So I’m thinking about this issue after having watched Netflix’s documentary on Jodi Hildebrandt, “Evil Influencer”: what’s up with Mormons doing criminal and immoral things under the belief they are inspired by God?
Such acts, of course, are pretty rare, but at this point it’s feeling a little disconcerting for it to appear that a seeming high percentage of such concerning cases happen among the Mormons.
I wrote a post in response to chat around Under the Banner of Heaven that it’s pretty clear from the historical record that those willing to make great personal sacrifice to follow the spirit have been a tremendous force for good in human history, so let me just say right off the bat that claiming to fix these problems by rejecting all spiritual promptings doesn’t appear valid to me. The atheist communists killed around 100,000,000 people in the 20th century.
But some of the cases of Mormon inspiration having gone bad are truly horrifying. Not only Hildebrandt, but Chad Daybell and Vallow killing Vallow’s kids under the belief they were demon possessed is really hard to fathom. I note some other cases in that post like the Laffertys.
In the many discussions over Mormon uneasiness over Nephi being commanded to kill Laban, I remember an old BCC post encouraging anyone feeling such a prompting to seek psychological help. I did a post on the question of “other impulses” related to the spirt, noting this can be tricky, but what happens when the psychologist IS the one getting problematic promptings like Hildebrant?
I also recall an old post from Lynnette at Zelophehad’s Daughters noting a session where the therapist gave the patients permission to be angry at God and Lynette writing in the post something like, “Isn’t it problematic for therapists to make such claims of religious authority?”
Either way, I don’t think such advice to seek therapy would have stopped Daybell/Vallow, and again, Hildebrandt WAS the therapist. Lots of us I’m sure are happy to have religion AND the mental health industry, but many religious people would balk at replacing religion with that profession.
Elder Renlund proposed that the safe-guards to spiritual experience are the brethren themselves, citing DC 28:2. Elder Renlund gave an example of getting a call “from an individual who had been arrested for trespassing,” who told Elder Renlund, “it had been revealed to him that additional scripture was buried under the ground floor of a building he tried to enter.” Elder Renlund noted that the man’s intention of finding new scripture for the church was outside the proper church structure, but the nature of the story also suggests the man acting in ways that most people would take as delusion whether church members or not. Just about everyone else on the planet would have been skeptical of the man’s claims regardless of our church’s structures around the nature of revelation.
Likewise, all humans would advise Daybell not to kill his step-kids and Hildebrandt not to abuse Ruby Franke’s kids. That is, I’m not sure the church’s structure of leadership over revelation would have had any more effect on stopping Daybell or Hildebrandt than general public opinion.
Tim Ballard also claimed some revelatory pretensions and had enough connections with Elder M. Russell Ballard. My point isn’t to attack Mormonism or our leaders, but only to note the concerning mess these stories suggest. Listening to our leaders and therapists ARE generally good things, but I’m not sure they are absolutely foolproof.
Again, I do think that empirically those who made great sacrifices to follow the spirit have done overwhelmingly more good than harm in human history, but cases of harm do exist. I do see Mormonism as a wonderful community, but are Daybell, Hildebrandt, and Tim Ballard simply unfortunate side effects of our generally very good community?
Comments
30 responses to “Spiritual Experiences Going off the Rails”
I think it is useful to distinguish between people who truly seem to be acting in response to personal revelation and those who invoke personal revelation only after their bad acts are revealed or to drive an increase in contributions. Obviously, I’m thinking of Tim Ballard in the latter case.
Compulsion is a powerful thing. I went through many painful years learning how to tell the difference between the manifestations of the spirit and OCD–and I still struggle with it at times.
I think Elder Renlund’s counsel is spot on. It may not cure the mental condition–but it can certainly keep those who are trying to live right from doing something horrific.
For me, spiritual prompting/revelation took practice and the knowledge that God was not going to pull a Nephi/Laban or Abraham/Isaac for a nobody like me. It also took faith that I would figure it out. Thank God I had a positive and miraculous (to me) experience that helped me understand revelation that has been repeated over and over again for the last 40 years. I am very comfortable with it and trust it.
I have a daughter with mental health issues that has been struggling with thinking God is telling her to do odd things like; a normal fast is good but I need a 7 day fast from you. She also feels God is berating her for not being a good enough person/member. She is getting better with therapy and meds. I am lucky that she will talk to me about all her issues so I am aware what she is going through. Not fun.
Experiencing this up close has led me to believe that these members that have these issues (or anyone for that matter) have a free pass like those who die before the age of 8. They dont have a chance to make it without the mercy and grace of God with the mind they are dealing with.
If we do indeed have a disproportionate number of members who go off the rails in the name of God, I wonder if part of it could be from attracting those who are more prone to want more supernatural experiences in their life. We talk about personal and ongoing revelation in ways that other denominations don’t. So those who are attracted to that message are going to come to us/stay with us.
Genuine question. Would it help if we were more willing to have hard conversations such as this?
Our default response is to defend the actions, praising the willingness to obey God’s commands even if hard. There is definitely justification for that approach. However, I think it is the only approach I’ve ever heard in church. I’m also struck by how the OP repeatedly asserts belief in that approach, even while very carefully trying to open the door to a more thoughtful discussion.
“A seeming high percentage of such concerning cases happen among the Mormons” – I don’t think this statement is true, or that there is any evidence for it. It’s important to have this discussion, but the assumption that we are particularly dangerous or susceptible is a hindrance.
Religious people are more likely to find a religious motivation for evil things, just as secular people are more likely to find a secular explanation. All else being equal, though, a functioning community with existing norms and authorities is an important way to keep some impulses in check. So I think going into this discussion with the idea that religion itself is the problem is, on the whole, more harmful than productive.
Relying on leaders might not be wholly reliable. What about all the bishops and stake presidents and others in and around Rexburg who fell for Daybell (before the murders were revealed)?
I don’t know what you mean, ji. If Daybell had asked his bishop or stake president, I am very certain they would have reliably told him not to murder anyone.
Jonathan, I clearly wrote before the murders.
The best time to ask your bishop if you should murder someone is definitely before committing the murder, so I still don’t see your point. What, specifically, are you talking about? Did Daybell go to the bishops of multiple wards and tell them the world was imminently ending, and they thought he was definitely right? Because that doesn’t sound like something that happened.
Lemming, yes, lots concerning about Ballard, but some of these cases do suggests people can be sincere and do terrible things.
Jack, again, advising mentally ill people from doing something horrific is something most people would notice and advise.
REC, prayers for you family and daughter.
jared, I think these cases were people raised in the church, and the church does stress very strongly following the spirit. I wondering if there are some instances where that is problematic.
PWS, yes, a complicated issue.
Jonathan, I’m making a very specific hypothesis, and not claiming that Mormon are particularly dangerous. I do recall someone (Stephen C.) noting Mormons having lower crime rates and I’m not disputing that.
This issue are instances of people feeling commanded by God through the spirit to engage in acts the rest of the society deemed criminal (apparently Daybell and Hildebrant didn’t see their acts as wrong).
This is rare, but I think we may have some indication of Mormons doing this more often than the society as a whole. I’m curious if you see evidence to the contrary. And I have stressed that my study of the topic strongly indicate the general good of people who feel they are following the spirit. My only point is that these alternate instances are troubling and do seem to be disproportionately Mormon.
Jonathan and ji, I brought up the bigger issue of our leaders claiming church leadership as a guard against problematic spiritual experiences. Yes, they would have told Daybell not to kill his kids but so would all other humans if asked for their advice on that question. Any conferring with other people would have advised Daybell against such an action.
I do think that the Tim Ballard issue does complicate claims that church leaders will be a guard against all problematic claims of the spirit. My understanding is that Ballard had a lot of support from the church and that it was law enforcement and the press that blew the whistle on Ballard before the church. Similarly, it was the cops who busted Hildebrand.
I don’t mean that as a criticism of our church, only that it appears to me that I don’t see church leaders as the absolute fix of problematic spiritual promptings.
But as I think about this, maybe Jonathan has the point that when it comes to ugly acts like child abuse and even killing one’s kids, the motive isn’t that important. Child abuse is not uncommon; doing so because one feel commanded by the spirit is uncommon.
I think what happens is that stories by Daybell and Hildebrandt are quite horrifying and thus get a lot of attention, which is understandable. And I hope it’s understandable that because these cases are Mormon, it seems worth talking about on the blog.
And I’d also point out that many of us could share stories about people they’ve observed doing questionable or kooky things claiming the spirit’s command. Ultimately, the Hildebrandt story felt concerning and was definitely food for thought.
Stephen,
Of course you’re right that most folks out there would agree with the basic counsel against doing anything horrific. But just to add: for those who struggle with compulsion an authoritative voice can be very powerful in dispelling OCD in certain instances. It might be one’s therapist who has that kind of authority in one’s life. For me, an apostle’s counsel can be very powerful in helping me to find balance in my mind.
And so sometimes, it isn’t so much the counsel per se that’s important as it is who’s giving it–because I think even the folks themselves who suffer from OCD are able to discern between what is horrific and what isn’t. A kid may know the commandment “thou shalt not steal” — but it’s only when his father comes down on him that he stops the reckless behavior.
What they need are the penalties or — as is the case with most good folks who struggle with compulsion –the *permissions* to disabuse themselves of the compulsion.
Stephen: I think you might have two separate topics here. The first issue involves people who feel like spiritual experiences are leading them to do extreme and terrible things. It’s that case where I would argue that the institutional and community guardrails are effective ways to stop people from doing terrible things. The deviant visionaries are not in fact in precisely the same situation as Nephi standing over Laban and wondering what to do – if they’re church members, then they have community practices and official teachings and local leaders to steer them back on course. The real problems occur when people ignore all those guardrails.
And I’d also add that church leaders can be especially effective for this in a way that any other responsible adult can’t, because a deviant visionary frames the problem in religious terms, and needs an answer within that religious framework. See also the numerous clergy members who have persuaded parishioners to turn themselves in for various crimes – that’s not something that another person would be able to do in many of those cases.
The second, separate question seems to be how to protect the community from people who claim visionary (or even just scriptural) support for extreme positions. Making clear who has official Church sanction and who doesn’t seems important, as does being careful about who you hand a platform to. But some of those invited guest speakers can address important topics (like the practicing psychologist who came to talk about youth mental health in a meeting for parents in my Rexburg stake around 2012), so a blanket ban doesn’t seem like the right approach (and I don’t know to what extent that would apply to any of the people under discussion here).
I do see Mormonism as a wonderful community, but are Daybell, Hildebrandt, and Tim Ballard simply unfortunate side effects of our generally very good community?
How often does one read about a parent who kills his or her children, or some other atrocity, and claiming voices in their heads told them to do so? Isn’t this a human problem, and not a Mormon problem?
Listening to our leaders and therapists ARE generally good things, but I’m not sure they are absolutely foolproof.
I agree that these are not foolproof.
Sometimes people are severely mentally ill and feeling they have been commanded to do terrible things is part of their psychosis. I think people like Daybell, Hildebrandt, and Ballard are probably NOT suffering from severe mental illness (ie psychosis) but they are psychopaths. They manipulate and deceive. All three were trusted by church leaders and portrayed themselves in ways that fellow Latter-day Saints saw them as spiritual giants. In fact their image in church circles was part of how they were able to continue committing crimes for so long. In the cases of Hildebrandt and Ballard at least, they were investigated by state authorities and action was taken against Hildebrandt’s license. This was seen as them being persecuted by The World because they chose to follow Christ.
Jack, I do agree that having a community with authority figures who can give good advice can certainly help us all who need such advice. If there was a way for Daybell or Hildebrandt to listen to someone who could have steered them away from such actions that would have been good.
Similar thoughts to what I said to Jack, Jonathan. Community is important, but a big part of me posting this was my own thinking about how to sift through such experiences for myself. I’ve felt spiritual promptings to differ sometimes (https://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2025/07/differing-from-church-leaders-a-personal-experience/) and think our leaders can make mistakes as well (https://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2025/10/the-priesthood-ban-and-our-leadership-theology/) and I think the Tim Ballard issues raises some questions also. That is, I don’t see church statements as the absolute and final truth in all cases. Figuring out the spirit, therefore, seems like a challenge.
ji, my question is do such extreme case occur more among Mormons than others? I don’t think I hear about parents killing their children because being commanded by God at all frequently. It’s not frequent among Mormons either, but Daybell and Hilbebrandt (among some other concerning cases) feel concerning.
E, it feels hard to me to sort out these people’s genuine belief in having revelations or not. Your comment did make me think of DC 121:41-42 as a kind a guardrail for those who have such promptings, harmful or not. It’s not God’s way to use compulsion and it seems that Daybell, Hildebrandt, and Ballard all did that. Of course, lots of church members and leaders engage in compulsion as well, so perhaps we all need to work on that!
For me, I am not concerned that Mormons receive extreme revelations (such as to kill their children) more than non-Mormons — whenever it occurs, I think God is not involved at all and the person is either a psychopath or is under psychosis, as another poster said. I don’t know numbers/statistics, but I don’t think our are worse.
My concern about revelations is the apparent gullibility among Mormons to follow those who have falsely claimed to have received less extreme revelations, like the bishops and stake presidents and other church members in and around Rexburg who followed Daybell before and up until the murders. Is there a pathology in our culture that allows that to happen? Or is that normal? I don’t know, but I don’t think so.
My perspective here is influenced by an incident in the last 5 years within easy walking distance from my house (and a long, long way from Rexburg) in which a mother killed her three children and herself. It’s awful, but I don’t think it reveals any inherent truth about my neighbors or neighborhood. So I agree with ji that this type of outlier tragedy isn’t somehow connected to religious affiliation or non-affiliation.
But ji: What do you mean by “bishops and stake presidents and other church members in and around Rexburg who followed Daybell”? What would that even look like? Is this something you’ve heard, or read, or what?
Again, I agree that the Mormons committing criminal acts is below the national average, but I still think there are indications that committing criminal acts under claims of inspiration are probably above the national average for Mormons.
These acts are rare but still seem noteworthy.
We Mormons emphasize personal revelation (again, I’m not saying that’s a bad thing!) and it is my sense that the concerning circle Daybell formed prior to his problematic acts are more of a Mormon things than the national average.
“I still think there are indications that committing criminal acts under claims of inspiration are probably above the national average for Mormons.”
I know you’re just claiming “indications”, but still…[citation needed]. This is anecdotal evidence. What we’re mostly seeing is indications Netflix thinks there’s a market for shows about Mormons behaving badly (using the term deliberately to include the FLDS).
Even if such an association did exist, I suspect the causal mechanism would be mostly “Criminals who are Latter-day Saints are more likely to use Latter-day Saint concepts and terminology in describing how they decided to commit their crimes.” An Evangelical is unlikely to describe being prompted by the Spirit to commit a crime. They’re more likely to cite biblical authority, such as declaring that their victims were Antichrists. Is that the same phenomenon? Do you have any sense of how often that happens so we can compare? I don’t.
I know very little about the specific cases mentioned, but the people involved seem to have been pretty far down a dark path before they claim to have been prompted to kill. I have a hard time believing they would not have committed a crime but for the Church’s teachings on revelation leading them to think they were being prompted to do so.
I think I disagree, RLD, but won’t belabor the point. Daybell’s dark path seems to have been his odd religiosity and experiences.
But I’ll stress again that I think the spirit and Mormonism are good things.
Jonathan Green, I’m not ji, but Chad Daybell was instrumental (if not a founder) of A Voice and a Warning (which held conferences and platformed speakers and ideas- Julie Rowe was often a presenter, and of course Chad himself) and was a founder of the LDS publisher Cedar Fort, and had a bunch of his books published with them. My (former) brother in law attended many of his conferences and came back to his family with some pretty wacky ideas (For instance, one night his wofe woke up to find him standing next to the bed ‘performing and exorcism’ on her). These organizations have tried to down play his leadership roles, but many people were taken in by him.
That should read “performing AN exorcism”
Thanks, Moss! That’s very helpful.
I do think our church (and every church) tends to attract people in spiritual/psychic/emotional need and that perhaps these people are more likely to believe what might otherwise be seen as irrational things. The First Vision story is an incredible selection test for the investigator. I say this with great love and respect: if you believe that story as told on your doorstep by a couple of 19-year kids, I suspect you may be predisposed to belief generally. I would also suggest that some of our more peculiar doctrines may lead us to think about things which may seem pretty fringe even for other religious folk. I doubt that this predilection for belief selects for mental instability or illness and I certainly do not think that it correlates to a greater incidence of psychotic or aberrant acts.
I am the parent of a person who has experienced extreme psychotic episodes, during which they committed violent acts against family and community members and destroyed a fair amount of public and private property. Recent high-profile news stories of violence committed by psychotic family members have hit us pretty hard. In our child’s most radically unhinged moments, messages from Joseph Smith, God, Satan, aliens, the FBI, etc were all major themes intertwined at various times. Book of Mormon stories were randomly mixed with covid conspiracies. There were screaming rants in public and private spaces which elevated to violent incidents that required police responses. Having been right up close in many of the most intense moments, it seems relatively clear to me (and few things are clear in these situations) that if we hadn’t raised them in the church, they would simply have had other source material at hand during those horrific episodes. The church stuff was just one ingredient in a random stew of real and imagined things.
On this journey with our child, we have learned that for people who experience psychotic episodes, there can be indelible remnants from previous psychotic episodes that stay in the mind and seem to pile up and intertwine even after years of medications and treatement. These “memories” of horrible experiences in a psychotic state are often recorded in the mind as real experiences and they are sometimes very hard to extinguish and to disambiguate from things that really happened. In many cases, the sick person’s perception of how they arrived where they are is not reliable in any way. The stories that they tell to explain their experiences are often a mixture of things that really happened in our observable world and things that only happened in their brain. I could tell story after story of psychiatrists and psychologists who believed stories that our child (in a psychotic state) fabricated from thin air. We were often astonished at the breadth of creative license, the almost-logical construction, and the fluency with which these stories were told. Big institutions, like parents, are the easiest things to blame and the easiest things to weave stories around, but in many such cases there is actually no person, group, or institution at fault.
Whatever the varied social and environmental sources of mental illness, there are often biological processes over which we have no conscious control. In our child’s case, what is happening is not about spiritual weakness, moral laxity, or poor character. They don’t have any of those problems. What is happening to them is cells, DNA, neurons, and chemical interactions not working as they should. And yes, I am very deliberately not getting into how “spirit” can/should be disambiguated from brain biology or concepts of mind.
One thing we have learned as parents is not to try and figure out the “why this?” or “why that?” or “what did we do?”. It is most likely impossible to figure out and doesn’t really help the person most of the time. In our child’s case, psychiatric medications are the only thing that helps and these medications are far from an ideal solution. Talking and thinking therapies of various kinds are necessary and welcome helps but only when their brain is in a relatively stable state. This has been a long story but one I wanted to share to perhaps build empathy and compassion for people who experience these extreme forms of mental illness. I guess the essence of what I want to say is that people often try too hard to ascribe logic or sense to the acts of people who experience this level of illness. We are looking for rational patterns in a place where we will not find them.
BJ I really appreciate your courage in sharing such a raw experience, I think it is valuable for so many to better understand the challenges in attribution we all struggle with in relation to psychosis.
Yes, thanks for those additional insights, Ross and BJ. Blessings on you, BJ, for all that you’ve gone through.
To me, though, your child’s condition sounds different that Daybell and Hildebrandt who were able to function a long time and attract followers.