There is sufficient evidence that the ‘brethren’ are on the defensive when it comes to dissent. Their fear is reflected in such Orwellian avowals as, “Not everything that is true is useful,” or “When the prophet has spoken the thinking is done,” or, “It’s wrong to criticize the leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true.”

Her work shows 6% of respondents said they left the church after discovering Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by looking at a “magic stone” in his hat. Another 3% because of the overwhelming DNA evidence showing absolutely no Hebrew nexus with the aboriginal peoples of North America; but one-third, over 30%, reported that they left because they could not trust the leadership of the church to tell the truth.

In a recent article by Jana K. Riess, a writer on American religion entitled, “The Next Mormons,” she indicates proportionately why members today are leaving the LDS church.

Nevertheless, let’s put this aside for a moment, for all is not well in Zion. I suspect that there have never been so many people abandoning the church since Joseph’s Kirtland crisis of 1837 and 1838.

They are not, but perhaps the testimony of a good and honest man might suggest we should keep the declaration that Palmer’s anonymous general authority makes in perspective.

Are brother Brown’s personal feelings and beliefs enough to convince one that the Mormon church is true?

I find Elder Brown’s honesty not only refreshing but stirringly human. If this good man said he believed the Mormon church was true, I don’t doubt that he genuinely believed it to be so.

In view of the above admission, you will not expect an argument or a brief on faith in God and immortality. However, and I hope it may be so, a relating of some personal experiences and observations may give you a fellow-feeling and bring comfort, courage, hope, and faith may renew in you the spirit of adventure, of zest for the quest of truth.”

Well, I have had that experience. But this I can say positively, that each peak which I have climbed has seemed higher and more inspiring than the last, due at least in part, I think, to the dark background of the valley through which I came. Sharp contrasts are sometimes most revealing.

“I was really glad to get your letter of October 25th, and I appreciate your confidence. The revelation of your mental and spiritual struggle does not come as a surprise, that the waters of your usual placid soul had become somewhat, roiled and disturbed. Would you be surprised if I should tell you that I, too, have had periods of perplexity, uncertainty, and doubt; that I, too, have known the darkness, fogginess, and chill of the valley which lies between illuminated peaks of faith and confidence, and that only the memory of the hilltops along the road over which I have come coupled with the somewhat misty vision of others still ahead has given me the courage to plod on when I was tempted to “chuck it all,” to wrap myself in the comfortless blanket of doubt and self-commiseration and just quit the field.

Elder Brown who later went on to serve as both an apostle and member of the First Presidency, confessed to moments of grave doubt about the Mormon church, as he expresses in the following letter to a friend who was going through a faith crisis:

When I was a child, Hugh B. Brown, served in our little Canadian branch. My father knew and revered him, describing him as a man of God, someone without guile.

Nevertheless, despite the cynical view this anecdote suggests, I think it wrong or at least premature to go as far as to assume ignoble motives on the part of all the ‘brethren.’

Was Palmer’s general authority lying, deluded, or had he an axe to grind? Perhaps, perhaps not, but having read Grant’s books on the Savior, and knowing of his service to the least among us – inmates in the Utah prison system; I do not doubt that Grant Palmer was telling the truth.

The late Grant Palmer, author of An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins spoke about several meetings he had with a general authority, who told him straight up that he didn’t believe the church was true and went as far as to suggest that the apostles all learn within a year or two of being called that the Mormon church is a fraud.

Occasionally I have heard an intrepid member muse, “Do you think they, that is, the general authorities, believe the LDS church is true, or are they, victims of self-delusion, the affluent lifestyle the church provides them; or is it about ego and avarice, ignited by all the bowing and scraping of true believers on the Wasatch front?” In other words, is it ‘fortune and men’s eyes‘ that drives them?

I can also accept that the leadership of the church have no answers beyond those their apologists propagate; but it is reasonable to presume that they are privy to secreted documents and additional data that might help one evaluate the LDS narrative.

I certainly do not take offence and understand that in an organization the size of the LDS church their C-level officials cannot respond to every letter they receive regardless of the solemnity of the writer.

Sadly, and it would seem predictably, that is just what happened. I did receive a rather terse ‘form-letter’ riposte from Uchtdorf’s secretary who copied my Stake President.

A colleague remarked to me that not only would Elder Uchtdorf not respond to my questions, but he would likely never see my letter. Instead, I could expect a form letter response from an underling and a missive from my Stake President.

Uchtdorf was my choice, as I viewed him as one of few General Authorities that might have the intelligence and courage to attempt to address my concerns.

On June 18th, 2017, I wrote to President Dieter Uchtdorf, then Second Counselor in the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the sincere hope he might take the time to respond to several specific concerns I had about the truth claims of the Mormon church.

President Gordon Hinckley once said, with a straight face, “We have nothing to hide, our history is an open book.”

I suspect that one-time church historian, Dr. Leonard Arrington might take issue with the president, having written in the first issue of dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought in 1966:

“It is unfortunate for the cause of Mormon history that the Church Historian’s Library, which is in possession of virtually all of the diaries of leading Mormons, has not seen fit to publish these diaries or to permit qualified historians to use them without restriction.”

It was Arrington’s remarks that prompted Boyd K. Packer to voice his now infamous statement, “There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.”

Nevertheless, I have taken brother Hinckley at his word and delved into as much of that ‘open book,’ he speaks of and I am somewhat troubled by what I find on its pages.

In this letter, I pose what, from my perspective, are the most serious unanswered questions and fundamental problems relating to the historicity of Mormonism, its foundational claims and the Joseph Smith story itself.

I have attempted to be fair and balanced, presenting the most intelligible rebuttals that FairMormon, the LDS church’s current leading cadre of apologists have published regarding my interrogatories. I hope that this methodology might help others, who, like myself, are experiencing honest doubts, or a crisis of faith, to answer Freddie Mercury’s question, “‘Is this the real life, or is this just fantasy?

I make no apologies for seeking the truth. The Second Epistle of Peter warns us that, ‘In their greed teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories.” This warning comes from the man Simon, son of Jonah, a true Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ who He renamed Peter.

The Lord himself warned, ‘take heed that no man deceives you.’ We have a lot of deceivers today, as the Lord teaches,‘many false prophets will rise and deceive many.’

In Matthew 7:15-20 the Lord again warns us to ‘Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.’

I have never had, nor do I now have an agenda beyond a genuine search for truth, nor am I animated by the comforting self-serving motives that Mormons often jump to when someone leaves or begins to question their church:

Someone gave offense: No one hurt me, Not one. I love and respect my friends and family, many of whom are committed members. Everyday Latter-day Saints are good and kind people, most of whom are living honorable lives. A desire to sin: I am in my seventies as I write this, so it’s a little late for that! Never had a testimony in the first place: Wrong again, I would not have served in stake and ward callings, paid a small fortune in tithing or attended the temple with my wife and five children if I had not at one time, truly believed the church to be true. Lazy, not reading the Scriptures: I love the Bible, particularly the New Testament, I like the Jesus therein contained, and I read it often; admittedly the Book of Mormon, not so much. Seduced by anti-Mormon literature: Hardly. It is easy to identify those who hate and those whose purpose is to destroy. I would not consider writers and researchers such as Richard Bushman, Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Fawn Brodie, B. H. Roberts, Dan Vogel, Greg Prince, Thomas Murphy, or Grant Palmer to be ‘anti-Mormon’ because they had doubts and dared to question.

Maybe it’s the Irish in me, but I have never been afraid to confront my supposed ‘adversaries,’ including those who have taken issue with the church’s truth claims. I recently spent an afternoon with Sandra Tanner, who has been often demonized, but, as those who know her will attest, is, in truth a couragous, knowledgeable, sincere and rather sweet Christian woman.

This Letter to an Apostle is not meant to be a condemnation of the LDS church. I do not question that the church has bettered the lives of many by introducing them to the Lord Jesus Christ. There are many positive things in Mormon culture. Nor do I doubt that one can live a rewarding and happy life, raising children with solid moral values, as a faithful Latter-day Saint. Obedient to the commands of the prophet, avoiding anything, that the brethren warn is not faith-promoting.

Many sincere men and women within the church taught me as a child ‘the Mormon gospel’ as it was taught to them. These were good and sincere people and I honor them as I do my mother and father who lived and died faithful members of the church and who brought our little family from Ireland to ‘Zion’ like thousands before them.

And I genuinely wish that the true Gospel is just as the Mormon church teaches; for what an amazing and beautiful future it portends. To be forever together with loved ones, walking with the Savior, growing and learning and progressing forever.

But the truth is that the Mormon Church has also done and continues to do irreparable harm to many. It teaches youth that being gay or transgender is evil in the eyes of God, and that premarital sex is next to murder. The Book of Mormon teaches that dark skin is a curse of God. It tells women not to pursue a career that takes them out of the home as their most important role is to take care of their husband and their children.

While these things are certainly problematic, I feel nothing but love and affection for my fellow Latter-day Saints., but history has shown that we are not altogether a virtuous people. In the Greek virtuous (ενάρετο) means more than good, it means courageous, it connotes someone who has the audacity to stand up to authority, who demands truth and personal freedom, someone willing to question the status quo. And, if you will forgive me, Mormons are not that. Latter-day Saints are largely a tractable lot. Too often obedience has replaced critical thinking and conformity has replaced courage.

Perhaps this is why during the civil rights movement of the 1960s when men and women of goodwill in this country were marching with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., seeking equal human rights for ALL of God’s children. When we saw Catholics, Protestants, Jews, even human secularists display the courage to speak up, we did not hear from Mormons. Rather, they bowed to their prophet and his apostles who continued to preach discriminatory racist doctrines and policies harming persons of color.

I am troubled by the fact that Ezra Taft Benson, later to become the president of the church, was one of the Mormon hierarchy’s most strident voices opposing the national crusade for African American civil rights.

In 1965 and 1967, Benson stated in televised sermons from Temple Square that the ‘so-called’ civil rights movement, as he referred to it, was a Communist program for revolution in America. Benson’s rhetoric intensified after, despite his best efforts, the federal Civil Rights Act was ratified.

Benson wrote the forward for a race hate book, The Black Hammer: A Study of Black Power, Red Influence, and White Alternatives. The cover of this vile little book shows a thick-lipped, low-browed, decapitated, bleeding head of an African American man superimposed upon the symbol of Communism – the hammer and sickle. I find it hard to accept that this man was God’s spokesman on earth..

As late as the 1970s the Mormon church was banning Black boys from becoming boy scout troop leaders. These leadership positions were reserved exclusively for White priesthood-holding Mormon boys. In fact, it took the NAACP to file a federal lawsuit against the church in 1974, to force the church to reverse this hurtful and discriminatory policy

Indeed in 1966, the NAACP issued a statement criticizing the LDS church, saying the church maintained a rigid and continuous segregation stand “and that the church had made “no effort to counteract [its] widespread discriminatory practices in education, in housing, in employment, and other areas of life.”

In 1978, as we are all aware, president Spencer W. Kimball shortly after meeting with US president Jimmy Carter announced he had received a revelation reversing the priesthood ban on African Americans?

The nature of this change, like the prohibition on polygamy, and more recently the unpopular banning of membership of the children of gay parents, can lead one to question if these changes were in truth a direct response to American political pressure, withering PR or simple expediency.

In a rare interview of a Mormon apostle by an outsider, Wesley P. Walters recorded the following conversation with LeGrand Richards:

Walters: “On this revelation, of the priesthood to the Negro, I’ve heard all kinds of stories: I’ve heard that Joseph Smith appeared; and then I heard another story that Spencer Kimball had had a concern about this for some time, and simply shared it with the apostles, and they decided that this was the right time to move in that direction. Are any of those stories true, or are they all?”

LeGrand Richards: “Well, the last one is pretty true, and I might tell you what provoked it in a way. Down in Brazil, there is so much Negro blood in the population there that it’s hard to get leaders that don’t have Negro blood in them. We just built a temple down there. It’s going to be dedicated in October. All those people with Negro blood in them have been raising money to build that temple. If we don’t change, then they can’t even use it. Well, Brother Kimball worried about it, and he prayed a lot about it.”

On the question of Blacks in the priesthood, some of the church’s apologists deny that president Carter’s meeting with Kimball had anything to do with this timely, ‘revelation.’ Some even claim that president Carter never even broached the subject.

This is not true.

Below I have replicated a note President Carter sent to me in response to my letter to him:

President Hinckley when questioned by the press maintained that “… these things (Mormon racism) are in the past” and yes that is true, and, regardless of their motivations, the church of late has made moves to do away with much of its racist past.

But one must ask why the Lord’s church would not have led the charge for greater equality, integration and acceptance rather than lagging decades behind and actually working to oppose social justice?

The problem the church still has to deal with is the unbridled racism that forms an integral part of the Book of Mormon itself.

The Book of Mormon abounds in racism and paints a very narrow viewpoint regarding the concept of beauty. The message of the Book of Mormon is that white is good and black is bad. It teaches that those whose skin pigmentation is darker are “filthy”, “loathsome” or at the least “not enticing.“

“21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

Second Nephi; Chapter 5, Verse 21

6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, which consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.

Alma; Chapter 3, Verse 6

15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites;

Third Nephi; Chapter 2, Verses 15

“…their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and a delightsome people.”

2 Nephi 30:6

I think that most people of good will, and I would include the majority of Latter-day Saints here, would agree that the condemnation of another human being, because of the color of their skin, is not just unChristian, it is wicked.

Is this concept of white supremacy something the Lord would countenance let alone give such prominence to in ‘another testament’ to Him?‘

I think this Mormon mindset – obedience over independent thought is why during the Second World War, not only did German Mormons, ‘go along to get along‘ with the Nazis, but as David C. Nelson, comments in his book, Moroni and the Swastika, “Mormons were not just tolerant of Hitler [they were] downright enthusiastic about his policies.“

This is straight talk and I know it can be upsetting. and if you are a TBM this may be when you leave. Cognitive dissonance is real and you might be experiencing it right now. I too suffered as I discovered that things are not as I was taught, but I hope you will summon the courage to read on.

It is like Gloria Steinem said, “The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.”

Hatred. lies and deception need to be attacked without mercy and I make no apology for doing so. In Ephesians 5:11 Paul tells us to expose the evil deeds of darkness. The Lord called out the Pharisees. In Revelation 2:6 and 15 He tells us he hated the practices of the Nicolaitans, and those who held to their teachings. In 1 Timothy 1:20 Paul names the Hymenaeus and Alexander and john names the false Diotrephes, (3 John 9). I could go on.

But I must tell you that the one thing that gave me pause in writing this examination, is the sad truth that when people leave Mormonism, as they are doing in droves today, sadly, they, too often, also leave religion altogether. ‘Once bitten twice shy.’ This troubles me as I do not want to lead anyone away from a belief in God.

Mormonism and Christianity are however not the same thing. If you reject the former you can still fully embrace the latter.

I have discovered that one need not read anything beyond Joseph Smith’s writings, LDS periodicals or the Mormon scriptures themselves to come face-to-face with myriad problems and inconsistencies.

A critical examination can be difficult, troubling and painful. Ignorance is easy and, as the saying goes, really can be bliss.

But some of us believe that it is important, regardless of the discomfort, and even heartache it may bring, to reject the siren call of self-delusion; and seek a reality not based on wishful thinking, emotion or the proverbial ‘burning in the bosom.’

Edward Abbey put it best:

“Better a cruel truth than a comfortable delusion.”

Faith is important. At its core, faith is the expectation of good things to come. It goes beyond hope. Hope lives in the mind, faith resides in the heart.

Life can be hard and faith in the Almighty can help us get through it; for it provides us with the knowledge, deep down inside us, that things will get better. It can provide the courage to take the next step, even when we can’t see the staircase below.

But God gave us a mind, so we might come to know what is true and what is not. He tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 “… to test everything [and] hold fast to what is good.” In Isaiah 1:18 the Lord pleads with us to, “Come now, and let us reason together.”

As the British philosopher, Austin Farrer noted, “Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.”

Humble reasoning is a vital and reliable mechanism for obtaining religious knowledge and theological truth. Religious beliefs acquired using reason as well as faith are more likely to be true and enduring.

So, no matter how appealing Joseph Smith’s ‘Plan of Salvation,’ might sound, it must be authentic, it must be true, designed by Deity and not merely the musing of a brilliant, ambitious, ‘ploughboy prophet.’

Was Joseph Smith what the Mormon church would have you believe, or was he a sexual predator, liar and beguiler, who committed one of the greatest frauds in American history?

As the bible warns us, we must take care. Jeremiah 23:16 says, “Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you, filling you with vain hopes. They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord.”

There is a wonderful allegory in Book Seven of Plato’s The Republic often referred to as ‘Plato’s Cave.‘ It tells the story of men held prisoner, chained and shackled such that they cannot look to their left, their right or behind; rather they can only see forward at the wall directly in front of them.

Behind them is a blazing fire and between them and the fire a corridor along which men walk carrying statues, tools, and all nature of objects. All that the prisoners can see, however, is the shadows of the objects that are projected on the cave wall in front of them.

Witnessing these passing, transitory shadows, the prisoners argue as to what they represent.

Some older prisoners, ‘the elders,‘ have developed explanations as to the true meaning of each of the shadows.

One day, a prisoner is released.

Now free to wander the cave, he sees the fire, and the objects being carried in front of it. This former prisoner comes to understand the origins of the shadows, and to his amazement, he sees that they had often been misinterpreted.

He hurries back to share with his fellow prisoners the true meaning of the shadows, what the truth is. But rather than welcome and embrace this new knowledge, his former friends ridicule him, particularly the elders, who even seek to take his life.

You and I are like those prisoners. We see as it says in Corinthians, through a glass darkly. We live in a world where, like the prisoners, our knowledge is imperfect; a world of conjecture and illusion.

Some ‘elders’ presume to know what the shadows mean, but they too are prisoners, and their shackles are as firmly in place as our own.

I don’t presume to be that prisoner freed from his chains who now longs to share the truth as only he can see it. I am a fellow prisoner, viewing the shapes and shadows on the wall, but seeking the truth by asking those questions that the ‘elders’ hope are never asked.

We will all leave the cave one day and will discover in that day, as we enter that new world filled with that dazzling brightness of light and truth that our lives have either been spent wisely engaged in a true and worthy cause, or that we have been well-meaning but credulous dupes, desiring so much to feel good about our present and our future, that we had become victims of an attractive fraud.

I hope that this letter and the research supporting it might provide greater clarity regarding the shadows that animate your actions and beliefs, or to at least make you aware of credible alternative interpretations to those presented by your ‘elders.’

This study may cement your testimony, as you face some of the greatest problems with the LDS narrative and choose nonetheless to embrace the explanations proffered by the church and her army of apologists as being altogether reasonable and efficacious.

Alternatively, it might lead you to a place where you discover that your knowledge and the breadth of your understanding, based on what you have been taught, is less than perfect, complete or true. That there is much more to the Joseph Smith story than the sanitized, correlated version presented in Sunday school, priesthood meeting, relief society or preached by those young fresh-faced missionaries.

So, let me end this preface with a warning. There is a great line delivered by Jack Nicholson in the film, “A Few Good Men,” wherein goated by the prosecutor’s withering cross-examination, Nicholson’s character barks, “The truth, you can’t handle the truth.”

When you view the image below, at first blush you will see either an attractive young woman with her head turned away from you, or you will see an old witch.

If you persist, you will eventually come to see both. However, from that point on, anytime you again view the image you will immediately see both iterations.