You are not crazy, something is wrong with the church!
THE REAL CHURCH HISTORY MENU
IMPORTANT CHURCH HISTORY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
THE REAL CHURCH HISTORY WRITING
CHURCH HISTORY TIMELINE
CHURCH HISTORY RELATED SCRIPTURES
IMPORTANT CHURCH HISTORY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
WHAT IS THE LORD'S ASSESSMENT
OF THE CHURCH?
WAS THERE ALREADY A PATTERN OF BLESSINGS, GIFTS AND APPROVAL TAKEN AWAY
WHAT IS THE LORD'S ASSESSMENT
OF THE CHURCH?
IMPORTANT CHURCH HISTORY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
THE REAL CHURCH HISTORY WRITING
Looking critically at your own religion and its history can be uncomfortable and is usually discouraged by churches themselves, even though the Bible admonishes believers to test all things in 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Without a plan, support from their leaders, congregation, or friends, most people never try to authenticate their beliefs. The key to achieving an honest and favorable outcome for those who do scrutinize their faith is simply being Christian and judging their own tenets honestly, with the same standards and openness to facts they would apply to judging someone else's religion.
If what you believe can not tolerate critical thinking, you should recognize that in itself as a sign that you, and/or your theology, may have a problem. If your thoughts swim in such a shallow protected environment, you can expect a very low ceiling on your spiritual growth. For many people, that is fine; they are happy to sit in their faith with no real expectation or desire to be impacted. But if that is not you, know that honestly validating your beliefs can give you more understanding, confidence, and a leg up on avoiding being led astray during the increasingly turbulent, confusing, and dangerous Last Days before the Second Coming.
So, acknowledging the difficulty of investigating your own faith, and the vulnerability that can come with doing so, it is important to assure you that Numos.net is not an Ex-Mormon site trying to tear down Mormon belief. We consider ourselves 100% defenders of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. Our goal is to give a full and accurate picture of Mormonism, which in places differs greatly from the modern Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The LDS Church, which has long claimed it would grow to fill the whole Earth, is seeing not only decreasing convert baptism rates, but also drastically falling activity and retention of even its lifelong members. To give the appearance of growth and to mask its decline, the LDS Church unnecessarily renames wards. It also builds new temples in areas without sufficient membership numbers or temple patron demand. Many members are beginning to notice things within the Church that don't make sense and run counter to long-held policies, programs, and traditions. Yes, those discerning something is off are correct; something is indeed wrong with the Church, and we will now try to explain why.
After going through all four of the MAIN COMPONENTS OF NUMO BELIEFS from this website, you will be able to identify when and why things changed. Seeing Church History accurately is the start of finding answers and renewing hope and enthusiasm for the original pure Mormonism, corrupted in the Brighamite version of the Restored Gospel.
HONESTLY EXAMINING THE REAL CHURCH HISTORY
HIGHLIGHTING CRITICAL MATTERS THAT CHANGED THE CHURCH
ONE: WARNINGS AND CONDEMNATION
WHY THE CHURCH WAS CONDEMNED
THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE CONDEMNATION
THE 1836 KIRTLAND TEMPLE VISION
THE MISSOURI PERIOD & THE FAILURE IN ZION
THE NAUVOO PERIOD: WHEN THE CHURCH CHANGED
HIGHLIGHTING CRITICAL MATTERS THAT CHANGED THE CHURCH
ALTERED DOCTRINES & HISTORY FOLLOWING JOSEPH SMITH'S DEATH
TITHING
WORD OF WISDOM
TEMPLES
Three deliberations arising from the study of Church History and Scriptures will be the primary focus of this first Real Church History writing. These areas of reflection are:
One: the Lord's warnings and condemnation.
Two: evidence that the LDS Church was rejected by the Lord in 1844 and lost its Melchizedek Priesthood authority.
Three: changes to the early church and its teachings.
Let’s go through a brief chronology of LDS Church History and see how the emphasis on these deliberations provides greater clarity about what actually happened to the Church.
ONE: WARNINGS, AND CONDEMNATION
In 1830, Joseph Smith founded the Church of Christ. In 1834, Joseph Smith changed the church's name to the Church of Latter-day Saints, removing Christ's name. The automatic question here is: Joseph was obviously well aware of the Book of Mormon scripture, 3 Nephi 27:3-8, saying, How Be It My Church Save It Be Called in My Name? So why then would he take Christ's name off of the Church? Some Church apologists argue Joseph did not do this; Sidney Rigdon suggested it. The full notes to the meeting where this name change occurred are not available, but what is known in the records is the date, May 3, 1834, who spoke, the fact that Joseph Smith was there, presided over the meeting, and a unanimous vote was given by all in attendance to remove Christ's name from the Church. Based on the Lord giving the name of the Church in 1830 by revelation, it would seem likely that such an act of removing Christ's name would also only be done with divine inspiration.
Before looking at the reason and details behind the name change, it's worth noting that, remarkably, most LDS members are unaware of the significant switch in 1834. In 2018, when then-modern LDS Church President Russell M. Nelson distanced the Church from the Mormon nickname and stressed Jesus Christ's presence in the Church's title, they made no mention of the earlier 1834 name change.
The Church does recognize that the change occurred. Still, it keeps purposely silent about it and offers a simply false explanation when pressed for a reason. The LDS Church claims that other churches at the time also used the same name, so it was changed to avoid confusion, and also to distance the Church from the terms "Mormon" and "Mormonite" used by opponents of the Church.
Based on the Modern LDS Church explanation, you might be led to believe the Lord was caught off guard by other churches using the same name, or that He forgot.
Now, let's go through the real explanation for the removal of Christ's name from the Church, after it was given by revelation to be the name of the church in 1830. See 3 Nephi 26:21, 27:8, Moroni 6:4, D&C 20:1, 20:61, 21:11 for the Lord clearly establishing the name by which the church was known during Book of Mormon days and would be called when His Church was restored, as the Church of Christ, bearing His name.
The Lord warns the Church in 1832 in D&C Section 84:54–58 that the whole Church was under condemnation by Him. On May 3, 1834, a meeting was held with Joseph presiding, where the Church took a unanimous vote to remove the Lord's name from the Church and rename it the Church of Latter-day Saints.
To give further context as to who was behind Christ's name being taken off the Church in 1834, we need to look no further than the Kirtland Temple dedicatory prayer, which was given by revelation. In D&C 109:78–79, verse 79 petitions, "And also this church, to put upon it thy name." The Church's explanation for the 1834 name change has major holes.
To start with, 1) it does not recognize that the Church was put under Condemnation shortly before the name change.
2) Within two years, the Kirtland Temple dedication prayer, which Joseph was given by revelation, includes the Saints petitioning the Savior to put His name back on the Church.
3) If the Church were experiencing troubles getting other Christians to recognize the Saints as Christians, removing Christ's name off of the Church would be less likely to get others to see them as Christians.
4) Records from the 1830s show only one other small church from a neighboring state used the title Church of Christ, and that church did so on a part-time basis and had a second name that was used more consistently. It was not until several decades after the 1834 name change that multiple churches started using the name Church of Christ. Factoring in each of these details, and that the Church leaves out mentioning the Condemnation timing, it appears the LDS Church's explanation is less than honest.
PRIESTHOOD ACCESS
MARRIAGE
DOCTRINE & COVENANTS SECTIONS
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS FROM CHURCH HISTORY
WHAT IS THE LORD'S ASSESSMENT
OF THE CHURCH?
WAS THERE ALREADY A PATTERN OF BLESSINGS, GIFTS AND APPROVAL TAKEN AWAY
WHAT IS THE LORD'S ASSESSMENT
OF THE CHURCH?
CHURCH TIMELINE-SCRIPTURE REFRENCES
Pre 1830 Warnings
The pattern has been the Lord’s people always failing short except for Enoch, and the Zion A Righteous Remnant will build according to Isaiah.
EXODUS 19:5–6 -
Moses example of the pattern
HELAMAN 3:33
Moses example of the pattern
4 NEPHI 1:2–3
Moses example of the pattern
D&C 3
Moses example of the pattern
1830 CHURCH OF CHRIST
D&C 20:32-35
Moses example of the pattern
D&C 21:11
Moses example of the pattern
D&C 24: 3&19
Moses example of the pattern
1831 CHURCH OF CHRIST
BLESSINGS 7 GIFTS TAKEN AWAY
ORGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH IN 1830
A WARNING TO THE CHURCH
THE CHURCH FALLS UNDER CONDEMNATION
SPIRITUAL WIFERY IS EMBRACED BY SOME
THE CHURCH OF LATTER DAY SAINTS
THE TERRESTIAL LAW IS GIVEN
ZION'S CAMP FAILURE
BUILDING OF THE KIRTLAND TEMPLE
BUILDING OF THE NAUVOO TEMPLE
DESTRUCTION OF THE NAUVOO TEMPLE
THE DEATH OF JOSEPH SMITH
THE DEATH OF JOSEPH SMITH
THE SAINTS ARE NOT PROTECTED
THE CHURCH IS REJECTED
BRIGHAM SAYS HE IS EDITING THE HISTORY
A TRANSFIGURATION NO ONE NOTICED
YE SHALL KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUITS
- NO REVELATIONS, NO SEEING CHRIST-
Scriptures Referenced
The Nauvoo Temple Destroyed by
Arsonist and then a Tornado
Numos are different in that they are willing to test everything and accept every truth from whoever it comes from. The Numo counterparts erroneously and/or nervously put Numos in the camp of each other’s group even though the Numos are much different and independent.
A Numo may be in or out of the church. Numos that stay involved in the church typically recognize problems with the church but remain involved for the following reasons. 1) They still get benefit from the church. 2) They desire to help awaken others to the things they have learned about the church 3) They do so for the harmony or overall benefit of their family. 4) They feel prompted by the Lord to stay for now.
Those who leave have almost opposite mirrored reasons why they stop attending. 1) They no longer are benefitted by the church, 2) They feel by not attending they will help others see that the church is amiss and wake up. 3) They stop for the aid to their family in learning truth. 4) They feel prompted by the Lord to separate.
Often an individual will feel the Lord telling them to do the opposite of their own desires, with someone who wants to stay being told to go and vice versa.
The Real LDS Church History
Why the Church Was Condemned
Just as important as knowing that the Church was under condemnation is knowing why it was and what its current status is before the Lord.
The Lord's condemnation in D&C 84:54–58 was not issued for no reason. The specific failures the Lord names include the Saints' failure to protect the poor, their self-interest, their failure to build the storehouse, and their failure to live in the unity and selflessness that Zion requires. D&C 82, given the same year, is even more direct in its language about the consequences:
"Behold, I have rejected your feast, and I will not come and eat with you until you repent. Behold, I tell you that the keys of the kingdom of heaven, which I have given you, shall be taken away from you, unless you repent" (D&C 82:3–4).
The Lord was not being metaphorical. He was telling the Church, in writing, through the mouth of a prophet whose name the Church still uses, that He had rejected the Church's efforts, that He would take away the keys, and that this would happen unless there was repentance. The specific triggers were the leaders' failure to care for the poor, their greed, and their failure to build Zion.
What the modern Church does with these sections is remarkable. They are included in the D&C, so members technically have access to them. But they are never taught in Sunday School. They are not part of the standard curriculum. They are not discussed in General Conference. They are effectively invisible — present in the book but absent from the teaching.
The Current Status of the Condemnation
Here is the point that the modern Church will not address: the condemnation has never been publicly lifted.
No General Conference address has announced that the Lord released the Church from the D&C 84:54–58 condemnation. No revelation has been received and published stating that the conditions of the condemnation have been met. No prophet has stood up and said, "The Lord has told me the Church is no longer under condemnation."
This is not a subtle point. In a church that teaches that the Lord speaks to His prophet and that the prophet's words are the words of the Lord, the absence of any such announcement is significant. If the condemnation had been lifted, the members would have been told. The fact that they have not been told is either an oversight of the highest order, or the condemnation has not been lifted.
President Ezra Taft Benson, the 14th president of the LDS Church, acknowledged that the condemnation was still in effect. No subsequent General Authority has made any public announcement that it has been released. This is a fact that the modern Church is aware of but has chosen not to address.
The 1836 Kirtland Temple Vision
In March 1836, at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple, Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon experienced what they described as a vision of the Savior in the temple. The vision is recorded in D&C 110. In it, the Lord appears, and the keys of the kingdom are confirmed.
This vision is important for two reasons. First, it confirms that the Melchizedek Priesthood authority was in full operation in 1836 — six years after the Church had been condemned. The Lord was still working through Joseph. The Church, despite its failures, still had authority in Joseph's hands.
Second, the dedicatory prayer, which was given by revelation, includes the petition in D&C 109:79: "And also this church, to put upon it thy name." Joseph was asking the Lord to restore what the Church had taken away in 1834. If the name change had been divinely inspired, as the modern Church implies, Joseph would not have been petitioning for Christ's name to be restored.
The Missouri Period and the Failure of Zion
In 1838, the Saints gathered in Jackson County, Missouri, to build Zion. The Lord had told them exactly what was required: unity, selflessness, the consecration of all property, and the building of a temple. The Saints in Missouri were not pure. They were not of one heart. They were greedy, contentious, and divided. The Lord told them this directly in D&C 105:
"Now, I, the Lord, am not well pleased with the inhabitants of Zion, for there are idlers among them; and their children are also growing up in wickedness; they also seek not earnestly the riches of eternity, but their eyes are full of greediness" (D&C 105:3).
The result was what we already know: the Saints were driven out by violent mobs in 1838. The Lord had warned them. They did not listen. And the consequences came.
The Nauvoo period (1839–1844) is where the story gets complicated, and it is where the modern Church's history and the actual history diverge most sharply.
During Nauvoo, the Church grew rapidly. The Nauvoo Charter was obtained. The temple was under construction. But something else was happening too: the Church was changing in ways that had not been part of the 1830–1834 vision.
The most significant change was the introduction of the temple endowment ceremony, which was first administered in the upper story of the Nauvoo Temple in 1841–1842. This ceremony included the Oath of Vengeance, the blood atonement language, and the specific penalties for breaking the covenants. None of these elements are found in the 1830–1834 revelations. None of them are in the Book of Mormon. They are not in the Doctrine of Christ.
This is not to say the temple endowment was evil. It is to say that it was a new element that was introduced into the Church in a period when the Church was already under divine condemnation, and that the modern Church has treated this ceremony as if it were a fixed, unchanging part of the gospel from the beginning — when it was not.
The other major development during Nauvoo was the question of plural marriage. Whether Joseph Smith personally practiced plural marriage is a genuinely contested historical question, and we will address it in more detail in Article 2. What is not contested is that the doctrine of plural marriage was introduced into the Church during this period, and that it was not part of the 1830–1834 gospel. The 1835 edition of the D&C explicitly condemned polygamy. D&C 132, which the modern Church canonizes as the scriptural basis for plural marriage, was not published until 1876 — over 30 years after Joseph's death.
The Nauvoo Period: When the Church Changed
1844: The Death of Joseph Smith and the Succession Crisis
Joseph Smith was murdered in Carthage, Illinois, on June 27, 1844. His death was not just a tragedy; it was, in the theological framework of the early Church, a crisis of the highest order.
The Lord had said the keys would be taken away if the Church did not repent. The Church had been under condemnation since 1832. The founder-prophet was dead.
The succession question was not simply "who should be president?" It was: does the Church still have the Melchizedek Priesthood authority, and if so, in whose hands is it?
Several candidates emerged. Sidney Rigdon proposed a continuation of the Council of Five, with himself as president. Others, including the so-called "Young 8," supported Brigham Young. The membership was deeply divided.
Brigham Young ultimately prevailed, largely through the loyalty of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, which he presided over. By late 1844 and into 1845, the majority of the Church had coalesced around Young's leadership.
Here is the critical point: this succession was not accompanied by a clear, publicly recorded revelation designating Young as Joseph's successor in the same way Joseph had been designated as a prophet. Joseph was called by the Lord in 1820. The priesthood was restored by angels. The Church was organized by direct command. The Kirtland Temple vision was a direct manifestation. Brigham Young's succession was a vote — a human organizational decision. No angel appeared. No revelation was received and published. The Lord did not speak.
The modern Church presents Young's succession as ordained and divinely confirmed. The Numo perspective raises the question of whether the Lord's authority in the Church continued unbroken through that transition. The honest answer, based on the documented record, is that we cannot point to a specific, published, canonized revelation that confirms Brigham Young as Joseph's successor in the same manner that Joseph's calling was confirmed.
Changes Under Brigham Young (1844–1847 and Beyond)
The years following Joseph Smith's death brought dramatic changes to the Church. These are not minor adjustments. They are fundamental shifts in doctrine, practice, and emphasis:
1. Plural Marriage. Under Joseph Smith, the public record of his teachings on marriage was monogamous. The 1835 D&C condemned polygamy. Under Brigham Young, plural marriage became a central and defining practice of the Church, leading to profound social consequences, including the Utah War and the eventual federal anti-bigamy legislation. The Book of Mormon's condemnation of polygamy (2 Nephi 29:29–31) is interpreted very differently by those who argue Joseph did not practice it and by those who maintain he did.
2. The Temple. Under Joseph Smith, temple construction and endowment ordinances were in their earliest, most limited stages. Under Brigham Young, the temple became the central institution of the Church, with the endowment and sealing ordinances becoming essential to salvation as later defined. The scale, secrecy, and centrality of temple worship expanded dramatically. The temple went from being one part of the gospel to being the gospel — the central defining feature of what it meant to be a member.
3. Tithing. While tithing was taught under Joseph, it was not strictly enforced as a condition of full membership or temple access. Under Brigham Young, tithing became a strict requirement for temple patronage, creating a significant economic and organizational obligation. This shifted tithing from a principle of generosity to a gatekeeping mechanism.
4. The Word of Wisdom. The health code known as the Word of Wisdom was given in 1833 (D&C 89). In its original form, it permitted tobacco and hot beverages. Under Brigham Young and his successors, it was progressively tightened, eventually becoming a requirement for temple recommend eligibility. The shift from counsel to commandment to temple-requirement was gradual, unexplained, and unrevealed.
5. The Name of the Church. This is a point that is rarely discussed but is historically significant. The full name "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" appears in D&C Section 115, which was received in 1838. D&C 115 conditions the name on the establishment of Zion — the gathering of the Saints to the "city of our God" and the building of the New Jerusalem.
Here is the critical historical fact: D&C 115 was not included in the 1844 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. It first appeared in the 1876 edition, which Brigham Young oversaw. Zion was never established. The conditions of D&C 115 were never publicly fulfilled. And yet the Church adopted the full name "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" based on a revelation whose conditions had not been met and which had not even been published in the Church's own scripture at the time the name was adopted.
The Numo argument is straightforward: D&C 115 conditioned the name on the establishment of Zion. Zion was not established. The Church remained under the 1832 condemnation. Therefore, the conditions for the name were not met. The name was applied by institutional leadership, not by fulfilled prophecy.
IMPORTANT CHURCH HISTORY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
MORE ABOUT NUMOS
A Numo is a label coined off the cuff by Kwaku El (Mormon YouTuber/podcaster) during a Midnight Mormons/Ward Radio episode while interviewing a popular Numo named Justin Griffin. The nickname name Numo stuck. The name of this episode was "The New Mormon Offshoot in Town, "The Remnant" (feat. J. Griffin, Director, Who Killed Joseph Smith". This video is an excellent introduction to Numos and their beliefs. (View Here)
As the episode's title states, Remnant is a more scriptural descriptive name used for the movement. However, a different group with similar thoughts, led by a former LDS member named Denver Snuffer, also uses the label Remnant. Remnant Numos are sometimes confused with Denver Snuffer's group, which is why the nickname Numo has gained traction.
okay for me I see the church that an oversimplification is you believe
everything the church teaches you believe nothing the church teaches or you believe some of the things that the
church teaches and that sum of category is where I think most people are why do
I think that because when I stand in front of the elders Quorum and ask questions I would get 26 different answers from 26 different guys about
what this Doctrine means so people just have their own here's how I think about
To explain the label Numo or Remnant we need to point out changes that took place over time giving place for a label like Numo / Remnant in Mormonism.
The name of the church in the Book of Mormon was at times called the Church of Christ (Mosiah 18:17, Mosiah 25:18-22) . In 1830 when the church was organized by Joseph Smith it was again called the Church of Christ. Evidence of this can be found in the first scripture and tracks produced follow the church’s establishment in the Book of Commandments ( pic) which would later become the Doctrine & Covenants in 1836.
Numo describes a person with Mormon beliefs who has awakened to the understanding that early Mormon history and teachings often differ significantly from what the modern LDS Church asserts. A Numo, on this discovery, does not throw out the baby with the bathwater, becoming an Anti-Mormon like many others. Instead, the Numo maintain their faith in the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith while distancing themselves from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. For a Numo, this starts a time of soul-searching, study and prayer. The Numo becomes like Lehi, who was shown the wickedness of Jerusalem in his day and told to go into the wilderness by the Lord.
Numos go through a similar wilderness experience, potentially grower closer to God while relying on Him and less on the church.
Numo describes a person awakened to the understanding that early Mormon history and teachings often differ from what the modern LDS Church asserts. Still, unlike the Anti-Mormon, Numos treasure the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith. (cut)
Kwaku El did not specifically define a Numo. Still, others have tried to attach more precise identifiers and give meaning to the name, such as New Understanding (Nu) Mormons or Nuanced Mormons. Despite some efforts, there are no formalities or exacts within the growing Numo community, which also has no formal leader, organization, official doctrines, or rules of being a Numo. This site is not an official Numo site and is solely an attempt to help others get introduced to this awakened community and to aid Numos in their pursuits.
The term Numo, like Mormon, is a nickname. A Mormon is a believer in Christ. The Book of Mormon was compiled by a man named Mormon but is a record of Christ and Christians in Ancient America. A more accurate description of who the Numos are comes from the Book of Isaiah in the Bible, which labels those who successfully go through a Numo-like experience as Remnant.
The Remnant is prophecized to be believers who will be drawn out of churches by the Lord.
Members of the church in 1830 were given the nickname Mormons due to their acceptance and use of the Book of Mormon. Those who did not regard the Book of Mormon as scripture or Joseph Smith as a prophet were known as Anti-Mormons. The name Jack Mormons was given to those while not accepting the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith but were kind and supportive. Later the use of Jack Mormons itself evolved into being associated with Mormons which did not follow the church’s modern Word of Wisdom teachings.
Numos are not the Remnant that the Lord that will call to go on an exodus to build Zion, but many that are selected to be apart of the exodus Remnant will have been Numos because of their early awakened state where they have had more time to prepare to be worthy and understand the pure gospel that will govern Zion.
Numos have no leader, no official organization and no consensus beliefs. Numos are basically people of the Restoration communities that have become spiritually awakened to teachings that Zion will be built by individuals God chooses and not by churches or men. Numos are a people in the wilderness preparing themselves and being prepared by the Lord to possibly one day be apart of the great End Times Remnant Exodus to build Zion prior to the Lord's Second Coming.
Numos are not associated with the current Remnant Church, Denver Snuffer or other groups but do share some beliefs.
