Which LDS apostle is a billionaire?
The question of an LDS apostle being a billionaire highlights a stark contrast between modern Mormon leadership and the poverty-embracing faith of Yeshua and His original apostles.
Quick Answer
Which LDS Apostle is a Billionaire? Exposing Wealth in Mormon Leadership Quick Answer Quick Answer: The question of an LDS apostle being a billionaire, specifically Elder Gary E. Stevenson, highlights a profound departure from the poverty-embracing teachings of Yeshua and the communal, non-acquisitive practices of the original apostles, who carried no gold or silver and…
Which LDS Apostle is a Billionaire? Exposing Wealth in Mormon Leadership
Quick Answer
Quick Answer: The question of an LDS apostle being a billionaire, specifically Elder Gary E. Stevenson, highlights a profound departure from the poverty-embracing teachings of Yeshua and the communal, non-acquisitive practices of the original apostles, who carried no gold or silver and shared all possessions according to need.
The Scholarly Case
The pursuit and accumulation of vast personal wealth by religious leaders stands in stark contrast to the foundational principles and practices established by Yeshua and His first-century Hebraic apostles. Yeshua Himself lived a life devoid of material possessions, declaring, "Foxes have dens and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head" (Matthew 8:20 BSB). This was not merely a personal preference but a directive for His disciples, whom He instructed, "Do not carry any gold or silver or copper in your belts" (Matthew 10:9 BSB) and "Take nothing for the journey... no money, no second tunic" (Luke 9:3 BSB). The early Messianic community, far from accumulating personal fortunes, practiced radical communal sharing. Acts 2:44-45 describes, "All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they shared with anyone who was in need" (BSB). This was not a mandate for perpetual poverty, but a demonstration of trust in Elohim and a rejection of personal material accumulation for the sake of the collective body. Peter, a leading apostle, famously declared, "Silver or gold I do not have, but what I have I give you: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, get up and walk!" (Acts 3:6 BSB), emphasizing spiritual authority over material wealth. The Torah itself, the foundational instruction of YHWH, warned against kings accumulating excessive wealth and wives, lest their hearts be led astray (Deuteronomy 17:17). This principle extends to all leadership within YHWH's covenant people, emphasizing a focus on spiritual shepherding rather than material acquisition. The Messianic movement, rooted in the Torah, upheld these values. The idea of a spiritual leader, particularly one claiming apostolic authority, amassing personal billions would have been utterly alien and antithetical to the Hebraic faith of Yeshua and His disciples. Such wealth is not merely a sign of prosperity but, in the context of leadership, can become a stumbling block, diverting focus from the spiritual needs of the flock to the maintenance of an earthly empire. The original apostles were not CEOs of corporations; they were humble servants, often enduring hardship and persecution, focused solely on proclaiming the Kingdom of Elohim. Their "net worth" was measured in souls saved and lives transformed, not in stock portfolios or real estate holdings. The concept of "apostle" within the original Hebraic context denoted one sent forth as an emissary, often facing hardship and relying on divine provision, not personal riches. The Hebrew term *shaliach* (שליח) carries this meaning of a delegated agent, whose authority comes from the sender, not from personal financial standing. The shift towards religious leaders accumulating vast personal wealth represents a profound departure from this Hebraic paradigm, mirroring instead the practices of secular potentates rather than spiritual shepherds. Furthermore, the very notion of new "apostles" arising in the 19th century in America, as claimed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), directly contravenes the explicit warnings of the Torah against adding to or subtracting from divine commandments. Deuteronomy 4:2 states, "You must not add to or subtract from what I command you, so that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I am giving you" (BSB). Similarly, Proverbs 30:6 warns, "Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar" (BSB). The Tanakh closes with Malachi, around 430 BCE, providing no canonical opening for new prophetic or apostolic figures outside the direct lineage of Yeshua's first-century *shlichim*. The claim of new American "sticks of Joseph" (referencing Ezekiel 37:15-19) is a misinterpretation, as Ezekiel's prophecy refers to the reunification of the divided houses of Israel and Judah in the land of Israel, not a new scripture in a foreign land. The Hebraic understanding of YHWH's oneness (Deuteronomy 6:4 BSB: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One") emphasizes a compound unity, *echad*, as seen in "one flesh" (Genesis 2:24) or "one cluster" (Numbers 13:23). This understanding, far from the later Latin/Nicene "three persons one substance" scholastic categories, accommodates the plurality within the Godhead (Genesis 1:26, "Let us"; Genesis 19:24, two YHWHs; Zechariah 12:10, "pierced ME"), the Memra (Word) of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan, and the "Two Powers in Heaven" concept articulated by scholars like Alan Segal (1977) and found in rabbinic texts like b.Sanhedrin 38b and b.Chagigah 14a. This Hebraic context provides no theological framework for the emergence of new, wealthy apostles outside the established prophetic and apostolic traditions.Adversary Teardown: lds.org
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) faces scrutiny regarding the personal wealth of its leadership, particularly the reported billionaire status of Elder Gary E. Stevenson, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. This situation exposes a fundamental fault line in the LDS tradition, which deviates sharply from the Hebraic-Messianic model of leadership. The LDS Church, founded by Joseph Smith Jr. in 1830 with the publication of the Book of Mormon, established a hierarchical structure with "apostles" at its head. Joseph Smith's "First Vision" (1820) was retroactively dated, and his death in 1844 led to a succession crisis, culminating in Brigham Young leading the majority faction to Utah in 1847. Young introduced doctrines like the Adam-God doctrine in 1852 and openly practiced polygamy, which was only officially ended by the 1890 Manifesto under immense federal pressure, a retreat from Doctrine and Covenants 132. The Book of Mormon itself, presented as a new scripture, contains numerous anachronisms that contradict archaeological evidence for pre-Columbian Mesoamerica. Scholars like Michael Coe, in "Mormons & Archaeology: An Outside View" (1973), highlight the absence of horses, chariots, steel swords, wheat, barley, and silk, which are depicted in the Book of Mormon but are archaeologically unattested before 1492. While John Sorenson's apologetic "An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon" (1985) attempted to counter these claims, it has been robustly rebutted by critics like Brent Metcalfe and Dan Vogel. Furthermore, the genetic claim of Lamanites being of Hebrew origin is refuted by modern DNA evidence, which, as Simon Southerton details in "Losing a Lost Tribe" (2004), points to Asian, not Semitic, mtDNA markers among indigenous American populations. The reported wealth of LDS apostles, including Elder Gary E. Stevenson, who co-founded and sold a company for a significant sum before his apostolic calling, stands in stark opposition to the apostolic model. While LDS sources, such as Elder David A. Bednar in "What Does the Church Do With Tithing Money? | Elder David A. Bednar" (Gospel Topics Essays), defend the Church's financial stewardship, they often sidestep the issue of individual apostolic wealth accumulation. Elder Gary E. Stevenson himself, in "How I #HearHim: Elder Gary E. Stevenson" (Gospel Topics Essays), focuses on spiritual experiences rather than addressing financial matters directly. This financial opulence among LDS leadership represents a clear break from the *shaliach* (apostle) model of Yeshua and His original disciples, who lived in poverty, not prosperity, and whose authority stemmed from YHWH, not from personal fortunes. The original apostles did not build personal empires; they built the Kingdom of Elohim through self-sacrifice and communal sharing, as exemplified in Acts 2:44-45.Counter-Arguments Anticipated
Objection 1: The wealth of apostles is a blessing from God for their faithfulness, and tithing ensures prosperity.
This argument is a distortion of the Hebraic understanding of blessings. While Malachi 3:10 (BSB) speaks of YHWH opening "the windows of heaven and pour out for you blessing without measure" for those who bring the full tithe, this promise is for the community's sustenance and the flourishing of YHWH's house, not for individual leaders to amass personal billions. Yeshua and His apostles explicitly rejected personal wealth accumulation as a sign of spiritual favor, instead emphasizing poverty of spirit and relying on YHWH's provision. Their blessings were spiritual, not material in the sense of personal enrichment, and often came through suffering and sacrifice, as seen in the lives of the early Messianic community.
Objection 2: These apostles earned their wealth through legitimate business before their calling, and it is not church funds.
While an individual may earn wealth legitimately before a religious calling, the question is whether such personal wealth, especially in the billions, aligns with the spirit and practice of true apostolic leadership as modeled by Yeshua and His original disciples. The original apostles, upon their calling, left their professions and possessions to follow Yeshua (Matthew 10:9; Luke 9:3). Their lives became dedicated to the mission, not to managing personal fortunes. The very concept of "apostle" within the Hebraic context implies a complete dedication to the sender's mission, often requiring personal sacrifice and reliance on divine provision, not the maintenance of vast personal estates. The focus shifts from the spiritual mission to the potential for perceived conflict of interest or a distraction from the ascetic demands of genuine spiritual leadership.
Objection 3: The LDS Church's financial strength and the apostles' business acumen are necessary for managing a global organization.
This argument conflates corporate management with spiritual leadership. The early Messianic movement, though global in its reach, was managed through spiritual guidance, communal sharing, and reliance on YHWH, not through corporate structures or the personal fortunes of its leaders. The model provided by the Brit Chadashah is one of servant leadership and stewardship of communal resources for the needy, not the accumulation of vast institutional wealth or individual billions. While financial resources are necessary for any large organization, the Hebraic model emphasizes transparency, accountability, and a clear distinction between the collective resources of the community and the personal wealth of its leaders, especially those claiming direct divine authority. The teachings of Yeshua and the example of the early apostles prioritize spiritual mission and communal care over corporate efficiency or personal financial success.