I read an article the other day, by someone who had left the mormon church, and he wrote on the controversy behind the statement President Uchtodrf made at conference: "Doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith."

Up until that point, I had only heard positive things about President Uchtdorfs talk, and I was interested to see what the disagreement was.

I also found that this wasn't the only article written by ex mormons on the exact same topic.

Basically, the point of their argument is that President Uchtdorf is saying people should not doubt anything about the church, and should blindly follow the prophet without ever questioning what they say.

The article stated:

"Had President Joseph Smith doubted his doubts, the church would not exist."

First off, from their perspective, I do see where they are coming from.

Maybe some of them went to their leaders with honest questions, and were told it was wrong to question and that they needed to repent.

Sometimes leaders make major mistakes like that, and for someone who didn't have a hard ground to stand on to begin with, I can see why the next step in their eyes was to leave the church.

If I had honest doubts about something, and hadn't had given a spiritual witness, while only feeling pressure to believe "blindly" I would probably leave too.

Now that I've clarified that I can understand where they are coming from, I would like to point out a few things they are missing.

First off, they are missing the rest of the talk President Uchtodorf gave.

I always believe criticizing only a part of what someone said without considering the context (often seen in politics, on both sides) is unfair.

So here is the rest of what he actually said..

First he clarifies that not everyone who leaves the church is "sinful or lazy"..

"One might ask, “If the gospel is so wonderful, why would anyone leave?”

Sometimes we assume it is because they have been offended or lazy or sinful. Actually, it is not that simple. In fact, there is not just one reason that applies to the variety of situations..

In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. It may break our hearts when their journey takes them away from the Church we love and the truth we have found, but we honor their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience, just as we claim that privilege for ourselves."

So you might ask, "if you respect those who honestly search for truth, why are you telling people to doubt their doubts before they doubt their faith?"

That's a valid question.. read a little further.

"Some struggle with unanswered questions about things that have been done or said in the past. We openly acknowledge that in nearly 200 years of Church history—along with an uninterrupted line of inspired, honorable, and divine events—there have been some things said and done that could cause people to question.

Sometimes questions arise because we simply don’t have all the information and we just need a bit more patience. When the entire truth is eventually known, things that didn’t make sense to us before will be resolved to our satisfaction.."

(paraphrasing as best as I can)

"And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine.

I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes."

"Some might ask, “But what about my doubts?”

It’s natural to have questions—the acorn of honest inquiry has often sprouted and matured into a great oak of understanding. There are few members of the Church who, at one time or another, have not wrestled with serious or sensitive questions. One of the purposes of the Church is to nurture and cultivate the seed of faith—even in the sometimes sandy soil of doubt and uncertainty. Faith is to hope for things which are not seen but which are true.⁷

Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters—my dear friends—please, first doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith.⁸ We must never allow doubt to hold us prisoner and keep us from the divine love, peace, and gifts that come through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ."

Must not allow doubt to hold us prisoner?

Did Joseph Smith's 'doubts' hold him prisoner?

No.

It in fact led him to more enlightment and truth than this earth has ever had.

So is there a chance he's talking about two different kinds of doubts?

Consider this observation.

When Joseph Smith prayed earnestly for answers,

How much truth did he have at that point?

This article gives a great answer to that question. The author first acknowledges that because Joseph Smith doubted, it led him to searching, then to scriptures, then to prayer, then to revelation..

Then the author states,

"But that was almost 200 years ago, when the light of the fullness of the gospel was just coming over the east mountains, so to speak. The earth had suffered nearly 1800 years of religious confusion. That was Joseph’s situation and starting point. Joseph hadn’t spent his life studying and receiving answers “line upon line”. He wasn’t studying out his doubts surrounded by decades of truths. In a way, he was sitting at 5% truth and 95% doubt. In that situation, it would seem that the best thing to do is to give those doubt a lot of attention because all you can do is gain more truth…"

The church has always taught that truth is gained "line upon line, precept upon precept."

It isn't gained all at once.

President Uchtdorf isn't talking to a group of people who only have '5% truth'.

He is speaking in a day in age, when a great amount of truth has been given "line upon line".

But we know from 1 Nephi 2: 11, there must be "opposition in all things." Otherwise, "righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad."

So that means, we will still have doubts, or 'questions' that aren't answered, despite the truth we've been given.

It is this kind of doubt he is telling us to doubt before we doubt our faith.

In his talk Lord I believe Elder Holland said,

"Let me be clear on this point: I am not asking you to pretend to have faith you do not have. I am asking you to be true to the faith you do have. Sometimes we act as if an honest declaration of doubt is a higher manifestation of moral courage than is an honest declaration of faith. It is not! So let us all remember the clear message of this scriptural account: Be as candid about your questions as you need to be; life is full of them on one subject or another. But if you and your family want to be healed, don’t let those questions stand in the way of faith working its miracle."

What does he mean, "don't let those questions stand in the way of faith working its miracle", when in the statement before he says "be as candid about your questions as need be"?

Well he goes onto say:

"This is a divine work in process, with the manifestations and blessings of it abounding in every direction, so please don’t hyperventilate if from time to time issues arise that need to be examined, understood, and resolved. They do and they will. In this Church, what we know will always trump what we do not know. And remember, in this world, everyone is to walk by faith."

He means that when questions arise, don't forgo the truth you do know.

We must remember the miracles we've seen, and the spiritual witness we've been given.

Then, when questions arise (like he said, they will) we acknowledge them by taking them to the Lord and allowing Him to answer them in His own time.

As we know, this life is a test.

If your teacher gave you every answer to your test, how much would you actually learn?

And how would you be able to prove what you know?

Wouldn't you say you learn the most from studying?

From making mistakes, and learning from them?

And wouldn't you say the only way to test what you know is to not give you all of the answers?

But instead, let you prove it on your own?

Why should this test be any different?

It's ironic that we get upset with not getting our way, when we knew from the beginning, that not getting our way and enduring hard things would be a part of the plan.

If you are willing to accuse mormons of believing that not all answers are given immediately and sometimes take patience, you have to acknowledge why that is.

To exercise faith.

To prove that we will remember the truth God has revealed, and not let what we don't know overcome what we do.

Those are my thoughts.

I will end by saying this..

After my son died,

I remember the day I was given answers.

I had a very spiritual experience, part of which was another witness to me that I will see my son again, and that his spirit is still alive even though I can't see him.

However, the overwhelming power of the spirit can't be felt at all times.

God doesn't always allow us to feel like that because otherwise, there would be no test.

So knowing that witness and feeling would soon leave, I typed this simple statement into my phone:

"There is no doubt that what I've felt tonight is very real. I know that God lives, Christ's atonement is real, and this gospel is true."

In the days following, many doubts came into my mind.

"What if I don't get to see him again, what if this life is all there is, what if I don't get to raise him.."

All sorts of doubts.

But I knew the source.

And I knew what I had felt and the understanding I gained.

And no matter, what I couldn't deny the feeling I'd had.

Every time one of those doubts comes into my mind,

I pull out my phone, and read that short testimony I wrote that night.