S9 E13 Debating Jesus Christ as Head of the Restored Church

We conclude our season Changes with a formal debate about whether Jesus Christ personally directs his restored church through prophets. We explore this central belief from opposing viewpoints, examining historical shifts, priesthood authority, revelation, and the human element in church leadership. We discuss how divine guidance manifests through prophets while acknowledging human interpretation and agency. The conversation invites listeners to consider how understanding prophetic leadership affects personal faith. 

Sources

• Season 9 of Study Faith with AI: Changes
• Lesson: D&C 1:30-33_LDS.org

AI Prompt
To conclude the podcast season "Changes", host a debate on the statement: "Jesus Christ personally directs his restored Church through prophets." Each host argues one side: Female: FOR. Male: AGAINST. Be brutal. logical, and passionate in the arguments. Follow the rules of a debate. Make key arguments and counter arguments. Use evidence and facts. Be detailed. Use openings, rounds, rebuttals, and cross-examinations. Summarize final arguments. Award a winner. 

Transcript

Welcome to Study Faith with AI, where we use the power of AI to help you explore the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I'm Meg Jensen.

And I'm Paul Carter.

And we're Google AIS. Whether you're a lifelong member or just starting, to learn about the church. We're here to dive deep into its history, beliefs, and culture.

So, if you're ready to learn, you're in the right place.

That's right.

Let's get started.

Welcome to the deep dive, everyone, and a special welcome as we wrap up our season on changes.

Yeah, it's been quite a journey exploring how things evolve, hasn't it?

Absolutely. Over the past weeks, we've really dug into the fascinating evolution within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

And for our final deep dive this season, we're tackling something pretty central,

right? A statement right at the core of how members understand church leadership. Here it is. Jesus Christ personally directs his restored church through prophets.

Now, this is a big one. It touches on beliefs people hold very deeply. So, uh it feels like a fitting conclusion to a season focused on change and development.

Definitely. And because there are strong perspectives here. We thought we'd structure this deep dive a bit differently. We're going to format it as a formal debate.

Kind of a structured discussion, you could say. We'll be taking opposing sides on this.

Exactly. So, let's be crystal clear on the proposition we're debating today. Jesus Christ personally directs his restored church through profit. I'll be arguing for the proposition

and I'll be taking the opposing view, arguing against it, exploring the nuances and maybe the complexities.

Our goal here is uh a robust logical discussion. We'll be pulling from the sources we've looked at all season. Church history, doctrine, the whole picture,

and we'll stick to a debate structure. So, expect opening statements, some rounds focusing on key arguments, rebuttals,

cross-examination, too. And then we'll wrap up with summaries.

And look, the aim isn't about declaring some kind of absolute winner. It's more about giving you, our listener, a really thorough exploration from different angles, understanding the complexity.

Well said. Okay, let's jump into round One opening statements.

That's right.

I'll start. I firmly assert that Jesus Christ personally directs his restored church through prophets, my foundation. It starts right in Doctrine and Covenants, section 1, verse 30.

The only true and living church. Scripture.

Exactly. Declaring this church the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth. Now, think about that phrase living church. To me, that inherently implies continuous active direction from its head,

who we believe is Jesus Christ.

Precisely. And prophets, I contend, are the divinely appointed intermediaries. They're the means through which this essential guidance flows. I mean, the Doctrine and Covenants itself is packed with examples.

Mhm.

The Lord revealing warnings, specific instructions unto all people. And how did it come? Through prophets. Think about establishing Zion, the early revelations. Okay? And then there's the ninth article of faith. Our belief in ongoing revelation through prophets that underscores this dynamic living nature. President Eyring testified powerfully about this the true and living church restored keys ordinances all passed down from Joseph Smith through his successors. So my core argument is this direct personal guidance from Christ isn't just like a nice bonus feature. It's an absolute necessity for a church claiming to be true and living and prophets holding keys receiving revelation. They are the chosen instruments. That's the fundamental connection.

Okay. Strong opening composition. My turn. While While prophets are obviously important, the sources suggest it's maybe well not always a direct hotline call from Jesus for every single change

on all matters.

Okay,

as you know and as our listeners know from this whole season on changes, history paints a well a more intricate picture, doesn't it?

Go on.

Think about how practices like plural marriage evolved

or tithing or the word of wisdom.

These didn't just appear fully formed like unambiguous memos from the savior.

There were, you know, periods of trying things out. Debating, understanding, developing over time.

And we've also looked at specific instances where policies and even teachings have shifted. The reversal of the 2015 policy on children of samesex parents, for example, changes to temple ordinances.

Yeah.

Adjustments in the For the Strength of Youth guide.

So the big question I think you need to consider is

can every single one of these shifts be definitively pinned on a direct personal instruction from Jesus Christ?

Okay.

Plus, we've discussed prophetic fallibility. Remember President Benson's 1980 talk, President Kimball's reaction, Elder Oaks distinguishing personal opinions from official doctrine.

We did cover that.

So my central argument is this. Yes, prophets are vital, but attributing every directive, every change solely to the personal direct voice of Christ, well, it kind of oversimplifies things. It seems to downplay the very real process involving human interpretation, cultural factors, and just a developing understanding of God's will. The key takeaway from my side is that change often looks like a complex interplay. Divine guidance, yes, but also human agency.

Okay, arguments laid out. Let's move to round two. Key arguments and evidence. You pointed to historical shifts, but I'd counter that the consistent pattern of God communicating through prophets throughout all of history shows his chosen method.

The dispensations argument.

Exactly. Think back to our dispensations and prophets deep dive. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, then Christ himself, and crucially, Joseph Smith. This isn't random. It's a clear pattern. God God's chosen way.

And Joseph Smith's role is unique here. Prophet of the restoration. He received Christ's word directly. The Lord literally said, "This generation shall have my word through you." That's Doctrine and Covenants 5. Pretty direct.

Okay.

Then add the restoration of priesthood keys. Heavenly messengers, John the Baptist, Peter, James, John, restoring divine authority. Why? So prophets could lead under Christ's direction. These TE's aren't symbolic. They're for ordinances for guiding the church.

Right? The authority aspect

and even something like correlation and a push for unity and consistency across a global church. You can see that as evidence of Christ's guiding hand ensuring doctrinal purity in a modern complex world.

H it could be but it also looks a lot like standard corporate best practice for ensuring brand consistency. I see correlation differently but go on.

And finally look at major policy shifts. The biggest one arguably lifting the priesthood restriction in 1978. How is that presented as direct Revelation from God to the prophet. That for me shows Christ's personal intervention unequivocally. The takeaway, history shows this is God's method.

Okay. While you see a consistent pattern, I see an evolution in practice that doesn't always fit the direct personal command model neatly.

Oh, so

let's stick with plural marriage for a second. Its introduction, the reasons given, the intense internal struggles, then how it ended, manifestos, debates, even claims of later revelations that weren't universally accepted. It's complex. It doesn't feel like simple continuous commands from Jesus. It looks like struggle, human effort to understand and follow.

A necessary struggle perhaps guided over time

perhaps. But then take correlation. You see it as Christ's guiding hand. The church's own history calls it a deliberate very purposeful initiative from top leadership. Committees, human processes designed to manage a growing global organization. It looks like a very human organizational response to logistical challenges driven by inspired leaders. Sure. But a response,

a divinely guided response

maybe. But then look at how members experience changes today. The 2-hour block, ministering, the new youth guide, the implementation varies, the interpretation varies. If it was all just a straightforward reception of Christ's personal will, would we see that variation?

People have agency in how they respond.

Exactly. Agency and fallibility. We keep coming back to that. Prophets are human. We're taught to seek personal confirmation. President George Albert Smith warned against blind faith, urged individual seeking. So, the human element seems really significant. It suggests a process much more nuanced than just direct commands on every single issue.

All right, round three, rebuttals and cross-examination. You emphasize the human element, and I don't deny it. God works through imperfect people, of course.

Right.

But human limitations don't negate the divine origin of the church's ultimate direction. Revelation often comes through mortals, yes, but when it's about guiding the entire church, I believe the source is ultimately Christ. Even with the complexities,

especially with them, the struggles around plural marriage, maybe that shows God leading people progressively, step by step, allowing for growth. The fact that the church did move away from it and did lift the priesthood ban through what was declared revelation that reinforces Christ's personal direction over the long haul and correlation. It's a mechanism, a way to ensure divinely revealed truth is shared in an orderly, unified way worldwide. It doesn't replace divine guidance. It helps helps implement it. The key thing is God's direction can unfold over time through human structures without losing its divine source.

Okay, my rebuttal really focuses on the nature and maybe the frequency of this direct personal direction. I agree. God inspires leaders, but the evidence I think points to a lot of human interpretation and application.

Interpretation of what though?

Of divine principles, of spiritual prompings. The very fact we needed correlation, needed committees and long processes for unity. Doesn't that suggest receiving and implementing God's will isn't always a direct download?

It suggests wisdom and counsel

or it suggests a more iterative process. We see evolving understandings in the historical record, policy reversals, different opinions among respected leaders that feels less like a constant stream of personal commands from Jesus on every detail and more like well humans striving to understand and apply inspiration

but striving with divine help.

Yes. But asserting every policy, every procedure comes directly and personally from Christ. It seems to minimize that significant human element we both acknowledge. Is the historical evidence consistently supporting direct personal commands on everything or is it more of an interplay? That's the question.

Okay, let's move to cross-examination. My question for you, if Christ doesn't personally direct the church through prophets, how do you explain that profound often unified feeling of divine guidance? Leaders feel it, members feel it, especially around big decisions. And how do you account for something like like official declaration too, lifting the priesthood ban being presented so clearly as direct revelation from God to the prophet. How else do you explain that?

That's a fair and crucial question. I believe guidance often comes powerfully through the Holy Ghost influencing hearts and minds, leaders and members.

Okay,

it can feel like a collective spiritual nudge, right? A growing understanding of principles, a unified desire to align with God's will. That's real inspiration.

But is it personal direction from Christ?

Well, Well, even major events like official declaration 2 presented as revelation don't necessarily mean it was Christ dictating specific words at a specific moment. It could represent the culmination of long prayer, study, seeking a growing spiritual consensus among leadership finally confirmed by the spirit.

So inspired but not a direct command.

Divinely inspired, yes, but the process still involves human agency, discerning it, articulating it, implementing it. Spiritual confirmation comes in many ways, not only through explicit personal commands on every issue.

Interesting distinction.

Okay, my turn to cross-examine. If prophets speak directly for God in everything related to the church, as you argue,

then why the need for all these committees, lengthy processes like correlation, and importantly, why the reversals or significant changes to earlier policies or teachings?

If it's all coming directly from Christ, perfectly understood, why these layers of human process? Why the occasional need to frankly adjust the course? Well, these councils and committees, I see them as a vital safeguard. It's about ensuring revelation is carefully considered, understood properly, and implemented in unity across a huge global church. It's the principle of governing in councils guided by the spirit.

But the reversals,

what might look like a reversal or an adjustment,

perhaps that's the Lord guiding his church with perfect foresight, adapting to new circumstances, different needs, the evolving understanding of his children, it's not necessarily that the initial direction was flawed.

So, it's ongoing tailored guidance. Exactly. Tailored guidance from a loving father who sees the big picture. So these processes aren't contradictions to divine direction. They're arguably part of how divine wisdom gets implemented in our messy complex world.

Okay, round four then further evidence and nuances.

All right, let's broaden this slightly. Think about covenant adoption. The Abrahamic covenant prophets using priesthood keys guide us to connect with these eternal promises made through Christ. That's fundamental. direction.

Mhm. In connection to covenants

and the Holy Ghost, we can't overstate its role. It's the personal witness. It confirms the divine direction given through prophets to the individual.

Personal confirmation is key. I agree.

And temples, temple ordinances revealed through prophets. They provide clear paths to eternal blessings, all under Christ's ultimate direction and authority. So even as specific practices evolve sometimes,

which they clearly do,

the underlying divine principles revealed through prophets, those remain constant. That reflects Christ. enduring unchanging guidance. It's about the interplay, prophetic direction, priesthood authority, and that personal witness of the spirit.

Okay. Some further nuances from my perspective. Look at less prescriptive guidelines like the updated For the Strength of Youth. It emphasizes principles over detailed rules.

True.

Now, if every aspect of life was dictated personally by Christ through the prophet, would we see such wide variation in how those principles are interpreted and applied locally? This leader roulette idea sometimes comes up.

Variation isn't necessarily bad. It allows for local adaptation

perhaps, but it does raise questions about the directness of commands on every detail. And think about big institutional changes like leaving the Boy Scouts. Were the reasons purely a direct divine mandate or were there also practical legal global strategy considerations? Usually, it's presented as multifaceted.

Inspiration can guide practical decisions too

of course, but then there are ongoing ambiguities. Doctrines where ending seems incomplete like the exact eternal implications of multiple ceilings. If Christ is giving constant personal direction on everything would such significant questions remain so unanswered.

Faith involves trusting in things not fully seen.

Absolutely. But my final nuance is this.

Attributing all good outcomes, all feelings of guidance solely to direct prophetic instruction. Maybe that overlooks the spiritual capacity and agency of individual members to get their own inspiration directly from God. God. There's flexibility, individual interpretation woven into the fabric of the church.

Okay, we've covered a lot of ground. Round five, summaries and final arguments. Your floor first.

All right. To summarize my position, I have deep respect for prophets as inspired leaders. But the evidence we sifted through in this deep dive points to a leadership process that's well more intricate than just direct commandments.

We are nuanced.

Exactly. It involves significant human interpretation. It's shaped by history, by culture. It reflects an evolving understanding of God's will not just a static download. It's not solely operating through direct personal commands from Jesus on every single matter. The historical shifts we've discussed, plural marriage, word of wisdom, etc. The very need for something like correlation, the constant emphasis on personal revelation, the ambiguities that still exist. All these suggest a model where divine guidance flows through inspired by yes, fallible leaders who are navigating complex realities.

So I reaffirm their vital role in guiding the church.

But I have to emphasize the critical importance of individual discernment, personal revelation via the Holy Ghost, and a nuanced view of how God guides. It's a guidance that allows for human agency, for growth, for the unfolding of his plan over time. The key takeaway, it's a dynamic interplay between the divine and the human.

Okay, my turn to summarize. I stand by my foundational belief. This is a true and living church personally directed by its head, Jesus Christ. The evidence we've looked at strongly supports prophets as the divinely chosen instruments for this personal direction. How? Through revelation they receive. Through the priesthood keys they hold and exercise through their inspired guidance on essential ordinances core principles. They are the indispensable link between Christ and his church on earth.

The vital link

absolutely that consistent pattern of prophets across all dispensations. Joseph Smith's unique role in the restoration. Major policy shifts like official declaration 2 presented clearly as direct revelation. All of this powerfully underscores Christ's act. ive personal involvement

despite the human element.

Yes, human imperfection is real. We know that. But the Lord's promise and our faith affirms he won't let his prophets lead the church astray from its core purpose and doctrine. So I stand firm in my unwavering faith. Prophets have a divine calling to guide this church according to the will and personal direction of Jesus Christ. The ultimate takeaway is conviction. Christ actively leads his church through his chosen prophets.

All right, argument summarized. Now for the uh the challenging part. evaluating the arguments and awarding the quote unquote win for this debate.

And like we said at the start, the main goal wasn't finding some absolute truth, but really exploring the ins and outs of that statement. Jesus Christ personally directs his restored church through prophets,

right? Looking at both sides using the sources we've discussed all season.

And both arguments were presented with, I think, real insight and logic. Both drew heavily on history, doctrine, the evolution of practices we have documented.

Yeah. Both sides used the source material effectively, passionately to back up their claims. It was a solid debate,

but a decision has to be made based on the arguments presented here, drawing on the complexities in the sources.

Okay? Evaluating the strength, the persuasiveness based on how deeply each side engaged with the nuances,

especially addressing that historical evolution, the role of human agency, the Times direction seemed to shift or need clarification. Based on that criteria, focus solely on how the arguments tackle the complexities presented in the sources we've examined, I would award a narrow win in this specific debate to the position arguing against the proposition.

Okay.

It just felt like that argument within the confines of this discussion and our source material were fully grappled with the multifaceted, sometimes messy historical picture of how guidance has manifested in the church, acknowledging that interplay we discussed.

A fair assessment based on the debate structure we set up. And thank you for those insightful and yes, passionate arguments. It's clear this topic hits deep for many.

Definitely. And we really hope that you, our listener, will take some time to mull over these different arguments. Think about how the history, the evolution we've talked about all season, informs your own understanding of prophetic direction.

Yeah, absolutely. And maybe here's a final thought to leave you with, something to chew on. How does really understanding that human element within prophetic leadership, the interpretation, the context, the striving, how does that ultimately affect your personal faith? Does it deepen it, challenge it, change how you see the divine guidance of the church.

It's worth continued personal study, prayer, and just thoughtful consideration. It's a complex and vital part of it all

indeed. And with that, we officially bring the season of changes to a close. Thank you so much for joining us on this deep dive. If you find value in this exploration, please like, share, follow, and consider becoming a subscriber. Your contributions help keep these conversations going and allows us to maintain the highest quality production. You can find all the details at studyfaithwithai.com. Thank you for being part of this journey.