The first testimony a Mormon bore to me (it was a class-mate during our senior year at high school) he said it was “God’s official church.” I don’t remember him saying “true,” though he might have.

It took me a while to make the connection that “true” means “official” in that context.

“True” in a testimony sense doesn’t mean “real”. Other churches are real churches. The other religions and the other denominations of Christianity are real religions.

But the LDS church, founded by Joseph Smith Jr., and currently headed by Gordon B. Hinckley is the only church authorized of God to be the official church organization of Christ.

In my mind, other churches are more like “God’s fan clubs.” They can be very sincere, and they often do a lot of good. And just as you have the right to join any fan club of a movie star or pop star that you want, authorized, or unauthorized, everyone has the right to join whatever church or God’s-fan-club they want.

I spent time during my teen years in some of those other churches, and they brought me closer to God, and prepared me for discovering the “official church” later on. I don’t know why I took that other path, or whether it was necessary from God’s viewpoint, but hey, it worked.

But once you know which one the official fan-club is, and which one the “star” wants you to join, then I don’t see a reason for joining some other fan-club, if you truly love that star and want to be totally devoted.

I like the idea of other churches as “God’s fan clubs”. Unfortunately, the modern scriptures paint a different story. Joseph first learns from the Son that the churches “were all wrong”, “their creeds were an abomination”, their “professors were all corrupt”, and “their hearts are far from me”. JSH 19. Many have struggled with 1 Nephi 14′s “two churches only” with the Church of the Lamb being the “covenant people of the Lord” and rest being “an abomination”. My personal experience is far different from these striking characterizations, with committed disciples flowing forth from all denominations.

I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior while standing alone in my sister’s apartment. It was a very spiritual experience that changed my life. I was then lead by the Spirit to be baptized at a Christian church. This was also a very spiritual experience.

Then the Spirit basically said “There is more…are you interested?” and I was baptized a Mormon with the priesthood and this was also a very spiritual experience.

I believe that God and his Son smile upon all sincere forms of worship.

Very interesting disucussion. For more than a decade I have struggled with the “I know the church is true” mantra. But I realize now that it is mainly a problem with semantics. This discussion nicely illustrates the problem. I have found that when pressed, most people will agree that technically, they do not know, but that they believe the church to be true. (Remember, I said most.)

Many years ago while I sat in gospel doctrine class I had the thought come to me that there are many people in other religious organizations that will be exalted before some of those (myself included) seated in that room. LIke Howard, I believe God is pleased with all sincere attempts to worship and come to know him.

Interesting post, annegb. There’s a lot to think about here.

The verb “to know” is complex. French and Spanish (and probably others) have one “to know” that essentially deals with knowledge of information and another “to know” that deals with familiarity (like with people). I think we usually a mean something like the former when we say “I know the church is true”–that is, we are saying, “it is a fact that the church is true, and I have learned this fact.” I might make more sense if we used “know” in the latter sense–”I know the church is true” meaning “I am familiar with the truthfulnes of the church.” In that sense, our scripture study, dialogue, and prayers can really lead to knowledge as we explore its veracity.

In science, we acquire knowledge by testing a hypothesis and measuring the results (we know there is gravity because it has been measured and re-measured countless times). In history, we acquire knowledge by examining and comparing different accounts of what happened. (My apologies to you scientists and historians out there who could give much more nuanced (and probably more accurate) statements of how knowledge is acquired.) Each of these approaches works for spiritual matters to some degree–we keep the commandments and measure the results, for example. Spiritual knowledge, however, depends upon a witness from the Holy Ghost, who is not always easy to understand.

Unlike most of the things I know, my knowledge of God and the truthfulness of the church has to be based on my own data and examination of relevant accounts and, of course, my attempts to listen to the Holy Ghost. So, when personal study yields data that people are willing to rely on, I think it is absolutely appropriate for someone to say they know the church is true.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but I want to just say one thing about the word “true”. Like “know,” it has multiple meanings (many of which would be interesting to explore in this context), but the Lord says that this is the only true and living church in which he is well pleased, and I think there should be more emphasis on the living part of that. While there are many good people in various churches who advocate principles consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ, I think the LDS is rare the way we assert that Christ still personally leads the Church, i.e. that it’s living, through relevation to a prophet.

I used to place those who testify,” I know the Church is true,” into two groups: those who are just parroting something they’ve heard many times before; and those who are using “true” as shorthand for “the true Church of Jesus Christ” – what others here have called “official.” But it still grates a bit when folks say it, because it sounds like the person bearing testimony is saying that other groups that call themselves churches rally aren’t, which makes no sense to me. (Does that come from being a lawyer, making my living working with words?)

In the last few years I’ve thought of a third, admittedly more obscure, meaning. We refer sometimes to a person as “true.” And in building, we refer to some angles as “true.” There, as in these testimonies, “true” is used without modifying a noun. In each case, we mean true to a particular standard or ideal. In that sense, testifying that “the Church is true” would be testifying that it is true to some ideal – presumably to the ideal set by Christ and our Heavenly Father. I like that meaning best, though I admit that it suggests a perfection that the Church, operating with imperfect people in an imperfect world, may not have reached.

I am married to a morman and have heard all of the above from either my wife or others of that faith. I have been married for twelve years and my wife introduced me to the mormam church. I’ve found no real reason to believe the morman church is true or the “official” church of God. The fact that the Bible clearly states that no man can bear the sight of God, meaning that if he actually saw him our mortal senses couldn’t bear the greatness, the splendor, the awesome power of actually seeing him. The one account of one who actually saw God had to be ressurected. So, the though of a 14 year old kid actually “seeing and talking to the Godhead” is hard for me to accept. The other fact is that why would God rely on a 14 year old kid to establish a church when his own Son, Jesus, didn’t start a ministry until he was 30 years old? And the fact that Paul and the remainder of the Apostles stressed the fact that learned men of God should lead the church. The bible teaches that we all should have the attitude of little children in learning His word meaning that we should have their couriosity, their willingness to learn. Never was a child used to the magnitude of the proposed experience of Joseph Smith. Even Smith’s life would hinder me from believing the authenticity of his tale being one given to questionable practises. There are so many questions that the bible has answers to that the morman church doesn’t and really can’t have answers to. Additionally, there are so many doctrines that the mormans purport that have no scriptural basis or precedence, namely, polygamy (which they’ve since denounced) sealed marriages, baptism for the dean, having the “only priesthood”. The bible clearly teaches in Hebrews and other epistles that each believer and follower of Christ is a priest and that Christ is the Highpriest. I hear repeatedly that personal testimony that “I believe that the church is true” and I cincerely believe that the testifier believes that fact. But does that make it right? Is the testimony based on scripture, feeling, emotion, blind allegiance or parents’ wishes? I believe that when one studies the scripture and asks God for guidance and confirmation of what he has studied that he will undoubtedly be led to the Church of Christ. This is a bible base faith who find authority for what they believe and practise in the scripture. There is no better foundation on which to build a church. Additionally, the “priesthoods (Aaronic, Levitical) that are used in the morman church have no basis in scripture. In Hebrewes, Galations and elsewhere, we’re taught that we should refrain from the Old Testament practise of temple worship. There is no indication nor record of temple work recorded in the new testament. But for space and time I could go on with other observations concerning this. But, I would like to say that I deeply respect the people of morman faith. Their emphasis on family their amazing missionary efforts should be emulated by all who proclaim to be follower of Christ. They have such a great spirit about them that can only be described as infectious. But I truly believe that their mantra that their’s is the only true church is just not scripurally sound doctrine. I would love to continue this discussion and welcome any comments. Thanks

Steve D: (#12) Typos are allowed. But, please, it’s Mormon.

Jim A, maybe we can correspond by email. I’m not particularly interested in the “us and them” approach. I have a deep seated interest in getting at the truth. It’s just that I haven’t found the mormon to be true or official. This is not from a casual approach, as I stated earlier, I’ve been around it for 12 years and have studied it deeply. There are just too many inconsistencies that remain, in my mind, unanswered by the mormons. I always get the answer that they’ve prayed about it and they feel it’s right. That’s ambiguous and doesn’t really answer my questions that I have. So maybe I can get some better answers in our offline discussions. sdavis39@bellsouth.net. Oh, and sorry about the spelling, I didn’t even realize the typo until Bookslinger pointed it out. You’d think I would know how to spell after so many years, lol

annegb, just for fun, I did an insignificant, nonscientific, completely non-comprehensive, sampling of your posts on this site. Over and over and over again you say, “I don’t know…” But I could not find a single instance of you saying, “I know that…” in any context. Not even, “I know it’s a nice day.” or “I know I said this before….” or anything.

So perhaps you don’t say you “know” it true, because you simply don’t go that far in ANY respect. It was interesting to me, anyway…