Mormon Apostleship.

Jesus casts out the devils. Artist: Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld. Engraver: W. Am[l?]and, inscribed lower left. Source: Die Bibel in Bildern, Plate 191.

In Christian theology and ecclesiology, the apostles, particularly the Twelve Apostles (also known as the Twelve Disciples or simply the Twelve), were the primary disciples of Jesus according to the New Testament. During the life and ministry of Jesus in the 1st century AD, the apostles were his closest followers and became the primary teachers of the gospel message of Jesus.

During his time on Earth, Jesus Christ selected a group of twelve individuals, often referred to as the Twelve Apostles or Disciples, to be his inner circle. They accompanied him, learned from him, and were entrusted with the responsibility of continuing his mission after his crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension into heaven. This group of men played a pivotal role in the growth of early Christianity, as they disseminated Jesus’ teachings and laid the groundwork for the burgeoning Church. Their influence on the development and expansion of Christianity cannot be overstated.

Introduction: The Foundation of the Claim

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints makes an extraordinary assertion at the very heart of its theology: that after centuries of apostasy, God restored the original apostolic authority through Joseph Smith in 1829. According to LDS teaching, the resurrected apostles Peter, James, and John appeared to Smith and Oliver Cowdery, conferring upon them the Melchizedek Priesthood and the keys of apostolic authority. From this restoration event, the Church claims to have reestablished the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles with the same divine responsibility and authority as the original apostles who walked with Jesus Christ.

This claim is not peripheral to Mormon theology—it is foundational. The LDS Church teaches that apostleship is a living office with ongoing authority, divine revelation, and responsibility for witnessing Christ. Today’s Mormon apostles are presented as direct successors to Peter, James, John, and the other apostles, possessing the same priesthood power and apostolic mandate. The Church insists that these men hold “the same divine responsibility as Peter, James, John, and the other early Apostles.”

However, when we examine the New Testament carefully and compare the actual ministry and demonstrated powers of the first-century apostles with the contemporary LDS apostles, a glaring discrepancy emerges. The original apostles possessed and regularly exercised three specific miraculous powers that Jesus explicitly commanded them to demonstrate: healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead. These were not optional abilities or occasional occurrences—they were defining characteristics of apostolic ministry and essential credentials of apostolic authority.

This article will demonstrate that the modern LDS apostles’ complete failure to manifest these three fundamental apostolic powers reveals that their claim to have restored original apostolic authority is fundamentally flawed. If the apostolic office and authority were genuinely restored, we should expect to see the same demonstrable powers that authenticated the ministry of the first apostles. The absence of these powers is not a minor detail—it strikes at the very heart of the LDS Church’s claim to be the restored church of Jesus Christ.

Part One: The Biblical Standard for Apostolic Authority

The Great Commission and Apostolic Powers

When Jesus Christ commissioned His apostles, He did not merely give them a message to preach—He endowed them with supernatural power to authenticate that message. In Matthew 10:1-8, we read one of the most explicit descriptions of apostolic authority: “Jesus called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out impure spirits and to heal every disease and sickness… As you go, proclaim this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.”

This passage is critically important because it establishes that miraculous powers were not ancillary to apostolic ministry—they were integral to it. Notice the imperative nature of Christ’s commands: “Heal the sick, raise the dead… drive out demons.” These are not suggestions or possibilities; they are direct commands that presuppose the apostles would have the power to accomplish them. The authority to perform these miracles was given simultaneously with the authority to preach the gospel.

Luke’s gospel records a similar commissioning: “When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick” (Luke 9:1-2). Again, we see the inseparable connection between preaching authority and miraculous power. The apostles were not sent merely as teachers or administrators—they were sent as miracle workers whose supernatural abilities would validate their message.

Mark’s gospel emphasizes the same point: “He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons” (Mark 3:14-15). The authority to cast out demons was part of the essential apostolic commission from the very beginning.

The Purpose of Apostolic Miracles

These miraculous powers served a specific theological and practical purpose. They were the divine credentials that authenticated the apostles’ claim to speak for God. In Hebrews 2:3-4, we read: “This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.” The miracles were God’s testimony—His divine signature—confirming that the apostles’ message was genuine.

Paul understood this clearly. When defending his own apostleship against false apostles, he wrote: “I persevered in demonstrating among you the marks of a true apostle, including signs, wonders and miracles” (2 Corinthians 12:12). For Paul, miraculous power was one of the essential “marks” or credentials of a true apostle. It wasn’t enough to claim apostolic authority; that authority had to be demonstrated through supernatural power.

This understanding was shared by the early church. When the disciples needed to replace Judas Iscariot, they looked for someone who had been with Jesus from the beginning and could be “a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:22). The apostolic office required eyewitness testimony and demonstrable divine empowerment. These were non-negotiable qualifications.

The Three Essential Apostolic Powers

Among all the miraculous abilities demonstrated by the apostles, three stand out as particularly significant and frequently mentioned in Scripture: healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead. These three powers were not random or arbitrary—they represented Christ’s victory over the three great enemies of humanity: disease, demonic oppression, and death itself.

Healing the Sick: This was perhaps the most frequent apostolic miracle. The book of Acts repeatedly emphasizes that “many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles” (Acts 5:12). The healings were so numerous and public that “people brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by. Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed” (Acts 5:15-16). Note the comprehensive nature: “all of them were healed.” This was not occasional or rare—it was the normal pattern of apostolic ministry.

Casting Out Demons: The apostles regularly demonstrated authority over demonic spirits. Mark 6:13 records that when Jesus sent out the Twelve, “They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.” Acts 5:16 notes that crowds brought “those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed.” Philip’s ministry in Samaria included the casting out of demons: “With shrieks, impure spirits came out of many, and many who were paralyzed or lame were healed” (Acts 8:7). Paul’s ministry was characterized by similar power: “God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them” (Acts 19:11-12).

And he took the damsel by the hand, and said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, arise. And straightway the damsel arose, and walked; for she was of the age of twelve years. And they were astonished with a great astonishment. Mark 5:41-42

Raising the Dead: While less frequent than healing and exorcism, the apostles did demonstrate power over death itself. Peter raised Tabitha (Dorcas) from the dead in Acts 9:36-42: “Peter sent them all out of the room; then he got down on his knees and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, ‘Tabitha, get up.’ She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter she sat up.” Paul raised Eutychus from the dead in Acts 20:9-12 after the young man fell from a window: “Paul went down, threw himself on the young man and put his arms around him. ‘Don’t be alarmed,’ he said. ‘He’s alive!'” These weren’t resuscitations of people who had just lost consciousness—these were genuine resurrections witnessed by many people.

The Consistency of Apostolic Power

What is striking about the New Testament record is the consistency and public nature of apostolic miracles. These were not rare, private events whispered about in secret or known only through vague, unverifiable testimonies. They were public, witnessed by crowds, and often performed in hostile environments where skeptics could easily expose fraud.

The apostles did not pray for healing and then wait to see what happened. They commanded healing in the name of Jesus, and healing occurred immediately. When Peter encountered the lame beggar at the temple gate, he didn’t offer to pray for him or suggest he seek medical attention. Peter said, “Silver or gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk” (Acts 3:6). The man was healed instantly, “jumping to his feet and beginning to walk” (Acts 3:8).

Similarly, when Paul encountered the demon-possessed slave girl in Philippi, he didn’t engage in a lengthy exorcism ritual or call for a committee of elders. Acts 16:18 records: “Finally, Paul became so annoyed that he turned around and said to the spirit, ‘In the name of Jesus Christ I command you to come out of her!’ At that moment, the spirit left her.” The exorcism was immediate and complete.

This pattern of immediate, public, and verifiable miracles was the norm for apostolic ministry. The miracles were not occasional or hidden—they were regular, public demonstrations of divine authority that no one could deny. Even the enemies of the early church acknowledged the reality of apostolic miracles. After Peter and John healed the lame beggar, the religious authorities “could not decide what to do with them, because all the people were praising God for what had happened. For the man who was miraculously healed was over forty years old” (Acts 4:21-22).

Part Two: The LDS Claim to Apostolic Authority

The Mormon Doctrine of Apostolic Restoration

The LDS Church’s entire claim to legitimacy rests on the assertion that true apostolic authority was lost from the earth after the death of the original apostles and was then restored through Joseph Smith. The Church teaches that after the death of the original apostles, there occurred what they call “the Great Apostasy”—a complete falling away from true Christianity that resulted in the loss of priesthood authority and apostolic power.

According to LDS theology, this apostasy was so complete that no valid Christian church existed anywhere on earth from approximately the second century until 1829, when Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and conferred upon them the Melchizedek Priesthood. This priesthood, the Church teaches, includes “the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church” and “holds the right of presidency, and has power and authority over all the offices in the church.”

From this restored priesthood authority, the LDS Church established its own Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. The Church explicitly claims that these modern apostles possess the same authority and responsibility as the original Twelve: “The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles includes twelve everyday men with the same divine responsibility as Peter, James, John, and the other early Apostles.”

LDS Source: The Source of Priesthood Authority

The priesthood is the power and authority of God, which He gives to us to help carry out His work of salvation (see Handbook 2: Administering the Church [2010], page 8). The Lord has given His priesthood to chosen servants since the days of Adam.

After Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and the deaths of the Apostles, Latter-day Saints believe that the fulness of Christ’s gospel, including the priesthood, was taken from the earth and that in 1829, the priesthood was restored to the earth when heavenly messengers conferred it upon the Prophet Joseph Smith.

Because the priesthood is given to worthy men by the laying on of hands and a record is kept of those ordinations, priesthood holders today can trace their line of authority back to Joseph Smith, who received the Melchizedek Priesthood from Apostles of Jesus Christ.During His mortal ministry, Jesus Christ gave His priesthood authority to His Apostles, including Peter, James, and John (see Matthew 10).On May 15, 1829, John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to give them the Aaronic Priesthood. A few weeks later, the ancient Apostles Peter, James, and John gave Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the Melchizedek Priesthood (see Doctrine and Covenants 27:12; 128:20; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 81, 101).

The Prophet Joseph Smith gave the priesthood to other worthy men, who, under the Prophet’s direction, gave it to other worthy men, and so on, up to the modern day.

LDS Source: Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Apostle was the title Jesus gave to the Twelve whom He chose and ordained to be His closest followers and supporters. Apostles are chosen to be special witnesses of Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus Christ called and sent His Apostles forth to represent Him, today’s Apostles are given the role to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world. The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is the second-highest leadership body of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the First Presidency being the highest).

Jesus Christ calls Apostles to represent Him in our day just as He did in the Bible.

This is an extraordinary claim that demands extraordinary evidence. If modern LDS apostles truly possess “the same divine responsibility” and the same priesthood authority as Peter, James, and John, then they should be able to demonstrate the same miraculous powers that authenticated the ministry of those first-century apostles. The LDS Church cannot have it both ways—claiming full apostolic authority while lacking the demonstrable powers that defined that authority in the New Testament.

The LDS Teaching on Priesthood and Miracles

The LDS Church does teach about miracles and healing, but in ways that are significantly different from New Testament apostolic practice. LDS teachings on healing emphasize faith, personal worthiness, and the will of God in ways that often excuse or explain away the absence of immediate, demonstrable miracles.

In a 2010 General Conference address titled “Healing the Sick,” Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles stated: “Righteousness and faith certainly are instrumental in healing the sick, deaf, and lame—if such healing accomplishes God’s purposes and is in accordance with His will. Thus, even if we have strong faith… not all of the sick and infirm will be healed.”

This teaching creates a theological framework that differs markedly from the New Testament pattern. While it is true that not every person Jesus or the apostles encountered was healed (Jesus healed those who came to Him or were brought to Him), the New Testament never presents faith or God’s will as explanations for apostolic failure to heal. When the disciples failed to cast out a demon from a boy, Jesus did not say, “It wasn’t God’s will” or “The boy didn’t have enough faith.” Instead, He rebuked His disciples for their lack of faith and immediately cast out the demon Himself (Matthew 17:14-20).

The LDS Church also teaches that healing power is available to any worthy priesthood holder, not just apostles. According to LDS doctrine, any man who holds the Melchizedek Priesthood can perform healing blessings through the laying on of hands. While this democratization of healing power might seem egalitarian, it actually undermines the LDS claim to apostolic authority. In the New Testament, apostles possessed a unique and superior degree of miraculous power that distinguished them from other believers. The apostles could not only perform miracles themselves but could also confer miraculous abilities on others through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-18¹); (Acts 19:6²).

The Problem of Apostolic Succession

The LDS doctrine of apostolic succession differs fundamentally from the biblical pattern. In the New Testament, apostles were personally chosen by Jesus Christ Himself (except Matthias, who was chosen by lot under divine guidance, and Paul, who was directly called by the risen Christ). Jesus “called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles” (Luke 6:13).

Even Paul vigorously defended his apostolic credentials by emphasizing his direct commission from Christ: “Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father” (Galatians 1:1). He asked rhetorically, “Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” (1 Corinthians 9:1). Seeing the risen Lord was a non-negotiable qualification for apostleship.

In contrast, LDS apostles are chosen through a very human process. According to official LDS teaching, “By inspiration, apostles are chosen by the President of the Church, sustained or ratified by the general membership of the Church and ordained by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles by the laying on of hands.” This is selection by committee and popular vote—a far cry from the direct, personal calling of apostles by Jesus Christ Himself.

The LDS Church teaches that this selection process is guided by inspiration and revelation, but the fact remains that no modern LDS apostle can claim to have been personally chosen by the risen Christ or to have seen Him in the same way Peter, James, John, and Paul did. When LDS apostles are asked directly about whether they have seen Jesus Christ, they typically refuse to answer, claiming such experiences would be too sacred to discuss. This evasiveness stands in stark contrast to the biblical apostles, who boldly proclaimed their eyewitness testimony as the very foundation of their apostolic authority (Acts 1:22; 1 Corinthians 9:1; 1 John 1:1-3).

Blue Letter Bible: Are There Still Apostles Today?

One of the major questions surrounding the gift of an apostle is its continuance. Are there still apostles functioning in the church today? Do people still hold this particular office or have this gift?

With the sacred commissioning and responsibility that came with the office of an apostle, it is hard to imagine any person today claiming such an authoritative office. Anyone who does make a claim to have this particular office should immediately be looked upon with the greatest of suspicion.

Indeed, it seems audacious, if not almost blasphemous, for someone in our present-day to claim similar authority as the apostles of Jesus Christ. They received direct revelation from God, had seen the risen Christ, were specially commissioned by Him, and were responsible for composing the New Testament. There is nobody today who should be considered as equal with them.

Part Three: The Missing Powers—A Detailed Analysis

The Absence of Apostolic Healing

If modern LDS apostles truly possess the same authority and power as the New Testament apostles, we should see evidence of the same kind of immediate, public, miraculous healings that characterized apostolic ministry in the book of Acts. Instead, what we find is a striking absence of such demonstrations.

The LDS Church encourages its members to believe in healing through priesthood blessings, but these healings—when they occur—follow patterns more consistent with natural recovery, medical intervention, or psychosomatic improvement than with the immediate, undeniable miracles of the New Testament. There are no documented cases of LDS apostles healing congenital disabilities, giving sight to the blind, or enabling the lame to walk in ways that parallel the healings of Peter, Paul, and the other first-century apostles.

Consider the standard by which New Testament apostolic healing was measured. Acts 5:15-16 tells us that “people brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by. Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed.” This passage emphasizes several key points:

The healings were so consistent that people believed even Peter’s shadow might convey healing power
Large crowds brought their sick to the apostles
The text explicitly states “all of them were healed”—not some, not those who had enough faith, but all

Where is the modern LDS equivalent of this kind of apostolic healing power? If the current Quorum of the Twelve possesses the same authority as Peter and the other apostles, why don’t crowds gather in Salt Lake City, bringing their sick to be healed by the apostles? Why don’t we see documentation of the LDS apostles healing all who come to them?

The LDS Church would likely respond that such miracles do occur but are not publicized out of respect for the sacred nature of these experiences or the privacy of those involved. However, this explanation fails to account for the public nature of New Testament apostolic miracles. The first-century apostles did not perform their miracles in secret or only for believers. They performed them publicly, often in hostile environments, specifically so that the miracles would serve as credentials authenticating their message.

Moreover, the LDS Church is not shy about publicizing other aspects of its apostles’ ministry. The Church maintains extensive media operations, publishes talks and writings by apostles, and promotes their testimonies worldwide. If modern LDS apostles were performing miracles comparable to those of Peter and Paul, there would be no theological or practical reason to keep such evidence hidden. On the contrary, such miracles would be the most powerful possible evidence for the LDS claim to be the restored church.

The reality is that modern LDS apostles do not heal the sick in the same manner as the New Testament apostles. They do not walk through hospital wards emptying them of patients. They do not command the blind to see or the lame to walk. They do not demonstrate the kind of immediate, undeniable healing power that characterized apostolic ministry in the book of Acts.

The LDS Church has developed elaborate theological explanations for why healings may not occur despite faithful prayers and priesthood blessings. These explanations emphasize the role of individual faith, personal worthiness, and divine timing in ways that effectively excuse the absence of immediate miraculous healing. While these theological concepts may have merit in other contexts, they represent a fundamental departure from the New Testament pattern of apostolic healing.

In the Latter Day Saint tradition, apostles and prophets are believed to be the foundation of the church, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone. The “Articles of Faith”, written by Joseph Smith, mentions apostles: “We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.”

You can search at length for any official or non-official Latter-day Saint literature and will never find “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils” in a single documented source relating to the modern ministry of LDS Apostles.

When Peter and John encountered the lame beggar at the temple gate, they did not tell him to have more faith, to be more worthy, or to wait on God’s timing. Peter simply commanded: “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk” (Acts 3:6). The healing was immediate, complete, and undeniable. The man “jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God” (Acts 3:8). This is the standard of apostolic healing established in the New Testament.

The Absence of Authoritative Exorcism

The casting out of demons was another defining characteristic of apostolic ministry in the New Testament. Jesus gave His apostles “authority to drive out impure spirits” (Matthew 10:1), and the book of Acts repeatedly documents their exercise of this authority. The apostles cast out demons immediately, publicly, and with complete authority.

Modern LDS practice regarding demon possession and exorcism reveals the same problematic gap between claimed apostolic authority and demonstrated apostolic power. While the LDS Church does teach about the reality of Satan and evil spirits, and while LDS priesthood holders occasionally perform what might be termed exorcisms, these practices bear little resemblance to the immediate, authoritative exorcisms performed by the New Testament apostles.

Research into LDS exorcism practices reveals several significant differences from the biblical pattern. First, LDS exorcisms are unofficial, uncodified, and often regarded as folk practice rather than official church doctrine. According to discussions among LDS members, “Exorcisms aren’t recorded in the LDS Church; in fact, the ordinance itself isn’t even documented. It’s known unofficially as one of the ‘Unwritten Ordinances’ of the church.”

This unofficial status is itself problematic. If modern LDS apostles possess the same authority as Peter and Paul, and if casting out demons was a regular part of apostolic ministry, why would exorcism be an “unwritten ordinance” rather than a clearly defined apostolic function? The New Testament apostles did not treat exorcism as a secret practice or an unofficial activity—it was a public demonstration of their authority over the spiritual realm.

Second, most reported LDS exorcisms involve missionaries or local priesthood holders rather than apostles. The very fact that ordinary missionaries claim to cast out demons actually undermines the LDS claim to unique apostolic authority. In the New Testament, while other believers could perform miracles, the apostles possessed a superior degree of power and authority. When the sons of Sceva (who were not apostles or even believers) attempted to cast out demons in Jesus’ name, they were attacked by the demon-possessed man, and “they ran out of the house naked and bleeding” (Acts 19:13-16). This incident demonstrates that not everyone who invoked Jesus’ name could exercise authority over demons—such authority required genuine divine empowerment.

Third, reported LDS exorcisms often involve lengthy procedures, special prayers, and multiple attempts—quite unlike the immediate, authoritative exorcisms of the New Testament apostles. When Paul encountered the demon-possessed slave girl in Philippi, he “turned around and said to the spirit, ‘In the name of Jesus Christ I command you to come out of her!’ At that moment the spirit left her” (Acts 16:18). There was no lengthy ritual, no multiple attempts, no uncertainty about the outcome. Paul’s apostolic authority was sufficient to cast out the demon immediately.

Moreover, the most well-documented instances of LDS leaders attempting to deal with demon possession or evil spirits come not from the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in Salt Lake City but from missionaries serving in various parts of the world, particularly in cultures with strong beliefs in spirits and demons. This pattern suggests that LDS exorcism practices may owe as much to local folk beliefs and cultural expectations as to authentic apostolic power.

The LDS Church’s teaching that “you can’t be possessed without letting the evil spirit in” represents a significant departure from New Testament theology. Jesus and the apostles cast demons out of many people who had not willingly invited demonic possession. The Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:1-20), for example, was not held morally responsible for his possession—Jesus simply freed him from the demons without any suggestion that the man had “let them in” through sin or lack of faith.

Recent tragic cases involving LDS members who became obsessed with demonic possession and committed abuse or murder in attempts to “cast out demons” from family members highlight the dangers of maintaining a doctrine of exorcism without demonstrating genuine apostolic power to perform exorcisms. If modern LDS apostles possessed real authority over demons comparable to that of Peter and Paul, they could demonstrate that authority publicly and provide clear teaching and guidance on this issue. Instead, the Church’s approach to demonic possession and exorcism remains ambiguous, unofficial, and largely relegated to folk practice.

The absence of documented, authoritative exorcisms by modern LDS apostles is another glaring indicator that they do not possess the same power and authority as the New Testament apostles. If the apostolic office was truly restored through Joseph Smith, we should see modern apostles exercising the same immediate, authoritative power over demons that characterized the ministry of the first apostles.

The Complete Absence of Raising the Dead

Perhaps the most telling evidence of the failure of LDS apostolic claims is the complete absence of modern LDS apostles raising the dead. This miracle, while less frequent than healing or exorcism in the New Testament, was nevertheless performed by the apostles and served as one of the most powerful confirmations of their divine authority.

Peter raised Tabitha (Dorcas) from the dead in Joppa (Acts 9:36-42). The account emphasizes that this was a genuine resurrection, not merely a resuscitation: Peter “got down on his knees and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, ‘Tabitha, get up.’ She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter, she sat up.” The result was that “this became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord” (Acts 9:42). The resurrection miracle authenticated Peter’s apostolic authority and message.

Paul raised Eutychus from the dead after the young man fell from a third-story window during Paul’s long sermon (Acts 20:7-12). The text makes clear that Eutychus was actually dead: “he was picked up dead” (Acts 20:9). Paul went down, embraced him, and declared, “Don’t be alarmed… He’s alive!” (Acts 20:10). This was not a near-death experience or a fortunate resuscitation—it was a genuine resurrection witnessed by the entire church gathering.

These resurrection miracles were not performed in secret or known only through secondhand reports. They were public events witnessed by many people, and they had immediate and dramatic effects on the spread of the gospel. They demonstrated apostolic power over death itself—the final and greatest enemy of humanity.

Now consider the modern LDS apostles. Despite their claim to possess the same authority and power as Peter and Paul, there is not a single documented case of any modern LDS apostle raising someone from the dead. Not one. This is not because such opportunities don’t present themselves—LDS apostles, like all humans, undoubtedly encounter death regularly, whether in their own families, among church members, or in their travels. The absence of any resurrection miracles is not due to lack of opportunity but to lack of power.

The LDS Church might respond that God’s will determines whether such miracles occur and that it may not be God’s will for such miracles to happen today. However, this response fails on multiple levels. First, Jesus explicitly commanded His apostles to “raise the dead” (Matthew 10:8), making it clear that resurrection power was part of apostolic authority. Second, the New Testament presents resurrection miracles as deliberate demonstrations of apostolic power, not as rare exceptions that occurred only when God specifically willed them. Third, if it is not God’s will for modern LDS apostles to raise the dead, then by definition, they do not possess the same power and authority as the New Testament apostles who did raise the dead.

Some LDS members might point to historical accounts from early LDS Church history of miraculous healings or even possible resurrections. For example, there are accounts of Joseph Smith performing healings in Nauvoo in 1839. However, even if we accept these nineteenth-century accounts at face value (which is historically problematic given the lack of reliable documentation and medical verification), they still fail to establish that modern LDS apostles possess resurrection power. The question is not what happened in the 1830s or 1840s but what is happening today.

If the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in Salt Lake City today truly possesses the same authority as Peter and Paul, they should be able to demonstrate the same miraculous powers. The fact that they cannot—that not a single modern LDS apostle has raised anyone from the dead—is powerful evidence that their claim to apostolic authority is false.

The comparison becomes even more striking when we consider that the New Testament apostles performed resurrection miracles in public, in front of skeptics, and that these miracles could not be explained away or attributed to natural causes. In contrast, the most that modern LDS apostles can claim are subjective spiritual experiences, private healings that might be attributed to natural recovery or medical intervention, and vague testimonies of miraculous events that lack verification.

Part Four: Theological and Historical Problems with LDS Apostolic Claims

The Biblical Case Against Modern Apostles

The biblical evidence strongly suggests that the apostolic office was temporary and foundational rather than permanent and ongoing. This understanding severely undermines the LDS claim that apostolic authority needed to be restored and continues today.

Paul’s letter to the Ephesians provides crucial insight into the purpose and duration of apostolic ministry. In Ephesians 4:11-13, Paul writes: “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.”

This passage indicates that apostles, along with prophets, were given to the church for a specific purpose: to equip God’s people and build up the body of Christ “until” certain conditions were met. The word “until” suggests a temporary purpose. Pastors, teachers, and evangelists continue in the church, but the foundational offices of apostles and prophets served their purpose and are no longer needed once the foundation was laid.

Paul makes this even more explicit in Ephesians 2:19-20: “Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. Once a foundation is laid, you don’t keep laying it—you build upon it. The foundation, by definition, is not perpetually reestablished in each generation.

The book of Revelation provides further evidence that the apostolic office was limited to a specific number. In Revelation 21:14, John sees the New Jerusalem, and he writes: “The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” Not thirteen, not fourteen, not an ongoing succession of apostles—twelve. This suggests that the apostolic office was limited to a specific group of individuals who served a specific foundational purpose.

Moreover, the specific qualifications for apostleship outlined in the New Testament cannot be met by any person living today. When the disciples chose Matthias to replace Judas, Peter specified the qualifications: “Therefore, it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:21-22). Being an eyewitness to Jesus’ earthly ministry and resurrection was a non-negotiable qualification for apostleship.

No person today can meet these qualifications. No one today has been with Jesus from John’s baptism through His resurrection. No one today has been personally commissioned by the risen Christ in the same way as Peter, James, John, or Paul. The LDS claim that modern apostles are chosen “by inspiration” and ordained through human hands simply does not meet the biblical standard for apostolic calling and commissioning.

Does the Dunning-Kruger effect apply to religious beliefs?

The possibility of the Dunning-Kruger effect influencing members of the LDS Church leadership is a complex and sensitive topic that deserves careful consideration.

For those unfamiliar, the Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where individuals with low ability in a particular area overestimate their competence. They lack the self-awareness to recognize their shortcomings, leading to inflated confidence and potentially flawed decision-making.

David Dunning wrote, “In many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.” This idea was eloquently captured centuries ago by Shakespeare, who wrote, “The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.” This quote encapsulates the essence of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, highlighting the irony of how true wisdom often comes with a recognition of one’s limitations.

In the context of the LDS Church, some ex-Mormons argue that certain leaders might exhibit this effect. They point to instances where leaders seem overly confident in their knowledge or abilities, despite potential evidence to the contrary. This could manifest in various ways, such as:

Resistance to criticism or alternative viewpoints: A Dunning-Kruger-influenced leader might dismiss valid critiques or concerns, believing their own understanding to be superior.

Oversimplification of complex issues: They might offer simplistic solutions to complex problems, unaware of the nuances and intricacies involved.

Lack of self-reflection: They might not engage in critical self-assessment, hindering their ability to recognize and learn from mistakes.

It’s important to note that these are observations and interpretations from individuals outside the Church, and not all ex-Mormons share this view. Additionally, attributing the Dunning-Kruger effect to specific individuals is difficult without direct access to their thoughts and motivations.

However, the possibility warrants discussion. If the Dunning-Kruger effect were present in some leaders, it could have significant implications for the Church. It could lead to misguided policies, ineffective leadership, and a disconnect between the leadership and the members.

LDS leadership is not comprised of religious theologians or apologists.

LDS Minds: Current Apostles Previous Professions.

Before being called to their positions amongst the General Authorities, these brethren worked honorable, yet ordinary professions, and contributed greatly in the communities in which they lived. When being called to serve in the First Quorum of the Seventy and in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the brethren are asked to leave their respected positions and devote 100% of their time and effort to the Church.

• Jeffrey R. Holland – Formerly an educator and administrator; served as President of Brigham Young University (BYU).
• Dieter F. Uchtdorf – Former airline executive; was a senior pilot and executive in Lufthansa Airlines.
• David A. Bednar – Former university professor and administrator in higher education.
• Quentin L. Cook – Practiced law; specialized in corporate law and was a respected attorney.
• Neil L. Andersen – Businessman with experience in financial services and real estate.
• Ronald A. Rasband – Business executive in the energy and real estate sectors.
• Gary E. Stevenson – Served in business management and executive roles in globally operating companies.
• Dale G. Renlund – Medical professional; trained as a cardiologist and medical researcher..
• Gerrit W. Gong – Educator and diplomat; worked in international relations and academia.
• Ulisses Soares – Worked in accounting and public administration before full-time church service.
• Patrick Kearon – Businessman and church leader with experience in corporate management.

It is therefore plausible that the lack of formal theological or apologetic training among LDS Church leadership could contribute to the perception that they might be susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger Effect in certain areas. Here’s how:

Limited Specialized Knowledge: While LDS leaders are well-versed in scripture and Church doctrine, they may not have the same depth of knowledge as those who have dedicated their lives to studying religious history, theology, or apologetics. This lack of specialized knowledge could lead to overconfidence in their understanding of complex theological issues.

Unfamiliarity with Critical Analysis: Formal theological training often involves rigorous critical analysis of religious texts and traditions. Without this background, leaders may be less equipped to evaluate information objectively, potentially leading to oversimplified or biased interpretations.

Insularity of Thought: The hierarchical structure of the LDS Church could foster an environment where dissenting or alternative viewpoints are less likely to be considered. This could reinforce existing biases and limit exposure to new ideas, further contributing to the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Emphasis on Faith Over Academic Expertise: In the LDS tradition, faith and spiritual experiences are often prioritized over academic credentials. While this can be a source of strength, it could also lead to a dismissal of expert opinions or critical analysis, contributing to overconfidence in one’s own understanding.

Perception of Divine Guidance: LDS leaders believe they receive guidance from God in their decision-making. While this is a core tenet of their faith, it could also lead to a sense of infallibility, potentially blinding them to their own limitations or errors in judgment.

It’s important to emphasize that this is not a definitive conclusion, but rather a possible explanation for why some observers perceive the Dunning-Kruger Effect in LDS leadership. It’s also crucial to acknowledge that many LDS leaders are intelligent and capable individuals who have dedicated their lives to serving their faith. However, the lack of formal theological training could be a contributing factor to potential blind spots in their knowledge and understanding.

The Question of Miraculous Gifts

The biblical teaching on miraculous gifts further undermines the LDS position. Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 suggests that certain miraculous gifts, including prophecy and tongues, were temporary: “Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.”

The “completeness” or “perfection” (depending on translation) that Paul refers to has been understood by many scholars to refer to the completion of divine revelation—the full canon of Scripture. Once God’s complete revelation was available in written form, the need for ongoing prophetic revelation and miraculous authentication ceased.

This interpretation is supported by the historical evidence. The miraculous gifts that characterized the apostolic age did gradually cease as the first century ended and the apostolic witnesses died. By the early second century, even within orthodox Christianity, there is scant evidence of the kinds of miraculous healings, exorcisms, and resurrections that were common in the apostolic period.

The purpose of apostolic miracles was to authenticate the message of the gospel and the authority of its messengers during the foundational period of the church. As the writer of Hebrews explained: “This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will” (Hebrews 2:3-4). Once the message was confirmed and the foundation laid, the need for such miraculous authentication ceased.

Historical Problems with the Great Apostasy Theory

The LDS doctrine of a complete apostasy requiring restoration faces severe historical problems. The Church teaches that after the death of the apostles, the church fell into total apostasy, losing all priesthood authority and apostolic power. According to LDS teaching, no valid Christian church existed anywhere on earth from approximately the second century until Joseph Smith in the nineteenth century.

This theory is historically untenable for several reasons. First, we have extensive historical records from the second, third, and fourth centuries showing vibrant Christian communities scattered throughout the Roman Empire and beyond. These Christians preserved and transmitted the New Testament Scriptures, defended orthodox doctrine against heresies, and maintained a continuous church structure and worship.

Second, Jesus Himself promised that His church would not fail. In Matthew 16:18, He declared: “I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” If the LDS apostasy theory is correct, then Jesus’ promise failed. For over 1,700 years, according to LDS teaching, the gates of Hades did overcome the church completely. All authority was lost, all ordinances were corrupted, and no valid church existed anywhere on earth. This contradicts Jesus’ explicit promise.

Third, the apostles themselves made no provision for a total apostasy and subsequent restoration. Paul warned about false teachers and urged church leaders to guard the truth (Acts 20:28-31; 2 Timothy 1:13-14), but he never suggested that the church would completely fail and require restoration centuries later. Instead, he expected church leaders to continue faithfully preserving and teaching apostolic doctrine based on the foundation that had been laid.

Fourth, the LDS theory requires us to believe that for 1,700 years, billions of Christians lived and died without access to valid ordinances, true priesthood authority, or genuine apostolic guidance. This portrays God as having abandoned His people for the vast majority of Christian history—a portrayal that contradicts the biblical understanding of God’s faithfulness and His promise to be with His people always (Matthew 28:20³).

4 Reasons the Great Apostasy is a FALSE Doctrine of Mormonism

The Problem of Selective Restoration

Another significant problem with LDS apostolic claims is the selective nature of what was supposedly “restored.” If Joseph Smith truly restored the original apostolic church with the same power and authority as the first-century apostles, why didn’t he restore all the characteristics of apostolic ministry?

The New Testament apostles were characterized by:

Personal selection by Jesus Christ Himself
Eyewitness testimony of Jesus’ earthly ministry and resurrection
Immediate miraculous powers, including healing, exorcism, and raising the dead
The ability to confer miraculous gifts on others through the laying on of hands
Infallible inspiration in teaching and writing Scripture
Willingness to suffer persecution, imprisonment, and martyrdom for the gospel

Modern LDS apostles claim some of these characteristics (teaching authority, willingness to serve) but conspicuously lack others (personal calling by Christ, eyewitness testimony, demonstrable miraculous powers, martyrdom). This selective restoration is itself evidence that what was “restored” through Joseph Smith was not the authentic apostolic office but rather a human institution using apostolic terminology.

The LDS Church has effectively redefined “apostle” to mean something quite different from the biblical meaning. In the New Testament, an apostle had seen the risen Lord and been personally commissioned by Him, who possessed demonstrable miraculous powers and who could speak and write with divine authority. In LDS theology, an apostle is a church administrator chosen by human leaders, who claims to have spiritual experiences (but cannot or will not verify them), and who teaches doctrines that may be revised or rejected by later church leaders.

Trading cards are a great way for kids to connect with their LDS Apostles … never has the Priesthood Authority been so much fun. Children love to trade and collect these saint trading cards.

Part Five: The Witness of Church History

Early Church Understanding of Apostolic Authority

The early Christian church, in the centuries immediately following the apostolic age, understood that the apostolic office was unique and non-repeatable. The apostolic fathers—Christian leaders who lived in the late first and early second centuries—did not claim to be apostles themselves, nor did they suggest that new apostles needed to be appointed.

Clement of Rome, writing around AD 95-96, spoke of the apostles as a completed group who had appointed bishops and deacons to continue their work, but did not suggest that the apostolic office itself continued. Ignatius of Antioch, writing around AD 110, repeatedly referred to “the apostles” as a specific, historical group to whom he did not claim to belong, even though he was a bishop and church leader.

Irenaeus of Lyon, writing around AD 180, defended apostolic teaching by appealing to the apostolic writings and to the churches founded by apostles, but he never claimed that apostolic authority continued through succession. Instead, he argued that the truth was preserved through faithful bishops who maintained the apostolic teaching, not through individuals who claimed the apostolic office or apostolic powers.

This historical pattern is significant because these early church leaders were much closer to the apostolic age than we are. If the apostolic office was meant to continue through successive generations, these early church fathers would have known it and practiced it. The fact that they did not indicates that the church understood from the beginning that the apostolic office was foundational and temporary, not permanent and continuing.

The Medieval Understanding

Throughout the medieval period, while various church leaders claimed different types of authority, none claimed to be apostles in the New Testament sense. Even the popes of the Roman Catholic Church, who claimed to be successors of Peter, did not claim to be apostles with the same miraculous powers as Peter. They claimed teaching authority and administrative authority, but not the power to perform the kinds of miracles that authenticated apostolic ministry in the book of Acts.

The Orthodox churches maintained the doctrine of apostolic succession, teaching that bishops were successors to the apostles in terms of ecclesiastical authority and the ability to ordain clergy and administer sacraments. However, even in Orthodox theology, this succession was understood to be a succession of teaching authority and sacramental power, not a succession of the apostolic office itself with all its miraculous demonstrations.

Neither Catholic nor Orthodox theology taught that their bishops could perform miracles like healing all the sick brought to them, casting out all demons, or raising the dead. These churches recognized that such powers belonged uniquely to the apostolic age and served the specific purpose of authenticating the gospel message and establishing the church.

The Protestant Reformation and Apostolic Authority

The Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century uniformly rejected the idea that apostolic succession conveyed any special authority beyond what was available through Scripture. Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other Reformers argued that the apostolic teaching continued through the inspired Scriptures, not through human succession.

The Reformers believed that the church was “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 2:20) in the sense that it was built on apostolic and prophetic Scripture, not in the sense that it required ongoing apostolic officers. They saw no biblical warrant for modern apostles and regarded claims to apostolic authority apart from Scripture as presumptuous and unbiblical.

None of the major Protestant traditions—Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, or later Baptist and Methodist—taught that new apostles needed to be appointed or that apostolic miraculous powers would continue beyond the apostolic age. This consensus across different theological traditions suggests a common recognition that the biblical evidence points to the temporary and foundational nature of the apostolic office.

Modern Claims to Apostleship

In the modern era, several religious movements besides the LDS Church have claimed to have apostles. Various Pentecostal and charismatic groups, particularly those in the “New Apostolic Reformation” movement, claim to have modern apostles with special authority and revelatory powers. Like the LDS apostles, however, these modern “apostles” fail to demonstrate the same miraculous powers that characterized New Testament apostleship.

The existence of multiple groups claiming to have apostles, each contradicting the others in doctrine and practice, itself suggests that these claims are spurious. If God truly restored apostolic authority in the nineteenth century through Joseph Smith, why would He also give apostolic authority to Pentecostal leaders in the twentieth century who teach doctrines contradicting LDS theology? The multiplication of conflicting apostolic claims actually undermines all such claims, as it demonstrates that calling someone an “apostle” does not make them one.

Part Six: Answering LDS Objections

“Miracles Occur According to Faith”

One common LDS response to the absence of apostolic miracles is that miracles occur according to faith and that modern society’s lack of faith prevents such miracles from occurring. However, this explanation fails both biblically and logically.

Biblically, the apostles performed miracles precisely to create faith, not merely as a response to existing faith. When Peter healed the lame beggar at the temple gate, the beggar was not exercising great faith—he was simply asking for money (Acts 3:1-10). The miracle created faith in him and in the witnesses. Similarly, Paul’s miracles among the Gentiles were performed to authenticate the gospel to people who had no prior faith in Christ (Acts 14:3⁴); (Romans 15:18-19⁵).

Moreover, if a lack of faith in modern society prevents apostolic miracles, this would mean that modern LDS apostles are actually weaker and less empowered than the New Testament apostles, who performed miracles even in hostile, unbelieving environments. The apostles didn’t require ideal conditions of faith to perform miracles—they commanded healing and casting out of demons by the authority given to them by Christ, regardless of the faith level of the surrounding society.

Logically, if modern LDS apostles truly possessed apostolic power, they could demonstrate it in controlled conditions where faith is not an issue. They could heal their own faithful church members, for example, or perform miracles in LDS communities where faith in the priesthood is strong. The fact that even in these favorable conditions, there are no documented cases of apostolic-level miracles suggests that the absence of such miracles is due to lack of power, not lack of faith.

“We Don’t Publicize Sacred Experiences”

Another LDS response is that miracles do occur but are not publicized out of respect for their sacred nature or the privacy of those involved. However, this explanation contradicts both the biblical pattern and common sense.

In the New Testament, apostolic miracles were deliberately public. Jesus told His disciples, “Let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:16). The apostles performed miracles “in the sight of all the people” (Acts 3:11-12; 4:16). These miracles were meant to be witnessed and testified to because they authenticated the apostolic message.

If modern LDS apostles were performing miracles comparable to those in Acts, there would be overwhelming practical and theological reasons to publicize them. Such miracles would:

Provide powerful evidence for the LDS claim to be the restored church
Encourage faith among church members and investigators
Demonstrate God’s power and glory to the world
Fulfill Christ’s command to let one’s light shine before others

The LDS Church has no hesitation in publicizing other aspects of its apostles’ ministry, including their testimonies, teachings, and administrative actions. The church maintains extensive media operations and actively promotes its message worldwide. The claim that apostolic miracles are occurring but being kept secret is simply not credible.

Furthermore, even if individual cases were kept private, the cumulative effect of numerous apostolic-level miracles would be impossible to hide. When Peter and the apostles were healing people in Jerusalem, “crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed” (Acts 5:16). Such widespread miraculous activity could not have been kept secret even if they had wanted to keep it secret. The absence of any comparable evidence today suggests the absence of comparable power.

“God’s Will Determines When Miracles Occur”

LDS theology often emphasizes that miracles occur according to God’s will, and that not all faithful prayers for healing are answered in the way we hope. While this is certainly true in a general sense, it cannot explain the complete absence of apostolic-level miracles among modern LDS apostles.

In the New Testament, when Jesus commanded His apostles to “heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons” (Matthew 10:8), He was not giving them suggestions that might or might not work depending on God’s will in each case. He was commanding them to exercise the power He had given them. The apostles’ miracles were not occasional answers to prayer—they were regular demonstrations of divine authority.

When Peter said to the lame beggar, “In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk” (Acts 3:6), he was not hoping the man might be healed if it was God’s will. He was commanding healing by the authority given to him by Christ. The healing was immediate and certain.

If modern LDS apostles truly possessed the same authority and power as Peter, they should be able to exercise that authority in the same way. The fact that they cannot—that they must couch healing in terms of God’s will, individual faith, and divine timing—demonstrates that they do not possess the same power that Peter possessed.

Moreover, the “God’s will” explanation creates an unfalsifiable claim. If healings occur, they are evidence of apostolic power. If healings don’t occur, it’s because of God’s will. This is logically circular and makes the claim impossible to verify or falsify. In contrast, New Testament apostolic power was demonstrable, verifiable, and consistently exercised. It was not dependent on explaining away failures with appeals to God’s mysterious will.

“The Early Church Also Had Failed Healing Attempts”

Some LDS apologists point to Matthew 17:14-20, where the disciples failed to cast out a demon from a boy, as evidence that even apostolic miracles were not always successful. However, this example actually undermines rather than supports the LDS position.

First, this incident occurred before the disciples had received the fullness of apostolic empowerment. It was during Jesus’ earthly ministry, before His death, resurrection, and ascension, and before Pentecost. After Pentecost, when the apostles received the power of the Holy Spirit, we see no further examples of failed exorcisms or healings.

Second, when the disciples failed, Jesus immediately and successfully cast out the demon, demonstrating that the power was real and effective. Jesus then explained that the disciples’ failure was due to their insufficient faith (Matthew 17:20⁶). He did not excuse their failure or explain it away—He confronted it and challenged them to greater faith. If modern LDS apostles were to attempt to cast out a demon and fail, they would need to acknowledge that failure as the disciples did, not hide it or excuse it.

Third, after Pentecost, we find no record of the apostles failing in their attempts to heal or cast out demons. Acts 5:16 explicitly states that “all of them were healed.” This suggests that once the apostles received the fullness of apostolic empowerment, their exercise of miraculous power became consistently successful.

The comparison actually highlights the problem with modern LDS apostles: they claim to have received the fullness of apostolic authority through Joseph Smith’s restoration, yet they demonstrate none of the consistent miraculous power that characterized the apostles after Pentecost.

Part Seven: The Implications for LDS Claims

Undermining the Foundation

The absence of apostolic miraculous powers in modern LDS apostles strikes at the very foundation of the church’s claim to authority. The LDS Church does not merely claim to be one Christian denomination among many—it claims to be “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth” (Doctrine and Covenants 1:30). This extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence.

If the LDS Church is truly the only church with valid priesthood authority, restored through divine intervention in 1829, then its apostles should be able to demonstrate powers that authenticate this claim. The fact that they cannot perform the same miracles as the New Testament apostles suggests that they have not received the same authority and empowerment.

The implications extend beyond just the question of miracles. If modern LDS apostles do not possess true apostolic authority (as evidenced by their lack of apostolic powers), then:

Their claim to receive ongoing revelation for the church is questionable
Their authority to administer ordinances is questionable
Their teachings carry no more authority than those of any other religious teacher
The entire LDS system of priesthood authority is called into question

The LDS Church cannot credibly claim that its apostles possess “the same divine responsibility as Peter, James, John, and the other early Apostles” while simultaneously acknowledging that they cannot do what Peter, James, and John did. Either the apostolic office includes the miraculous powers demonstrated in the New Testament, or it doesn’t. If it does, modern LDS apostles don’t have it. If it doesn’t, then the New Testament apostles weren’t truly apostles in the sense the LDS Church claims to have restored.

The Question of Authority

At the heart of the LDS claims is the question of authority. The Church teaches that other Christian churches lack proper authority because they did not receive it through the proper chain of priesthood ordination going back to Jesus Christ Himself. However, this emphasis on correct procedural authority actually exposes the weakness of the LDS position.

In the New Testament, apostolic authority was not primarily validated through correct ordination procedures—it was validated through demonstrated power. When Paul defended his apostleship, he did not primarily appeal to his ordination ceremony. Instead, he pointed to the miracles he had performed: “The things that mark an apostle—signs, wonders and miracles—were done among you with great perseverance” (2 Corinthians 12:12).

Similarly, Peter authenticated his message at Pentecost not by claiming proper ordination but by pointing to the miraculous events surrounding him: “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22). Later, when Peter defended his ministry to the Gentiles, he pointed to the miracle of the Holy Spirit falling on Cornelius’s household as evidence that God had approved his actions (Acts 11:15-17).

The New Testament pattern is clear: true authority is demonstrated through power, not merely claimed through proper procedures. Modern LDS apostles have the procedures—they are ordained through laying on of hands by those who claim authority. But they lack the power—they cannot heal the sick, cast out demons, or raise the dead as the New Testament apostles did.

This suggests that having the correct ordination procedure without demonstrable power is worthless. It’s like having a diploma from a medical school that doesn’t exist—the paper might look official, but it doesn’t make someone a real doctor. Similarly, LDS apostles might have impressive ordination ceremonies and official titles, but without the demonstrable powers that authenticated New Testament apostleship, their claims to apostolic authority are hollow.

The Problem of Continuing Revelation

The LDS Church teaches that its apostles and prophets receive continuing revelation for the church. However, the absence of apostolic miraculous powers raises serious questions about these claims to ongoing revelation.

In the New Testament, new revelation was authenticated by miraculous signs. When God revealed new truth through the apostles, He confirmed that revelation with miracles. Paul wrote: “God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will” (Hebrews 2:3-4). The miracles were God’s authentication that the message was truly from Him.

If modern LDS apostles are receiving new revelation from God—revelation that contradicts or adds to what is taught in the Bible—we should expect to see the same miraculous authentication. Instead, LDS revelations come without any miraculous confirmation. When LDS doctrine changes (as it has numerous times throughout church history on issues like polygamy, the priesthood ban for Black members, and various temple ordinances), these changes are presented as new revelation but are not accompanied by any miraculous signs to authenticate them.

This pattern suggests that LDS claims to continuing revelation are based on human decision-making and institutional development rather than genuine divine communication. If God were truly revealing new doctrine through LDS apostles as He revealed new doctrine through the New Testament apostles, He would authenticate those revelations in the same way—through undeniable miraculous signs.

Conclusion: The Verdict of History and Scripture

The evidence presented in this analysis leads to an unavoidable conclusion: the modern LDS apostles have failed to demonstrate the essential characteristics of New Testament apostleship, and therefore their claim to have restored the apostolic office is false.

This failure is not merely a matter of minor differences or variations in practice. The inability of modern LDS apostles to heal the sick, cast out demons, and raise the dead represents a fundamental absence of the very powers that defined and authenticated apostolic ministry in the New Testament. These were not optional extras or occasional bonuses—they were central, essential characteristics explicitly commanded by Jesus Christ when He commissioned the apostles.

The New Testament establishes a clear standard for apostolic ministry:

Personal selection and commissioning by Jesus Christ Himself
Eyewitness testimony of Christ’s resurrection
Immediate, demonstrable miraculous powers, including healing, exorcism, and resurrection
The ability to confer miraculous gifts on others
Infallible inspiration in teaching and writing Scripture

Modern LDS apostles meet none of these essential qualifications. They are selected by human processes, not by Christ Himself. They have not seen the risen Lord (and are evasive when asked about such experiences). They cannot perform the miracles that authenticated apostolic ministry. They do not write Scripture with the same authority as Peter, Paul, and John. Their teachings have been contradicted and revised by subsequent church leaders.

The theological implications are profound. If the LDS Church’s claim to restored apostolic authority is false, then the entire foundation of the church’s claim to unique authority collapses. The LDS Church cannot be “the only true and living church” if its apostles are not true apostles. The ordinances, teachings, and structure of the LDS Church cannot claim divine authority if that authority was not genuinely restored through Joseph Smith.

Moreover, the biblical evidence strongly suggests that the apostolic office was never meant to continue beyond the first century. The apostles served a unique, foundational purpose in establishing the church and providing the inspired Scriptures. Once that foundation was laid and the Scriptures were complete, the need for apostolic office and apostolic miraculous powers ceased. The church continues to be built on the foundation laid by the apostles through their writings—the New Testament Scriptures.

The LDS doctrine of apostasy and restoration is not only historically untenable but also theologically unnecessary. Jesus promised that His church would not fail, and it has not failed. The gospel message preserved in Scripture, the faith once for all delivered to the saints, continues to be sufficient for every generation of believers. There is no need for new apostles because the work of the original apostles—establishing the church and providing the inspired Scriptures—is complete.

For Latter-day Saints reading this analysis, the question must be asked honestly and courageously: If the modern LDS apostles cannot do what Jesus explicitly commanded the apostles to do—heal the sick, cast out demons, and raise the dead—how can they legitimately claim to have the same authority and power as Peter, James, and John? If these miraculous powers were essential credentials of apostolic authority in the first century (as the New Testament clearly demonstrates), why would they not be equally essential today?

The absence of apostolic miracles among modern LDS leaders is not a trivial matter that can be explained away with appeals to God’s will, lack of faith, or the sacred nature of miracles. It is evidence of a fundamental absence of apostolic power, which in turn indicates an absence of genuine apostolic authority. This absence calls into question not merely the miraculous claims of the LDS Church but the entire theological framework upon which the church is built.

The restoration that Joseph Smith claimed to have accomplished—if it were genuine—should have resulted in a church whose apostles demonstrate the same immediate, undeniable, public miraculous powers that characterized the ministry of Peter, Paul, and the other first-century apostles. The fact that no such demonstration has ever occurred, not in Joseph Smith’s day and certainly not in our own, strongly suggests that what was “restored” was not the genuine apostolic office but rather a human institution using apostolic terminology without apostolic reality.

For those seeking truth, the biblical standard is clear: “By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matthew 7:20). The fruit of the New Testament apostles included consistent, documented, public miraculous healings, exorcisms, and even resurrections. The absence of such fruit among modern LDS apostles speaks more loudly than any claims to authority or any explanations for why such miracles are absent. The verdict of Scripture and history is that the LDS Church has not restored the apostolic office because it has not restored apostolic power—and without that power, the claim to apostolic authority rings hollow.

The Apostles speak…

“Christians—those poor, miserable priests brother Brigham was speaking about—some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth, and at the same time preaching righteousness to the children of men. The poor devils, they could not get up here and preach an oral discourse, to save themselves from hell; they are preaching their fathers’ sermons —preaching sermons that were written a hundred years before they were born. …You may get a Methodist priest to pour water on you, or sprinkle it on you, and baptize you face foremost, or lay you down the other way, and whatever mode you please, and you will be damned with your priest.
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball (1802 – 1868), Journal of Discourses, v. 5, p. 89

“Christianity…is a perfect pack of nonsense…the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century.”
– Prophet John Taylor (1808 – 1887), Journal of Discourses, v. 6, p. 167

“Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom.”
– Prophet John Taylor (1808 – 1887), Journal of Discourses, v. 10, p. 127

“What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast.”
– Prophet John Taylor (1808 – 1887), Journal of Discourses, v. 13, p. 225

“Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent.”
– Apostle Orson Pratt (1811 – 1881), The Seer, p. 255

“After the Church of Christ fled from earth to heaven, what was left? A. A set of wicked Apostates, murderers, and idolaters, who, after having made war with the saints, and overcome them, and destroyed them out of the earth, were left to follow the wicked imaginations of their own corrupt hearts, and to build up churches by human authority, and to follow after the cunning craftiness of uninspired men; having no Apostle, Prophet, or Revelator to inquire of God for them: and thus, because of wickedness, the Church, and Priesthood, and gifts, and ordinances and blessings of the everlasting Gospel, were taken from the earth, and reserved in heaven until the fulness of times, when it was predicted that they should again be restored among men to continue until the end should come.”
– Apostle Orson Pratt (1811 – 1881), The Seer, Chapter 16, p. 205

“The Gospel of modern Christendom shuts up the Lord, and stops all communication with Him. I want nothing to do with such a Gospel, I would rather prefer the Gospel of the dark ages, so called.”
– Prophet Wilford Woodruff (1807 – 1898), Journal of Discourses, v. 2, p. 196

“For hundreds of years the world was wrapped in a veil of spiritual darkness, until there was not one fundamental truth belonging to the place of salvation …Joseph Smith declared that in the year 1820 the Lord revealed to him that all the ‘Christian’ churches were in error, teaching for commandments the doctrines of men.”
– Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith (1876 – 1972), Doctrines of Salvation, v. 3, p. 282

“Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls.”
– Apostle Bruce R. McConkie (1915 – 1985), Mormon Doctrine, see pp. 45-46

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.
– Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:110

I have known Joseph, hundreds of times, [to] send his handkerchief to the sick, and they have been healed.
– Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses 4:294

We will not end the practice of plural marriage until the coming of the Son of Man.
– Wilford Woodruff, Journal of John Henry Smith, 21 May 1888, LDS Church Archives

Baptism is just as essential to salvation, as Faith and Repentance. Without being immersed in water no man can enter into the fulness of Celestial glory: for baptism is instututed for the remission of sins; and if a person does not take the necessary steps to obtain pardon of sins, of course, he cannot be saved in the kingdom of God.
– Orson Pratt, Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 255

For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every should of them should repent…. Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller’s soap every day, they cannot wash away God’s mark.
– John Taylor, Millennial Star, v. 14, p. 418

Within four years from September 1832, there will not be one wicked person left in the United States; that the righteous will be gathered to Zion (Missouri,) and that there will be no President over these United States at that time…. I do hereby assert and declare that in four years from the date thereof [1832], every sectarian and religious denomination in the United States, shall be broken down, and every Christian shall be gathered unto the Mormonites, and the rest of the human race shall perish.
– Martin Harris, Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, 1834, p. 14

Brigham Young made a very strong statement on this matter when he said, ‘… shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.’ God has commanded Israel not to intermarry. To go against this commandment of God would be to sin. Those who willfully sin with their eyes open to this wrong will not be surprised to find that they will be separated from the presence of God in the world to come. This is spiritual death…. It does not matter if they are one‑sixth Negro or one‑one hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is still the same…. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a ‘Nation of Priesthood holders.'”
– John L. Lund, The Church and the Negro, pp. 54‑55, 1967

The reader may be interested in a few more articles…

Cold-Case Christianity: Investigating the Evidence for Mormonism In Six Steps

Stand To Reason: Verses for Your Conversations with Mormons

Caleb Thomas: 5 Reasons My Mormon Mission Was Actually the “Worst Two Years” of my Life

Clearly Reformed: 7 Reasons Why Mormonism and Christianity Are Not the Same

Mormon Research Ministry: Ten Lies I Told as a Mormon Missionary

Mormon Stories: Top 40 Most Dishonest Acts in Mormon Church History

Topical Bible Studies: Three tests the Book of Mormon CANNOT pass!

Stand To Reason: Why You Shouldn’t Ask God if the Book of Mormon Is True

Religion News: One in 4 US Mormons has thought about leaving the LDS Church, study shows

Salt Lake Tribune: Latest from Mormon Land: Church membership shrinks in 21 U.S. states.

CBS News: Billionaire resigns from Mormon church, says it is “actively and currently doing harm in the world”

Mormon Research Ministry: Survey explains reasons why Mormons leave the fold.

Mormon Liberty: The decline of the LDS Church in Great Britain.

Steve Arrowsmith: The Mormon Church Is Bleeding Badly

Salt Lake Tribune: Mormons have fallen below evangelical Christians, Muslims, and atheists in the approval hierarchy.

Lisa Hoelzer: Why Do So Many Post-Mormons Become Atheists

Footnote

1
Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet, He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money.
2
And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.
3
teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
4
Therefore they stayed there a long time, speaking boldly in the Lord, who was bearing witness to the word of His grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands.
5
For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ has not accomplished through me, in word and deed, to make the Gentiles obedient— in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.
6
So Jesus said to them, “Because of your unbelief; for assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith as a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.