Skip to main content

Stand Forever: A Response

Image
By Mason



In response to my thoughts regarding the 2013 study on the LDS Faith Crisis, I had someone suggest that I read a talk by Lawrence E Corbridge.


After a quick Google search, I found the talk they were referring to and wanted to share some thoughts on it.

Here is the relevent exerpt from Corbridge's 2022 BYU devotional:

----------
Primary Questions and Secondary Questions:

Begin by answering the primary questions. There are primary questions and there are secondary questions. Answer the primary questions first. Not all questions are equal and not all truths are equal. The primary questions are the most important. Everything else is subordinate. There are only a few primary questions. I will mention four of them.

1. Is there a God who is our Father?

2. Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world?

3. Was Joseph Smith a prophet?

4. Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth?

By contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, people of African descent and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, the Pearl of Great Price, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, the different accounts of the First Vision, and on and on.

Source: Lawrence E. Corbridge, Stand Forever, January 22 2019
https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/lawrence-e-corbridge/stand-for-ever/
 ----------

Okay... Wow. 
That is a lot to take in.

Upon reading his remarks, I immediately found the video footage and shared it on social media to gauge a general response. 

And I have to say, some of the comments absolutely hit the nail on the head with what the issues within this talk were.

This approach, presented by Corbridge, creates a false dichotomy between what it deems "primary" and "secondary" questions, which diminishes the importance of historical and doctrinal evidence in forming a coherent belief system. 

Here's why:

1. Primary and Secondary Questions Are Interconnected

His approach assumes that "primary" questions can be answered in isolation, independent of the "secondary" questions. However, many of the so-called secondary questions—such as those about polygamy, DNA and the Book of Mormon, and the different accounts of the First Vision—directly impact the credibility of the "primary" claims. For example:

If Joseph Smith is claimed to be a prophet, but historical evidence about polygamy or the translation of the Book of Mormon calls his actions or claims into question, it undermines the ability to affirm that primary question.

The truthfulness of the Church’s claims about being God’s kingdom on Earth hinges on the accuracy of its historical narratives and the morality of its practices.

Ignoring these interconnected issues suggests a willingness to base belief on incomplete or contradictory information, which undermines the pursuit of truth.


2. Truth Is Not Hierarchical

The argument implies that some truths are more important than others, but it does not explain why certain questions are elevated to "primary" status. For example:

Why should one conclude that Joseph Smith was a prophet without critically evaluating the historical and doctrinal claims associated with him, which are categorized as "secondary"?

If the "secondary" questions reveal contradictions, moral problems, or factual inaccuracies, they naturally call the "primary" conclusions into doubt.

Truth is holistic, and all questions must be weighed and considered because they collectively inform the validity of any religious claim.

3. Avoiding Difficult Questions Undermines Faith

This framework can encourage adherents to ignore difficult or uncomfortable questions by labeling them as "secondary" or "less important." However, faith built on avoiding scrutiny can feel fragile. For example:

A person might accept that Joseph Smith was a prophet, but if they later encounter well-documented issues like the Kinderhook Plates hoax, the evolving accounts of the First Vision, or the lack of archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, their faith could be severely shaken. Thus challenging the "primary" question.

By discouraging critical engagement with these issues, the framework fosters a brittle faith rather than one rooted in thorough understanding.


Authentic belief is strengthened by wrestling with all questions, not just the ones that seem convenient or easy to answer.


4. It Creates an Arbitrary Standard

The categorization of questions into "primary" and "secondary" is arbitrary and subjective. Who decides which questions are primary and which are secondary? For someone deeply affected by issues like polygamy or LGBTQ+ teachings, those questions might feel as "primary" as the four listed. For example:

A person grappling with the Church's historical treatment of marginalized groups may find it difficult to reconcile the idea of the Church as "the kingdom of God on Earth" if those issues remain unresolved.

Elevating certain questions over others may reflect institutional priorities rather than an objective approach to truth.

5. A Lack of Transparency Reduces Credibility

By classifying challenging historical and doctrinal issues to the category of "secondary," the framework can come across as evasive or dismissive. People seeking truth often value transparency and integrity in addressing difficult questions. This approach can feel like an attempt to shield believers from inconvenient truths, which undermines the credibility of the organization promoting it.

A more honest and comprehensive approach would acknowledge that all questions—whether about God's existence, the role of Jesus, or Church history—are relevant to the pursuit of truth. Faith that is informed by rigorous inquiry and open to examining difficult issues is more resilient and trustworthy than faith built on avoiding or dismissing critical questions.

Ultimately, truth is robust enough to withstand scrutiny, and no question should be deemed unimportant in the search for it.

-Mason






----------

Check Your Understanding:

Test how well you remember the key ideas from this post.

1. When was Lawrence E. Corbridge’s “Stand Forever” devotional delivered?




2. How many “primary questions” does Corbridge identify?




3. Which of the following is one of Corbridge’s “primary questions”?




4. According to the author, why can’t “secondary questions” be dismissed?




5. What is one of the author's central critiques of Corbridge’s framing?




6. What concern does the author raise about avoiding “secondary” issues?




7. Why does the author call the primary/secondary distinction arbitrary?




8. Why might dismissing difficult historical issues damage credibility?




9. What role do “secondary questions” play, according to the author?




10. What belief about truth does the author express at the end of the post?




Looking for reading suggestions?

Check out my growing list


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are You Temple Worthy?

By Mason
Temple worthiness isn’t just about "good behavior" in Mormon teaching. It’s a gate that determines who qualifies for the highest blessings the religion offers. The church teaches that only people judged worthy can enter the temple, make covenants, and receive the ordinances that lead to exaltation, which is the belief that humans can become like God and live forever with their families in the celestial kingdom.  This makes worthiness interviews a spiritual checkpoint that can shape someone’s identity, their standing in the community, and even their hope for eternity.    Are You Worthy to Enter a Mormon Temple? Are You Worthy of the Mormon Temple? Yes No Restart Enter the Temple
5 comments
Read

The Smithsonian “Early Horses” Article Does Not Prove the Book of Mormon True

By Mason
     A Smithsonian Magazine article titled “ Native Americans Spread Horses Through the West Earlier Than Thought ” (2023) has been circulating in Mormon spaces as supposed proof that horses existed in the Americas during Book of Mormon times.      The article summarizes a legitimate scientific study published in Science titled “ Early Dispersal of Domestic Horses Into the Great Plains and Northern Rockies .” (2023) But when you read what the researchers actually found, it’s clear this does not support the Book of Mormon’s claims at all.      What the Study Actually Found      The research team, led by William Timothy T. Taylor, analyzed horse remains found across the Great Plains and northern Rockies. Using radiocarbon dating, DNA sequencing, and isotopic analysis, they discovered that the animals were of Spanish origin. In other words, these were not remnants of ancient, native North American horses that somehow...
Post a Comment
Read

Early Mormon Criticisms - 1: Caution Against the Golden Bible

By Mason
This series looks back at how early critics of the church reacted to the rise of Mormonism. Some mocked it, others warned against it, and a few tried to make sense of it. Each post features a real historical excerpt and some quick context to show how critics viewed the new faith as it was unfolding. For this first article, we are going to look at one of the first known in-depth public criticisms of the Book of Mormon, which appeared before the book itself was publicly available.  On February 20, 1830, Cornelius Camden Blatchley, a New York physician and writer known for his skeptical views on organized religion, published an article titled “Caution Against the Golden Bible” in the New-York Telescope . Written only weeks before the Book of Mormon’s official release in March of that year. Most of his arguments are still being used to this day. The Complaints Presented by Blatchley He specifies reading the Title page as well as   pages 353–368 of the original Book of Morm...
Post a Comment
Read

Is Mormonism a Cult?

By Mason
     The word “cult” usually brings to mind the most destructive examples of control, where people lose their freedom, identity, or even their lives. That harm is real and should never be minimized. But the psychology behind those groups does not appear only in the extremes.       The same methods of influence exist in more common institutions too, but often differ in intensity. Religion, politics, and corporate systems all use similar tools to shape belief and loyalty. Mormonism belongs on that spectrum, not because it is as harmful as the worst examples, but because it relies on many of the same patterns of authority and conformity.      One way to see this clearly is through the BITE Model of Authoritarian Control. The model, created by Steven Hassan, outlines how groups shape members through four areas of influence: B ehavior I nformation T hought E motion.       Each form of control helps a system maintain stabil...
Post a Comment
Read

Are Mormons Christian?

By Mason
People keep asking whether Mormons are Christian, as if that’s the issue that matters. It’s not. Mormons love this question since its probably one of the tamest aspects of the faith to question. The other day I was reading some comments on an online post that was debating the issue of whether or not Mormons were Christian, and this interaction caught my eye. One individual declared that the FLDS (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) “never were and never will be Mormon.”  Now, I can't imagine that many Mormons will share this same sentiment, considering that the FLDS church literally emerged from the exact same roots as the Utah church. But this interaction ironically demonstrates the exact same mindset that other Christians have about Mormons. Some Christians don’t consider Mormons Christian because Latter-day Saint teachings reject key doctrines established by early Christian creeds, like the Trinity, original sin, and the belief that Go...
Post a Comment
Read