7 Ways Latter-day Saints get Following the Prophet Completely Wrong

One of the boldest and unique claims of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that we are led a living prophet today. A man, who like Moses of old talks with, and on behalf of, God. Repeatedly throughout all of Holy Writ, the message is clear, FOLLOW THE PROPHET!

From the stories told in the Holy Bible, to the Book of Mormon, to the teachings of Latter-day Prophets, repeatedly we have been promised blessings for following the prophet and warned of cursings/judgments for disobeying or ignoring their counsel. (See 20+ Amazing Quotes on Following The Prophet and the Dangers of Disobeying!)

Yet, still, after thousands of years of prophets, sadly we still often misunderstand what following the prophet means. I’ve written this article due to the vast amount of messages, comments, and posts on social media by members of the Church pushing these ideas that are not accurate. So, here are 7 ways Latter-day Saints get following the prophet completely wrong:

1st. We think that if we follow the prophet, we will be protected from bad things.

Our history is full of stories of miraculous preservation. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, The Army of Helaman, the Sons of Mosiah, Nephi and Lehi, the Mormon Battalion, Williard Richards, and more. The common theme is that they followed the prophet and were preserved. We also share stories like the Martin and Willie handcart companies, or Haun’s Mill massacre and emphasis “If they had listened to Brigham and not left so late”, or “had they only listened to Joseph and gathered to Far West…” These stories are often used to teach that if we follow the prophet we will be protected.

This is amazing, except that it is not the truth. For every story of miraculous preservation our history also has a story of someone offering the ultimate sacrifice in the course of their obedience. The women and children of Ammonihah, Abanadi, all the early Apostles. Hundreds if not thousands of faithful pioneers, and missionaries in this dispensation. All died while trying to follow the prophet. Sister Hinckleys Grandfather DIED of injuries from building the Manti Temple! And many others survived but suffered tremendously while trying to follow the prophet.

So what is the truth? Whereas we are insulated from many bad things by living the gospel and following the prophet, it is a false idea that we are insulated from all bad things. Some bad things happen due to disobedience, it is true, and often bad things are the natural side-effects of the fallen world in which we live. But many times, the Lord allows bad things to happen to us when we are obedient so that He can fully test our faithfulness to serve Him “at all hazards” as Joseph Smith told us would be required. (For more on this issue see “The Most Important Reason For Trials That Latter-day Saints often Forget.”)

2nd. We define what success looks like, and rarely is it how the Lord defines success.

When the Prophet asks us to do something one of the first things we do is define what success means. It is our human nature. For those called on missions, often they equate success with baptisms. Those pioneers called to settle the various colonizing missions (Cotton Mission, Iron Mission, San Juan Mission), they defined success as raising cotton, producing iron, or settling an area. And many of the brethren who went with Joseph to Missouri in Zion’s Camp defined success as redeeming Zion (Jackson County). Often when the prophet asks or urges us to do something, we expect to see immediate temporal success in the endeavor.

The problem? The Lord defines success differently than we do. The Iron and Cotton Missions “failed” according to the world, but the results of those missions are communities of faithful Saints known as Cedar City, St. George, and the surrounding areas. There are temples in those communities, and Jeffrey R. Holland hails from those communities. All from “failed” missions according to the world. The same can be said of Zion’s camp and many missionaries of this dispensation. According to the world, their missions were/are a ‘failure’ but according to the Lord, they are a success because they built His Saints.

So what is the truth? We must follow the prophet trusting in the Lord’s plan. Whereas we don’t know why the Lord inspires the prophet to call people to the missions they are called to, why He prompts the prophet to institute a policy, or issue a First Presidency statement, so let’s not assume what the Lord has not revealed. We often look at temporal success, the Lord is working on eternal timetables and for eternal salvation.

3rd. We think believing in prophetic fallibility and the promise the prophet won’t lead us astray are mutually exclusive.

Growing up I heard the quote, “Catholics teach that the pope is infallible, but none of them really believe it. Mormons teach that the Prophet is fallible, but none of them really believe it either.” And whereas it is tongue in cheek, it is important to understand that as Latter-day Saints, we do not believe that the prophet is infallible. Now, it is important to understand what that means. Infallibility means that one can do no wrong. Never make a mistake, never be deceived, or sin. There is but one man who fits that title, that is Jesus Christ. Every other man has and will be deceived, make mistakes, and commit sin, including every single prophet.

Whereas we do not believe that the prophet is infallible, we DO believe and teach that the Prophet, when acting in his official capacity as the President of the Church, will never lead us astray. Some people erroneously think that this promise is only from the Official Declaration 1, and applies to things of that scale. But they are either ignorant or misleading.

The promise the prophet will not lead us astray has been repeated MULTIPLE times by the prophets and the apostles: Even as recently as less than 12 months ago in the Oct 2021 General Conference when Elder Ronald A. Rasband declared, “We are distinguished as a Church to be led by prophets, seers, and revelators called of God for this time. I promise that as you listen and follow their counsel, you will never be led astray. Never!” (For more witnesses see 25+ Times we Have Been Promised That The Prophet Will Not Lead us Astray.)

4th. We think the words of the prophets are a measuring rod to judge others when they really are for us to measure ourselves.

When Russell M. Nelson asked all the members of the Church to stop using our nickname of Mormon and LDS and instead use the Church’s full name I had dozens of articles, videos, quotes, and aspects of my blog and social media that used the old jargon and needed to be updated to follow the prophet. I spent hours reviewing, searching, and correcting everything I had created to ensure it was accurate.

But, there was something else that happened almost immediately, suddenly everyone became Pharisees in enforcing this counsel. Any member caught using Mormon or LDS was suddenly attacked by other members of the Church. I remember watching pages like LDSDaily get all of their comments full of angry members who demanded they fix their site name. Regardless of whether or not others are following prophetic counsel, it is not our job to attack, judge, or shame them. Each of us needs to learn that following the prophet is about ME, not you. (For more see Following the Prophet is about ME not YOU.“)

NOTE: This does not mean that we are not to encourage others to use the full name, we are, the prophet has asked us to do that even. But it means we are not meant to be judging how others are following the prophet. Also, this does NOT mean we need to condone or stand silent when others flirt with apostasy by ridiculing or attacking prophetic counsel and/or trying to publically slander the Lord’s anointed.

5th. We think we don’t need to follow the counsel of the prophet, only the commandments.

I have noticed that whenever the counsel of the prophet agrees with our personal bias we often jump straight to “SEE WHAT THE PROPHET SAID!” to validate/vindicate our personal beliefs, biases, opinions, and politics. But when his words or actions come into conflict with our personal beliefs, biases, opinions, and politics, as a people we suddenly back up and start saying things like, “It was just counsel, not a command”, “That counsel is old and no longer relevant”, and “This is just his opinion.”

Russell M. Nelson taught that we need to replace skepticism with an emphasis when it comes to the teachings of the prophets, even those we disagree with, he said, “My experience is that once you stop putting question marks behind the prophet’s statements and put exclamation points instead, and do it, the blessings just pour.”

The moments where we disagree with prophetic counsel contain the most potential for spiritual growth. Elder Neil L. Andersen taught this at the April 2018 General Conference when he said, “Don’t be surprised if at times your personal views are not initially in harmony with the teachings of the Lord’s prophet. These are moments of learning, of humility, when we go to our knees in prayer. We walk forward in faith, trusting in God, knowing that with time we will receive more spiritual clarity from our Heavenly Father.”

Some might say that this is blind obedience, to which I resolutely echo the words of the last Patriarch of the Church, Eldred G. Smith, who proclaimed in the Oct. 1970 General Conference, “We are too often afraid of what is called blind obedience, but obedience to God is always right — blind or otherwise.” (For more on this topic see Blind obedience is better than disobedience. But obedience based on faith is not blind!)

6th. We think we should pray IF the prophet is right, rather than pray for a CONFIRMATION he is.

One of the BIGGEST mistakes Latter-day Saints make when following the prophet comes around the topic of gaining a personal witness that the prophet’s words are truly the Lord’s (see Doctrine and Covenants 1:38). Often Latter-day Saints pray and ask God IF the prophet is right. This often comes when we disagree with the prophet and we have a strong desire to be told he is wrong.

There is no better example of this and rebuttal to this thought than what happened in the late 1970s and early 1980s. See, the Church came out in full opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment. Speeches were given, Ensign articles were published, and even First Presidency letters were issued! Yet many members insisted on ignoring the prophet because his counsel disagreed with their personal political bias. They sought personal revelation that the prophet was wrong, a revelation that Satan was all too willing to give.

In a rebuttal and rebuke to the members who were standing in opposition to the First Presidency on ERA (and swap out ERA for any topic), the Church savaged their position with this excerpt from the March 1980 Ensign:

The relationship between the prophets and the members is not one of blind acceptance, contrary to some misunderstandings and misstatements, but rather places on members the full responsibility to study and pray, so that each also may receive confirmation from the Lord of the First Presidency’s position on the matter at hand.

With their own understanding and confirmation from the Lord, after study and prayer, members are more able to be an influence for good among their fellowmen on that matter, and are able to assist their leaders on that and related topics. The responsibility to be of good influence and to receive individual confirmation is a right and is a serious requirement of members of the Church.

But what if an individual feels his “confirmation” does not support the First Presidency statement? When the Apostle Paul was approached by members espousing their own interpretations, he resolved their dilemma by asking: “You saith I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor. 1:12–13).

President George Q. Cannon commented upon the extent to which counsel may be ignored or resisted:

“A friend … wished to know whether we … considered an honest difference of opinion between a member of the Church and the authorities of the Church was apostasy. … We replied that we had not stated that an honest difference of opinion between a member of the Church and the authorities constituted apostasy; … but we could not conceive of a man publishing those differences of opinion, and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special pleading to enforce upon the people to produce division and strife, and to place the acts and counsels of the authorities of the Church, if possible, in a wrong light, and not be an apostate, for such conduct was apostasy as we understood the term. We further said that while a man might honestly differ in opinion from the authorities through a want of understanding, he had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him, and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostasy, and be found fighting against God and the authority which He had placed here to govern His Church” (Deseret News, 3 Nov. 1869, p. 457).

It is clear, therefore, that members who choose not to follow the counsel of the First Presidency are completely free to do so. There is no civil or criminal penalty for religious disagreement, but there is surely a spiritual loss for the individual.

7th. We manipulate the prophet’s words instead of following them.

President Dallin H. Oaks in an Oct. 1994 Ensign article warned of “the practice of those who select a few sentences from the teachings of a prophet and use them to support their political agenda or other personal purposes. In doing so, they typically ignore the contrary implications of other prophetic words, or even the clear example of the prophet’s own actions.”

In layman’s terms? There is a tendency for people to take the words of the prophet out of context to justify their fringe political views/unorthodox views of the gospel. When we hear a quote used by someone to justify their political/ideological actions the FIRST thing we should do is to authenticate the quote (If you need help on how to EASILY ‘fact check’ a quote see this article for step-by-step instructions, How Can I Tell if a Quote From a General Authority is Authoritative?)

Most if not all, quotes used to justify extreme actions will fail this test. But President Oaks goes on to give another test, how does the quote compare with the actions of the prophets? Oaks taught, that “the servants of God are under the Master’s commands to follow him and to be examples to the flock (see 1 Tim. 4:12; 1 Pet. 5:3). We should interpret their words in the light of their works. To wrest the words of a prophet to support a private agenda, political or financial or otherwise, is to try to manipulate the prophet, not to follow him.“

This test by President Oaks will allow us to detect people manipulating the words of the prophets. Often I see people quoting an old prophet as justification to ignore the living prophet. Applying the standard of interpreting their words by their actions one CLEARLY sees that such quotes being used to justify disobedience is pure manipulation of the words, as every single prophet has sustained and followed their predecessors, and if alive today, EVERY past prophet would support the current prophet.

To drive home this very point, President Oaks taught, that “the most important difference between dead prophets and living ones is that those who are dead are not here to receive and declare the Lord’s latest words to his people. If they were, there would be no differences among the messages of the prophets.”

Therefore what?

In conclusion, I invite you to listen, read, and study the words of the prophets. All of the prophets. Not just the dead prophets you love, but the living prophet and apostles too! Not just the ones that confirm your biases, but the ones that challenge you to be more devoted to Christ and His gospel.

If you are unsure where to start, I recommend doing what I did. I went to the Gospel Library app, then to General Conference, and started at the oldest conference in the app (April 1971). I then worked forward from 1971 listening to each conference talk until I got to our current conference. Now I am working from 1970 backward via the conference archives (see https://archive.org/details/conferencereport you can filter by year, I’ve worked my way back to 1960).

But regardless of how you study I urge you to not throw away the words/counsel of the prophets. ESPECIALLY the counsel that disagrees with your current lifestyle. The more closely we align our lives with the teachings of the prophets, the more the Lord will be able to bless us. I want to close with the words of Ezra Taft Benson:

“If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.”
President Ezra Taft Benson (First Presidency Message, Ensign, June 1981)