of that, Church leaders have often encouraged openness and mutual respect between spouses before major spiritual commitments are made.
President Gordon B. Hinckley frequently emphasized kindness and unity in marriage. He taught:
“Marriage, in its truest sense, is a partnership of equals.” “Standing for Something”
That idea matters here. Even when spouses do not share the same faith, the Church encourages members to honor the marriage partnership and avoid creating unnecessary tension or feelings of exclusion.
Temple covenants are not small commitments. Receiving the endowment includes promises regarding discipleship, sacrifice, consecration, and wearing the temple garment. For a spouse who is not a member—or who may not understand the temple—those changes can feel sudden or even frightening.
Imagine a husband or wife who suddenly discovers their spouse now wears sacred religious clothing under their regular clothes, spends significant time at the temple, increases financial sacrifices through tithing, or begins talking about eternal marriage in ways the other spouse does not fully understand. Without communication and consent, that could place serious strain on the relationship.
The Church tries to avoid that.
Elder Richard G. Scott once taught:
“Two of the vital pillars that sustain Father in Heaven’s plan of happiness are marriage and the family.” “The Eternal Blessings of Marriage”
That principle of thoughtfulness applies spiritually, too. The Church does not want temple worship to become a wedge between husband and wife.
At the same time, it is equally important to understand what this policy does not mean. It does not mean a nonmember spouse has authority over someone’s salvation. It does not mean the Church believes a member is spiritually inferior because they married outside the faith. And it certainly does not mean a faithful member is unwanted at the temple.
Rather, it reflects the Church’s effort to balance two deeply important doctrines:
Latter-day Saint doctrine strongly teaches agency. God does not force covenant relationships, and the Church generally avoids creating family conflict when patience and understanding might help preserve peace.
President Russell M. Nelson has repeatedly taught that the gospel should strengthen families, not fracture them. He said:
“I promise that as you diligently work to remodel your home into a center of gospel learning, over time your Sabbath days will truly be a delight.” “Becoming Exemplary Latter-day Saints”
That becomes difficult if temple participation creates bitterness or distrust in a marriage.
There is also a historical context worth understanding. In earlier generations, joining the Church could dramatically affect family life and social standing. Converts were sometimes rejected by spouses or families. Church leaders often tried to avoid situations that left a spouse feeling blindsided or abandoned. Seeking permission was partly an attempt to preserve transparency and respect within marriage.
Over time, the Church has adjusted some temple-related policies to be more accommodating of families. One example came in 2019, when the First Presidency removed the previous one-year waiting period between a civil marriage and a temple sealing in many areas of the world. The Church explained that one reason for the adjustment was concern that family members sometimes felt excluded from important family moments.
That change reflected a continuing effort to strengthen both temple worship and family relationships.
Latter-day Saints believe temples are literally the “House of the Lord.” Temple worship is sacred, but so is marriage. When policies involving spouses exist, they are generally rooted in the idea that covenant-making should happen with honesty, unity, and respect whenever possible.
For members in this situation, the experience can still be painful. Some faithful Saints deeply desire temple blessings while their spouse is uncomfortable or opposed. Church leaders typically encourage patience, love, communication, and Christlike understanding rather than pressure or ultimatums.
Sometimes hearts soften over time. Sometimes they do not. But the Church teaches that God understands every circumstance perfectly and that no eternal blessing will ultimately be denied to the faithful.
Elder Jeffrey R. Holland once offered comfort to those carrying difficult family situations:
“Some blessings come soon, some come late, and some don’t come until heaven; but for those who embrace the gospel of Jesus Christ, they come.” “An High Priest of Good Things to Come”
That hope is central to Latter-day Saint belief. The temple is about eternal families—and sometimes protecting a marriage relationship in mortality is part of preparing for those eternal blessings later on.
]]>
Gramps,
In Alma Chapter 12, it discusses temporal and spiritual death. What is a spiritual death?
Joel
Joel,
When people read Alma 12 for the first time, one phrase tends to stand out: “spiritual death.“ Alma talks about both a temporal death and a spiritual death, and it can sound a little intimidating at first. What exactly does that mean? Is it the same as physical death? Does it mean someone stops existing? And how does Jesus Christ fit into all of it?
From a Latter-day Saint perspective, spiritual death is not the end of existence. It is separation from God. Alma’s teachings in Alma 12 are deeply connected to the Fall of Adam and Eve, the purpose of mortality, and the redeeming power of Jesus Christ.
The good news in Alma 12 is that although spiritual death is real, Christ has made a way for us to overcome it.
In Alma 12, Alma is teaching Zeezrom and the people of Ammonihah about the plan of redemption. As he explains the Fall of Adam and Eve, he teaches that humanity became subject to two kinds of death.
The first is physical or temporal death, which is the separation of the spirit from the body.
The second is spiritual death.
Alma taught:
“Then cometh a death, even a second death, which is a spiritual death.” (Alma 12:16)
Latter-day Saints generally understand spiritual death in two ways. The first type of spiritual death came because of the Fall of Adam and Eve.
Before the Fall, Adam and Eve lived in God’s presence in the Garden of Eden. After they partook of the fruit, they were cast out of the Garden and separated from God’s immediate presence. That separation is called spiritual death.
The Church’s Gospel Topics entry on spiritual death explains it simply:
“Spiritual death is separation from God.”
Because all of us live in a fallen world outside of God’s presence, every person experiences this first spiritual death. In that sense, all humanity is spiritually separated from God during mortality.
Samuel the Lamanite taught:
“All mankind, by the fall of Adam being cut off from the presence of the Lord, are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual.” (Helaman 14:16)
That may sound discouraging, but in LDS theology, this separation is actually part of Heavenly Father’s plan. Mortality is meant to be a time of growth, learning, testing, repentance, and choosing whether we will follow Jesus Christ.
Alma explained:
“There was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God.” (Alma 42:4)
In other words, mortality is not evidence that God abandoned us. It is part of His plan to help us become more like Him.
There is also another form of spiritual death discussed in scripture. This second type comes not because of Adam’s Fall, but because of our own sins and choices. When people knowingly reject God, refuse to repent, and persist in sin, they separate themselves spiritually from Him.
Alma warned:
“Whosoever dieth in his sins, as to a temporal death, shall also die a spiritual death; yea, he shall die as to things pertaining unto righteousness.” (Alma 12:16)
This is why repentance matters so much in the restored gospel. Sin distances us from God spiritually. Repentance brings us back.
President Russell M. Nelson once taught:
“The joy we feel has little to do with the circumstances of our lives and everything to do with the focus of our lives.” Joy and Spiritual Survival
When our focus turns away from God, spiritual darkness increases. When we turn toward Christ, spiritual life increases.
Latter-day Saints often talk about feeling “close to the Spirit” or “far from the Spirit.” That idea is connected to spiritual life and spiritual death. A person may be physically alive but spiritually disconnected from God because of sin, rebellion, or hardness of heart.
That is one reason Alma repeatedly warned the people not to harden their hearts.
One of the central messages of the Book of Mormon is that Jesus Christ overcomes both physical and spiritual death. Through His Resurrection, everyone will overcome physical death. Through His Atonement, repentance, and grace, we can overcome spiritual death and return to God’s presence.
Alma taught:
“And thus mercy can satisfy the demands of justice, and encircles them in the arms of safety.” (Alma 34:16)
The Savior does not simply rescue us from physical death. He heals our separation from God.
Elder D. Todd Christofferson explained:
“The Savior’s Redemption has two parts. First, it atones for Adam’s transgression and the consequent Fall of man by overcoming what could be called the direct effects of the Fall—physical death and spiritual death. Physical death is well understood; spiritual death is the separation of man from God.” Redemption
That is why Alma refers to the gospel as the “plan of redemption.” Redemption literally means being brought back. We are brought back from physical death through resurrection. We are brought back from spiritual death through Jesus Christ.
Sometimes the phrase “spiritual death” can sound abstract or dramatic, but in everyday life, it is actually very relatable. Anyone who has felt distant from God understands at least part of the concept.
There are moments when people feel spiritually alive—full of faith, peace, purpose, and closeness to the Holy Ghost.
There are other moments when people feel spiritually numb, disconnected, guilty, hardened, or lost.
Alma’s message is that Christ can change that.
One of the beautiful things about LDS theology is that spiritual death is not presented as hopeless. The entire purpose of the gospel is to help people return to a relationship with God.
The Book of Mormon repeatedly teaches that, because of Jesus Christ, spiritual separation need not be permanent.
President Boyd K. Packer taught:
“I repeat, save for the exception of the very few who defect to perdition, there is no habit, no addiction, no rebellion, no transgression, no apostasy, no crime exempted from the promise of complete forgiveness. That is the promise of the atonement of Christ.” The Brilliant Morning of Forgiveness
That includes spiritual wounds, spiritual distance, and spiritual death. The opposite of spiritual death is eternal life.
In LDS theology, eternal life is more than simply living forever. Everyone will live forever because of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Eternal life means living with God and becoming like Him.
That is why the scriptures describe eternal life as dwelling in God’s presence.
Spiritual death is separation from Him. Eternal life is reunion with Him. And Jesus Christ is the bridge between the two.
Alma 12 ultimately points readers toward hope in Christ. Alma warned about judgment and spiritual death, but his purpose was not to frighten people. His purpose was to invite them to repent and come unto Jesus Christ.
That invitation is still the same today.
No matter how spiritually distant someone feels, the restored gospel teaches that, through the Savior, they can return to the presence of God. That is the heart of the plan of redemption.
And that is why Alma’s teachings about spiritual death ultimately concern Jesus Christ.
]]>
Gramps,
Is there a correct positioning of hands and fingers on the head of a person being blessed, i.e., laying on of hands on the head or top of the head and side of the head in temple ordinances? Is there a protocol that is being violated if not done properly?
Dadi Bear
Dadi Bear,
In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the “laying on of hands” is a sacred and familiar practice. It is used in confirmations, priesthood ordinations, blessings of healing and comfort, setting apart for callings, and temple ordinances.
The short answer, according to Latter-day Saint theology, is this: the Church teaches that hands are to be placed reverently upon the person’s head, but there is generally not a revealed “magic formula” for finger placement or exact positioning beyond the instructions given for the ordinance itself. The power of the ordinance does not come from precise hand geometry. It comes from priesthood authority, faith in Jesus Christ, and obedience to the ordinance as established by the Lord.
The practice itself is ancient. Throughout scripture, the laying on of hands is connected with blessing, healing, receiving the Holy Ghost, and setting apart for sacred service.
Jesus Himself used touch in blessing others. In the New Testament, we read:
“Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 8:17)
Another example comes when Christ blessed little children:
“And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.” (Mark 10:16)
Latter-day Saints see these passages as establishing the pattern for priesthood ordinances today. The physical act matters because it symbolizes authority, connection, blessing, and divine appointment. But the scriptures do not provide detailed diagrams about finger placement or exact angles of the hands.
The clearest guide comes from the official Church handbook. For priesthood blessings, confirmations, ordinations, and setting apart, the instructions are simple and consistent: brethren participating place their hands “lightly on the person’s head.”
The current handbook can be found on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Handbook. Sections on confirmations, ordinations, blessings, and setting apart consistently focus on priesthood authority and the revealed ordinance rather than on detailed finger positioning.
That simplicity is important.
In Latter-day Saint theology, ordinances are sacred, but the Lord usually avoids turning them into rigid ritualism. The gospel is not intended to become a system in which spiritual validity depends on tiny technical details that God never revealed.
President Joseph Fielding Smith frequently emphasized that ordinances should be performed properly while avoiding unnecessary speculation and traditions beyond revelation. In Doctrines of Salvation, he taught that the Lord has revealed the essentials necessary for ordinances and salvation rather than endless ceremonial detail.
That principle applies well here.
Anyone who has participated in blessings has probably noticed slight differences.
Some place both hands directly on top of the head. Others place one hand more toward the side. In group blessings, hands often overlap as several priesthood holders participate at once. In temple ordinances, positioning may be influenced by space, ceremony, or specific instructions for the ordinance.
These differences usually arise from practical reasons, tradition, comfort, or local habits—not from competing doctrines.
The Church teaches uniformity in the ordinance itself, but not obsessive uniformity in incidental mechanics unless specifically instructed.
For example, in a confirmation, the essential revealed elements include:
Those are the essential components. Whether a thumb rests slightly higher or lower does not determine the validity of the ordinance.
Temple ordinances are naturally treated with extra care and reverence because of their sacred nature. Within the temple, workers and officiators receive instruction on performing the ordinances. Some ordinances may include specific ceremonial positions or actions associated with the ordinance presentation itself.
Even then, Latter-day Saint theology does not teach that mystical power resides in exact finger placement. Rather, temple ordinances emphasize covenant, symbolism, order, and obedience.
The Lord declared:
“In the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:20)
President Russell M. Nelson has repeatedly emphasized the sacred nature of priesthood ordinances and the need to perform them with care and reverence. In his talk “The Melchizedek Priesthood and the Keys,” he taught that priesthood ordinances open access to “all the spiritual blessings of the Church.”
Notice that the “power of godliness” comes through the ordinance established by God, not through accidental precision in hand posture beyond what the Lord has revealed.
Members sometimes become anxious about whether an ordinance was “done wrong” because someone’s hand slipped or rested awkwardly. Church leaders have generally counseled against this kind of scrupulosity. The Lord is not waiting to invalidate sacred ordinances because of harmless human imperfections when the ordinance was performed in sincerity and according to authorized procedure.
Although exact positioning is usually not the focus, reverence absolutely is.
A priesthood blessing is not casual. It represents acting in the name of Jesus Christ. The laying on of hands should therefore be respectful, calm, dignified, and orderly.
Elder David A. Bednar has often warned against becoming distracted by cultural traditions or practices that go beyond revealed doctrine. In his well-known message “That We May Always Have His Spirit to Be with Us,” he emphasized exactness in keeping covenants while remaining centered on Christ and the Spirit rather than outward performance alone.
That means participants should avoid joking, carelessness, or drawing attention to themselves. The focus belongs on the Savior and the person receiving the ordinance.
Over the years, some members have passed along unofficial ideas about ordinances. Sometimes people assume there must be hidden symbolism in every tiny detail. Others may insist that blessings must be performed exactly as they personally learned growing up.
Latter-day Saints are encouraged to distinguish between revealed doctrine and cultural tradition.
For example, there is no official doctrine stating:
Those ideas belong more to folklore than to revealed LDS theology.
Ultimately, priesthood blessings are not mechanical acts. They are acts of faith in Jesus Christ.
The power does not come from:
The power comes from:
That perspective keeps ordinances sacred without turning them into superstition.
The laying on of hands is meaningful because it is an authorized symbol established by God. It is a physical expression of spiritual authority and divine blessing. But the Lord looks primarily upon the heart.
]]>
Gramps,
How are Jesus and John related?
Kathy
Kathy,
According to the Bible and Latter-day Saint understanding, Jesus and John the Baptist were relatives through their mothers, Mary and Elisabeth (Elizabeth). The scriptures do not spell out the exact family connection in modern genealogical terms, but they clearly describe the two women as kin.
In the Gospel of Luke, the angel Gabriel told Mary:
“And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age.”
That verse has traditionally led Christians, including Latter-day Saints, to describe Jesus and John the Baptist as cousins. The word translated as “cousin” in English can also mean “relative” or “kinswoman,” so the precise relationship may not be fully known. But LDS theology firmly teaches that they were family.
What makes the relationship especially meaningful is not merely the family connection, but the divine missions both men were foreordained to fulfill.
John the Baptist was sent to prepare the way for Jesus Christ. Latter-day Saints believe John was one of the greatest prophets ever born. Jesus Himself declared:
“Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist.” (Luke 7:28)
John’s role had been prophesied centuries earlier. Isaiah wrote of “the voice of him that crieth in the wilderness,” preparing the way of the Lord. John fulfilled that prophecy by preaching repentance and baptizing in preparation for the coming Messiah.
LDS scripture adds even more insight into John’s mission. In Doctrine and Covenants 84:28, we learn that John:
“was ordained by the angel of God at the time he was eight days old unto this power.”
Latter-day Saints believe John held the Aaronic Priesthood and was specifically chosen before birth to prepare Israel for the Savior.
The connection between Jesus and John begins even before their births. Luke records one of the most beautiful scenes in scripture: Mary visits Elisabeth while both are pregnant. Elisabeth is carrying John the Baptist, and Mary is carrying Jesus Christ.
The account says:
“And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb.”
Elisabeth, filled with the Holy Ghost, then testified of Mary and the unborn Savior:
“Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.”
“And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
Latter-day Saints often see this as a powerful witness that John recognized the Savior even before birth. President Harold B. Lee once taught:
“John the Baptist was a special witness of the mission of Jesus Christ from before his birth.”
That idea fits beautifully with LDS teachings about foreordination—the belief that certain individuals were prepared in the premortal life for sacred earthly missions.
Although Jesus and John were relatives, their missions were very different. John was the forerunner. Jesus was the Messiah. John preached repentance; Jesus offered salvation. John baptized with water; Jesus would baptize “with the Holy Ghost, and with fire” (Matthew 3:11).
Yet despite their different roles, there was deep love and humility between them. John understood exactly who Jesus was. When Jesus came to John to be baptized, John initially resisted, saying:
“I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?” (Matthew 3:14)
But Jesus insisted “to fulfil all righteousness.” John then baptized the Savior in the Jordan River, becoming one of the first public witnesses of Christ’s ministry.
That moment is incredibly important in LDS theology because it demonstrates several key doctrines at once:
As Jesus came up out of the water, the Holy Ghost descended like a dove, and the Father’s voice declared:
“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:17)
Latter-day Saints also believe John later restored priesthood authority in modern times. In 1829, John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery as a resurrected being and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood upon them.
Joseph Smith recorded that John declared:
“Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron.”
That restoration gives John the Baptist a unique place in LDS belief. He was not only the cousin and forerunner of Christ in mortality, but also a resurrected messenger who helped restore Christ’s Church in the latter days.
Another beautiful aspect of their relationship is John’s humility. Even though many wondered whether John himself was the Messiah, he consistently pointed others to Jesus rather than seeking attention for himself.
John famously declared:
“He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30)
That single verse captures John’s entire character. In LDS teachings, John is admired not only for his courage and prophetic calling, but for his willingness to step aside so people would follow Christ.
Elder Bruce R. McConkie once wrote that John the Baptist was:
“One of the noblest and greatest souls ever born into mortality.”
Latter-day Saints generally see the relationship between Jesus and John as both familial and symbolic. They were blood relatives, but they were also united in mission. John prepared hearts for the Savior, and Jesus fulfilled the plan of redemption.
In many ways, their relationship teaches an important gospel principle: true disciples point people to Christ rather than to themselves.
John never tried to compete with Jesus. He rejoiced in Jesus’s success. He recognized divine truth when he saw it and faithfully fulfilled the role God had given him.
So, according to LDS theology, Jesus and John the Baptist were relatives—commonly understood as cousins through Mary and Elisabeth. But more importantly, they were connected through sacred missions established by God long before either was born. John prepared the way. Jesus became “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).
]]>
Gramps,
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. What does this mean exactly?
Kerry
Kerry,
One of the most repeated commandments in scripture is also one of the most personal:
“And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.” (Deuteronomy 6:5)
Jesus later called this the “first and great commandment” in Matthew 22:37-38. For members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this verse is much more than a poetic phrase. It is a description of discipleship itself. But what does it actually mean to love God with all our heart, soul, and might?
LDS theology teaches that this commandment is not about perfection overnight. It is about devotion, covenant loyalty, and gradually giving our entire lives to Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ.
The “heart” in scripture usually refers to our desires, affections, and priorities. Loving God with all our hearts means He becomes the center of our lives rather than an afterthought.
President Ezra Taft Benson taught:
“When we put God first, all other things fall into their proper place or drop out of our lives.” (The Great Commandment—Love the Lord)
That statement captures the idea perfectly. Loving God with our hearts means our relationship with Him shapes every other relationship and decision. It influences how we spend our time, how we treat family members, what we choose to watch, how we speak to people, and even what we think about when nobody else is around.
This does not mean faithful people never struggle spiritually. Even devoted disciples have doubts, moments of weakness, or periods where they feel distant from God. In LDS belief, loving God is shown less through flawless performance and more through continual turning toward Him.
The Savior Himself said:
“If ye love me, keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)
In other words, love is not merely emotional. It is active. It is demonstrated through obedience, repentance, worship, and covenant keeping.
The word “soul” carries deep meaning in LDS theology. In Doctrine and Covenants 88:15, we learn:
“A the spirit and the body are the soul of man.”
So loving God with all our souls means offering our entire being—both spiritually and physically—to Him.
Elder Jeffrey R. Holland once taught:
“The great thing about the gospel is we get credit for trying, even if we don’t always succeed.” (Tomorrow the Lord Will Do Wonders among You)
That perspective matters because loving God with all our souls does not mean never failing. It means our whole selves are pointed toward Christ, even as we continue to grow.
This kind of love affects both spiritual and temporal aspects of life. It includes:
LDS theology teaches that discipleship is holistic. God cares about our spiritual lives, but He also cares about what we are becoming as eternal beings.
President Russell M. Nelson explained:
“If we do the best we can, the Lord will bless us according to our deeds and the desires of our hearts.” (Perfection Pending)
That short statement resonates with many Latter-day Saints because it reminds us that wholehearted devotion matters deeply to God. He is not waiting for us to become instantly perfect before accepting our love.
The word “might” suggests strength, energy, and action. Loving God with all our might means giving Him our best efforts, not leftovers.
This can include obvious things like serving in Church callings, ministering, missionary work, or helping those in need. But it also applies to daily life: showing patience with children, working honestly, defending truth kindly, or choosing integrity when nobody is watching.
Elder David A. Bednar taught:
“True devotion to God is motivated by love and gratitude rather than fear or obligation alone.” (paraphrased)
That distinction is important. In LDS theology, loving God with all our might is not about exhausting ourselves trying to earn heaven. Salvation comes only through the grace of Jesus Christ. Rather, our efforts are a response to His love and sacrifice.
When someone truly loves God, they naturally want to serve Him.
One word appears repeatedly in this commandment: all.
God does not ask for part of our heart on Sundays and the rest during the week for worldly priorities. He invites complete devotion. That can sound intimidating at first, but LDS doctrine emphasizes that this process happens gradually through the Savior’s help.
President Dieter F. Uchtdorf said:
“God does not look on the outward appearance.” (The Hope of God’s Light)
The Lord understands our weaknesses perfectly. He knows when we are sincerely trying to follow Him, even when we stumble.
This commandment is therefore less about achieving spiritual intensity every moment of every day and more about the direction of our lives. Are we moving toward God? Are we allowing Him to shape us? Are we willing to place Him first?
That is what covenant discipleship looks like.
Interestingly, Jesus connected loving God directly to loving people. After naming the first great commandment, He immediately added:
“Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” (Matthew 22:39)
According to LDS theology, these commandments cannot really be separated. The more we love God, the more we begin to see others the way He sees them.
President Thomas S. Monson often emphasized simple Christlike service. He famously taught:
“Never let a problem to be solved become more important than a person to be loved.” (Finding Joy in the Journey)
That kind of charity flows naturally from genuine love for God.
So what does it mean to love the Lord with all our heart, soul, and might?
In LDS theology, it means giving Him our desires, our devotion, our energy, our loyalty, and ultimately our entire lives. It means striving to place Him first while relying completely on the grace of Jesus Christ.
It does not require instant perfection. It does require sincerity.
As disciples of Christ grow in faith, repentance, covenant keeping, and service, their love for God deepens. Over time, loving God becomes less about obligation and more about transformation. The heart changes. The soul changes. Life itself changes.
And perhaps that is the real purpose of the commandment—not simply to measure our love for God, but to help us become more like Him.
]]>
Gramps,
In 3rd Nephi, there was daylight for a day, a night, and a day at the birth of the Savior. Is there any evidence of this happening outside of the Book of Mormon?
Shasta
Shasta,
One of the more fascinating miracles recorded in the Book of Mormon is the sign given at the birth of Jesus Christ in the Americas. According to the account in 3 Nephi, believers witnessed something extraordinary: light throughout an entire “day and a night and a day” without darkness.
From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the answer is both interesting and somewhat complex. There are traditions, theories, and historical observations that some people find compelling, but there is no universally accepted historical proof outside the Book of Mormon that definitively confirms the event. Even so, many Latter-day Saints believe there are meaningful reasons why the account deserves thoughtful consideration.
The prophecy itself came years before the Savior’s birth through the prophet Samuel the Lamanite. Standing on the walls of Zarahemla, he declared:
“There shall be great lights in heaven, insomuch that in the night before he cometh there shall be no darkness.” (Helaman 14:3-4)
Samuel also prophesied that a new star would appear and that the signs would testify that the Son of God was coming into the world. For believers among the Nephites, these prophecies became a source of hope during a time when many mocked and rejected faith.
The fulfillment came exactly as Samuel had foretold. In 3 Nephi 1, the record states:
“At the going down of the sun there was no darkness; and the people began to be astonished because there was no darkness when the night came.” (3 Nephi 1:15)
The account continues:
“It was the day that the Lord should be born, because of the sign which had been given.” (3 Nephi 1:19)
For Latter-day Saints, the precision of the fulfillment is significant. The miracle did not happen randomly. It came as prophesied and at the exact time foretold. That pattern—prophecy followed by fulfillment—is a major theme throughout scripture.
So what evidence exists outside the Book of Mormon?
Over the years, some researchers and scholars have sought references in ancient records to unusual celestial events around the time of Christ’s birth. There are Chinese records of bright stars or novae, Roman references to unusual heavenly signs, and traditions among some ancient peoples describing extraordinary lights in the sky.
However, none of those records directly describes a night without darkness in the same way the Book of Mormon does. Some possible astronomical events from roughly 5-7 BC, such as planetary conjunctions or exploding stars, may help explain why people across the world noticed unusual activity in the heavens, but they do not fully account for the specific miracle described in 3 Nephi.
Some LDS scholars have explored whether a supernova or another atmospheric phenomenon could have contributed to extraordinary nighttime brightness. Others have suggested the miracle may have involved divine power beyond ordinary natural explanation. In many ways, that fits the broader pattern of miracles in scripture. After all, the scriptures also describe the Red Sea parting, Christ walking on water, and darkness covering the land at His crucifixion.
One important point often overlooked is that the Book of Mormon never explicitly says the entire world experienced uninterrupted daylight. The sign may have been intended specifically for the people of the Americas as a witness to the Savior’s birth.
A helpful Church article titled “Christmas in the New World” discusses this idea and notes that the miracle was given so “there should be no cause for unbelief among the children of men.” That wording echoes Samuel’s prophecy in Helaman 14:28:
“Many shall see greater things than these, to the intent that they might believe.”
That verse helps explain the spiritual purpose behind the sign. The miracle was not simply about creating amazement or satisfying curiosity. It was intended to strengthen faith in Jesus Christ.
That perspective matters because sometimes people approach the Book of Mormon as though every truth within it must first be proven scientifically before it can be believed. Yet LDS theology teaches that spiritual truths are often confirmed through revelation and the witness of the Holy Ghost as much as through physical evidence.
At the same time, the Church has never discouraged sincere study or investigation. Many Latter-day Saints appreciate archaeology, astronomy, and historical research related to scripture. In fact, thoughtful inquiry can sometimes deepen appreciation for the Book of Mormon’s complexity and consistency.
Still, believers generally recognize that not every miracle will leave behind clear scientific documentation. Ancient historical records are incomplete even for major world events. Countless writings have been lost over time, and many civilizations preserved history through oral tradition rather than written records.
It is also worth remembering that the sign in 3 Nephi was deeply symbolic. Jesus Christ repeatedly described Himself as the Light of the World. In the New World, the resurrected Savior declared:
“I am the light and the life of the world.” (3 Nephi 9:18)
The Apostle John recorded a similar declaration in the New Testament:
“I am the light of the world.” (John 8:12)
Seen through that lens, the miraculous light at Christ’s birth carries profound meaning. The coming of the Savior literally brought light into a darkened world. For believers in the Americas, the heavens themselves testified that the Messiah had arrived.
There is also an important human element to the story. Before the sign appeared, faithful believers faced ridicule and even threats of death because others claimed Samuel’s prophecy would fail. The account in 3 Nephi says that many began to lose hope as the appointed day approached.
Then, at what may have seemed like the last possible moment, the sign came.
That part of the story resonates with many modern readers. Sometimes, faith requires patience as we wait for promises to be fulfilled. The people who trusted the words of the prophets were eventually vindicated, even when circumstances seemed impossible.
Ironically, the Book of Mormon also shows that miracles alone do not guarantee lasting faith. After witnessing astonishing signs, many people eventually returned to pride and unbelief. The record repeatedly teaches that signs may inspire attention, but true conversion comes through choosing to follow Christ.
So, is there evidence outside the Book of Mormon for the day, night, and day without darkness? There are intriguing theories, scattered historical traditions, and astronomical possibilities, but no universally accepted proof. From an LDS theological perspective, though, that does not diminish the significance of the miracle.
For believers, the sign’s greater purpose was never simply to create historical evidence. It was to testify that Jesus Christ truly was the Son of God and the promised Savior of the world. The light in the sky pointed people toward the true Light—the Savior Himself.
]]>
Dear Gramps,
Thanks for being so great with your gospel responses. I’ve always loved the imagery of a Flaming Sword. Why do you think the Savior created a Flaming Sword & Cherubim to guard the tree of life? Why were both required when the Savior could have created just one thing that would do the job? Thanks again!
Ev
Ev,
In the book of Genesis, one of the most intriguing moments comes right after Adam and Eve are cast out of the Garden of Eden. The Lord places “cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life” (Genesis 3:24). For many readers, that verse raises an interesting question: Why both? If the Savior had the power to create anything, why use both cherubim and a flaming sword to guard the tree of life? Why not just one or the other?
According to the theology of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the answer may reveal something profound about the nature of God, justice, mercy, priesthood authority, and the sacred path back into His presence.
Latter-day Saints believe the Garden story is not merely symbolic fiction nor merely ancient history. It is deeply doctrinal and teaches eternal truths about mortality, agency, redemption, and exaltation. The details matter. When scripture mentions both cherubim and a flaming sword, it is likely intentional.
One important principle in LDS theology is that God does not act arbitrarily. The Savior’s actions are purposeful and layered with meaning. Elder Bruce R. McConkie once taught that the Fall introduced both physical and spiritual death into the world. Adam and Eve could no longer remain in God’s presence in their fallen condition. If they had immediately partaken of the tree of life after the Fall, they would have lived forever in their sins, without experiencing mortality, growth, repentance, or redemption through Jesus Christ.
That is why access to the tree had to be restricted.
The Book of Mormon gives additional insight into this doctrine. The prophet Alma explained:
“Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword” (Alma 42:2).
Alma goes on to explain that this delay created a “probationary state,” a time for mankind to repent and prepare to meet God. Without that separation, the entire Plan of Salvation would have been disrupted.
So why both a flaming sword and cherubim?
One possible answer is that they represent two different aspects of God’s nature and government.
The flaming sword may symbolize divine justice and the consequences of sin. Fire throughout scripture often represents the holiness and glory of God. It purifies, illuminates, and destroys impurity. The sword imagery suggests judgment, separation, and protection. A sword prevents unauthorized entry. It is active, powerful, and impossible to ignore.
Interestingly, the scripture says the sword “turned every way.” This creates the image of complete protection. There was no loophole, no alternate path, and no sneaking back into Eden. Humanity could not bypass the conditions God established.
From an LDS perspective, this teaches that no unclean thing can dwell in the presence of God. Spiritual laws are real. Justice is not optional. The Savior Himself upholds eternal law even as He prepares the way for mercy.
The cherubim, however, may symbolize something different.
Throughout scripture, cherubim are closely associated with the presence of God and sacred space. In the Old Testament, cherubim were embroidered into the veil of the tabernacle and later the temple. Two cherubim rested atop the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies. In temple symbolism, cherubim often represent heavenly beings who guard sacred things and testify to God’s glory.
This connection becomes especially meaningful in LDS temple theology.
Latter-day Saints view temples as places where heaven and earth symbolically meet. Sacred ordinances and covenants prepare individuals to return to the presence of God. In many ways, the Garden of Eden narrative parallels the temple journey. Humanity is separated from God, learns through mortal experience, enters into covenants, and eventually seeks to return to His presence through Jesus Christ.
In that light, the cherubim guarding the tree of life may represent more than security guards. They may symbolize divine authority, holiness, and the sacred order established by God. Access to eternal life is not casual or automatic. It comes through a covenant relationship with Jesus Christ.
The combination of cherubim and the flaming sword may therefore teach that returning to God requires both justice and holiness. One guards physically and symbolically; the other represents heavenly authority and sacred access.
There may also be another layer to this.
In LDS theology, the Savior perfectly balances mercy and justice. He does not eliminate eternal law; He fulfills it. The presence of both guardians may illustrate that God’s work is accomplished through multiple divine principles acting together rather than through simplistic force alone.
The flaming sword alone might emphasize fear and punishment. Cherubim alone might emphasize sacredness and heavenly order. Together, they communicate both the seriousness of separation from God and the sacred hope of eventual return.
That balance appears throughout the gospel.
Justice without mercy would condemn all mankind. Mercy without justice would destroy agency and accountability. The Savior harmonizes both through the Atonement. Likewise, the guardians of Eden may symbolically reflect multiple dimensions of divine truth operating together.
Another interesting possibility is that the dual guardianship teaches that eternal life is protected not merely from intrusion, but from misuse.
The tree of life represents eternal life, immortality, and the love of God. Partaking worthily requires transformation. Fallen humanity was not yet prepared to receive that fullness. The Savior’s restriction was therefore not cruel; it was merciful.
Sometimes God withholds blessings until His children are ready to receive them.
That principle appears repeatedly in scripture. Ancient Israel was not prepared for the higher law. Sacred temple ordinances are given carefully and reverently. Even spiritual knowledge often comes “line upon line, precept upon precept” (2 Nephi 28:30).
The guarding of the tree of life fits this same pattern. Humanity first needed mortality, opposition, growth, covenants, repentance, and ultimately the redemption made possible through Jesus Christ.
President Russell M. Nelson has frequently taught that God’s work is centered on bringing His children back into His presence. The story of Eden is therefore not merely about exclusion. It is about preparation for eventual reunion.
That changes the tone of the entire passage.
The cherubim and flaming sword were not permanent barriers meant to destroy hope. They were temporary protections established until the Savior could open the way through His Atonement and Resurrection.
In fact, one of the beautiful themes throughout scripture is that Christ eventually becomes the “way” back to the tree of life. In the Book of Mormon, the vision of the tree of life in 1 Nephi 8 represents the love of God revealed through Jesus Christ. What was once guarded becomes accessible again through covenant discipleship.
Through Christ, the path reopens.
Perhaps that is one reason both the flaming sword and cherubim were necessary. The Lord was teaching from the very beginning that returning to eternal life would involve more than overcoming danger. It would require transformation, holiness, covenant relationship, divine authority, and redemption through the Savior Himself.
The barriers in Eden ultimately point us toward Jesus Christ.
He is the one who satisfies justice. He is the one who grants mercy. He is the keeper of sacred things. He is the way back into the presence of the Father.
And maybe that is the deeper message hidden within the imagery of Genesis: the road back to the tree of life would never be simple, but it would always be possible through the Savior.
]]>
Gramps,
Was the Holy Ghost in full force on the earth during Christ’s ministry on the earth?
Clifford
Clifford,
The question of whether the Holy Ghost was “in full force” during the mortal ministry of Jesus Christ invites a careful and meaningful distinction in Latter-day Saint theology. The answer is both simple and nuanced: the Holy Ghost was active and present, but the full gift of His constant companionship was not widely available until after Jesus Christ was resurrected and glorified.
To understand this clearly, we need to distinguish between two doctrinal concepts: the influence of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost.
In Latter-day Saint belief, the Holy Ghost is the third member of the Godhead, a personage of spirit whose mission is to testify of truth, provide revelation, comfort, warn, and sanctify. His influence has always been present on the earth. Prophets from Adam onward received divine guidance through the Spirit. Revelation has never been absent where faith and righteousness existed.
However, the gift of the Holy Ghost—meaning the right to His constant companionship—is something more. It is given after baptism by the laying on of hands by proper priesthood authority. Elder David A. Bednar explained:
“The gift of the Holy Ghost is bestowed only after proper and authorized baptism and by the laying on of hands by those holding the Melchizedek Priesthood. (Receive the Holy Ghost)
During Christ’s mortal ministry, this gift was not yet broadly conferred. The Apostle John recorded: “the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39). Latter-day Saints understand this to mean that while the Holy Ghost was certainly influencing individuals, the fullness of His constant companionship had not yet been widely bestowed.
Elder Bruce R. McConkie taught this distinction clearly:
“Before the mortal ministry of Christ, the Holy Ghost was given to the faithful, but the gift of the Holy Ghost as a constant companion was not enjoyed in the same fullness.” (Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith (1985), p. 262)
This helps us better understand what was happening during the Savior’s ministry. The Spirit was undeniably active. Jesus Christ Himself was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost. At His baptism, the Spirit descended like a dove, symbolizing divine approval. Individuals received powerful spiritual witnesses—Peter’s testimony that Jesus is the Christ came through revelation.
Yet there are also clear signs that the Spirit was not yet fully present among Christ’s followers. The apostles at times struggled with understanding, showed fear, and lacked spiritual clarity. However, something changed dramatically after Christ’s resurrection.
In Acts 2, on the Day of Pentecost, the apostles experienced a powerful outpouring of the Spirit. They spoke with boldness, clarity, and spiritual power. Latter-day Saints understand this as a pivotal moment when the gift of the Holy Ghost began to be more fully manifested among Christ’s followers.
The Book of Mormon provides an even more vivid example. In 3 Nephi 19, after the resurrected Savior appears to the Nephites, He authorizes His disciples to baptize and confer the Holy Ghost. The people are then filled with overwhelming spiritual power—praying, rejoicing, and encircled by divine presence. This moment reflects a heightened spiritual condition made possible only after Christ’s glorification.
Why did this change occur? The answer lies in the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
The Holy Ghost’s role includes sanctifying individuals—making them holy. This sanctifying power depends on the completed Atonement. Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin taught:
“If they would open their hearts to the refining influence of this unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost, a glorious new spiritual dimension would come to light.” (The Unspeakable Gift)
Before Christ completed His suffering, death, and resurrection, the full effects of that sanctification could not yet be fully applied. Once the Atonement was complete, the way was opened for individuals to receive not just occasional spiritual impressions, but ongoing sanctification through the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost.
President Henry B. Eyring emphasized the importance of this blessing in our day:
“I give my witness that the living Christ sends the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, to those we are pledged to help Him comfort.” (The Comforter)
This constant companionship is one of the great blessings restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith. With priesthood authority reestablished, individuals today can receive the gift of the Holy Ghost after baptism and enjoy its guidance regularly—something not universally available during Christ’s mortal ministry.
So, was the Holy Ghost “in full force” during Christ’s ministry?
The most accurate Latter-day Saint answer is this: the Holy Ghost was actively influencing, testifying, and guiding, but the full, covenant-based gift of His constant companionship was not yet widely given until after Jesus Christ’s resurrection and glorification.
Understanding this distinction deepens our appreciation for both the Savior’s Atonement and the gift of the Holy Ghost today. Because of Jesus Christ, the heavens are more open. The Spirit can be with us continually—not just in moments, but in daily life—guiding decisions, offering comfort, warning of danger, and sanctifying our hearts.
Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe this gift is one of the greatest blessings of mortality. Each week, as they partake of the sacrament, they renew the promise that they may “always have his Spirit to be with them” (Doctrine and Covenants 20:77).
That promise is profound. It means that through Jesus Christ, we live in a time when the Holy Ghost is not only present, but can be constantly with us.
]]>
Gramps,
Will people living on the Earth today see the second coming of Jesus Christ?
Tracey
Tracey,
It’s the kind of question that comes up in quiet conversations after church, during family scripture study, or when the world feels especially chaotic. Wars, natural disasters, political division, moral confusion—it’s understandable why people sometimes wonder if the Second Coming of Jesus Christ is getting close.
From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the answer is both simple and uncertain at the same time.
Yes, there absolutely will be people living on the earth who witness the Savior’s return. But whether any of us personally will be among them is something the Lord has never revealed. And honestly, that uncertainty seems intentional.
Latter-day Saints firmly believe that Jesus Christ will literally return to the earth in glory and power. In LDS theology, the Second Coming is not symbolic or merely spiritual. Christ taught:
“For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” (Matthew 24:27)
The restored gospel also teaches that we are living in the “last days,” meaning the final gospel dispensation before the Savior returns. Latter-day Saints believe this dispensation began with the Restoration through Joseph Smith.
Modern revelation says:
For the hour is nigh and the day soon at hand when the earth is ripe; and all the proud and they that do wickedly shall be as stubble; and I will burn them up, saith the Lord of Hosts, that wickedness shall not be upon the earth;(Doctrine and Covenants 29:9)
At the same time, “soon” in the Lord’s timing may not look the same as “soon” in ours.
So could the Second Coming happen in our lifetime?
Yes, it’s possible. But faithful Saints have believed that for generations.
Early Church members believed the Savior’s return could be near. Saints living through world wars, economic collapse, pandemics, and global unrest often felt the same way. Every generation tends to notice signs that seem to point toward the end.
And to be fair, many of those signs really are mentioned in scripture.
Jesus warned of “wars and rumors of wars” (Matthew 24:6). He also spoke of earthquakes, deception, wickedness, and tribulation throughout the earth. Latter-day Saints also see the worldwide preaching of the gospel and the gathering of Israel as major signs of the times.
One verse often quoted is:
“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” (Matthew 24:14)
President Russell M. Nelson has repeatedly taught that the Lord’s work is accelerating in preparation for the Savior’s return. He has said:
“These surely are the latter days, and the Lord is hastening His work to gather Israel.” (Russell M. Nelson, “Hope of Israel,” Worldwide Youth Devotion June 2018
That feeling of spiritual acceleration is one many Latter-day Saints genuinely experience today, especially as missionary work expands worldwide and temples are built at a remarkable pace.
But there’s also an important caution that Church leaders consistently emphasize: we are not supposed to set dates or predict exact timing.
Jesus Himself taught:
“But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” (Matthew 24:36)
Because of that, Church leaders have repeatedly encouraged members to focus less on speculation and more on preparation.
President Dallin H. Oaks taught:
“We need to make both temporal and spiritual preparation for the events prophesied at the time of the Second Coming. And the preparation most likely to be neglected is the one less visible and more difficult—the spiritual. A 72-hour kit of temporal supplies may prove valuable for earthly challenges, but, as the foolish virgins learned to their sorrow, a 24-hour kit of spiritual preparation is of greater and more enduring value.” (Dallin H. Oaks, “Preparation for the Second Coming,” April 2004 General Conference)
That really shifts the focus. In LDS theology, prophecy is not meant to create fear or obsession. It’s meant to encourage faithfulness and spiritual readiness.
That’s one reason the signs of the times matter. They are less about building a countdown clock and more about helping people stay spiritually awake.
Jesus compared His coming to the parable of the ten virgins. The wise virgins were ready before the bridegroom arrived. The lesson was never about knowing the exact hour—it was about being prepared whenever it happened.
For Latter-day Saints, that preparation looks a lot like ordinary discipleship: faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, prayer, temple worship, service, following the Holy Ghost, strengthening families, and enduring faithfully through difficult times.
President Gordon B. Hinckley once said:
“We can so live that we can call upon the Lord for His protection and guidance. This is the best security we can have in an uncertain world.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “If Ye Are Prepared Ye Shall Not Fear,” October 2005 General Conference)
That perspective helps keep things balanced. Latter-day Saints are not taught to obsess over every headline or constantly search for hidden prophetic clues in world events. They are taught to live in a way that keeps them spiritually prepared, whether the Savior comes tomorrow or centuries from now.
Still, many believers do feel that the world is moving rapidly toward conditions foretold in scripture. The global spread of the gospel, the gathering of Israel, and the growing number of temples feel deeply significant to many Church members.
Technology has also changed how people think about prophecy. Events that once would have been impossible for the whole world to witness can now be seen almost instantly across the globe.
Even so, LDS theology leaves room for patience. The Savior may come very soon—or still generations in the future. Either way, the faithful response remains the same.
And when Christ does return, Latter-day Saints believe it will be unmistakable.
Scripture describes the Second Coming as a glorious worldwide event filled with power and majesty. The wicked who refuse repentance will mourn, while the righteous will rejoice.
The Doctrine and Covenants teaches:
“For the presence of the Lord shall be as the melting fire that burneth, and as the fire which causeth the waters to boil.” (Doctrine and Covenants 133:41)
Latter-day Saints believe Jesus Christ will personally reign upon the earth during the Millennium—a thousand years of peace.
One of the beautiful things about LDS doctrine is that the Second Coming is not viewed simply as the end of the world. It is viewed as the beginning of a healed world.
So yes, it is entirely possible that some people alive today will witness the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. But whether it will happen during our personal lifetime is something God has chosen not to reveal.
And maybe there’s wisdom in that.
If people knew the exact date, many would probably delay repentance, postpone change, or wait to fully commit themselves to discipleship. Instead, the gospel invites people in every generation to live faithfully now.
Latter-day Saints believe the signs of the times are real. They believe Christ’s return is certain. They believe the world is moving toward prophetic fulfillment.
But ultimately, the most important question is probably not:
“Will we personally see the Second Coming?”
It’s:
“If Christ came today, would we be spiritually ready to meet Him?”
]]>