Belief in Joseph Smith required for worthiness?
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:00 am
Over on the other board, someone asked an interesting question.
The obvious answer to this is if you don't believe Joseph Smith was what he claimed to be, then there is no way you can believe the church is true. It all comes down to Joseph Smith, as Hinckley once said. It either happened the way he said it did, or it's a fraud. The replies the OP is receiving all have a similar theme. If you don't believe in Joseph Smith, what's the point in trying to be a member?
The OP brings up the question of worthiness. Why is belief in Joseph Smith part of a worthiness questionairre? I understand it comes down to whether or not you believe the church is true, but I think this is a big problem with the church. It is all based on Joseph Smith. You cannot remove him or the church falls.
I understand the OP's point. Why does one's opinion of Joseph Smith affect their relationship with God? But I also understand the church's position. You can't believe the church is true without believing Joseph Smith was a prophet and everything he claims happened to him really happened.
Should the church allow members to participate in their ordinances while believing Joseph Smith was not what he claimed to be? Should the church try to de-emphasise Joseph Smith? Does the church's dependence on Joseph Smith make it the Church of Joseph Smith, as the EVs like to call it?
I was just thinking back to my last temple recommend interview I had, in which I made it known to my bishop that I had some pretty serious doubts about Joseph Smith being a prophet of God. I was subsequently denied my temple recommend. I am not angry or bitter over this, but I was just wondering why this question matters in regards to a persons temple attendance. I always saw the temple as a place meant for me to make covenants with God, communicate with him, and find a place of peace to ponder life etc. So I thought this would be an interesting discussion for this board; why have questions about Joseph Smith in temple interviews? Are our covenants with God dependant on our belief in Joseph? I'm interested to hear your thoughts, thanks in advance.
The obvious answer to this is if you don't believe Joseph Smith was what he claimed to be, then there is no way you can believe the church is true. It all comes down to Joseph Smith, as Hinckley once said. It either happened the way he said it did, or it's a fraud. The replies the OP is receiving all have a similar theme. If you don't believe in Joseph Smith, what's the point in trying to be a member?
The OP brings up the question of worthiness. Why is belief in Joseph Smith part of a worthiness questionairre? I understand it comes down to whether or not you believe the church is true, but I think this is a big problem with the church. It is all based on Joseph Smith. You cannot remove him or the church falls.
I understand the OP's point. Why does one's opinion of Joseph Smith affect their relationship with God? But I also understand the church's position. You can't believe the church is true without believing Joseph Smith was a prophet and everything he claims happened to him really happened.
Should the church allow members to participate in their ordinances while believing Joseph Smith was not what he claimed to be? Should the church try to de-emphasise Joseph Smith? Does the church's dependence on Joseph Smith make it the Church of Joseph Smith, as the EVs like to call it?