Who is the wealthiest LDS apostle?

This article investigates the financial status of LDS apostles, specifically Gary E. Stevenson, and contrasts such earthly wealth with the Torah-observant faith of Yeshua and the apostles.

Quick Answer

Who is the wealthiest LDS apostle? Quick Answer Quick Answer: While exact net worths are often private, reports indicate Gary E. Stevenson, an LDS apostle, has significant personal wealth, primarily from his business ventures before his apostolic calling. This focus on earthly riches by those claiming spiritual authority stands in stark contrast to Yeshua’s clear…

Who is the wealthiest LDS apostle?

Quick Answer

Quick Answer: While exact net worths are often private, reports indicate Gary E. Stevenson, an LDS apostle, has significant personal wealth, primarily from his business ventures before his apostolic calling. This focus on earthly riches by those claiming spiritual authority stands in stark contrast to Yeshua’s clear instructions regarding heavenly treasures and the simple, self-sacrificing lifestyle of His original apostles.

The Scholarly Case

The question of the wealthiest LDS apostle exposes a fundamental divergence between the modern Mormon organizational structure and the Hebraic-Messianic faith of Yeshua and His first-century emissaries. The original apostles, chosen by Yeshua, were characterized by their devotion to the Gospel, often enduring poverty and persecution, not accumulating vast personal fortunes. Their sustenance was derived from their ministry, as Yeshua prescribed that "those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel" (1 Corinthians 9:14, BSB), implying a modest provision, not immense wealth. Yeshua Himself taught explicitly against storing up earthly treasures. He declared, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matthew 6:19-21, BSB). This instruction was a cornerstone of His teaching, emphasizing spiritual over material pursuits. Furthermore, Yeshua stated, "No one can serve two masters: Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money" (Matthew 6:24, BSB). The accumulation of significant personal wealth by spiritual leaders, therefore, raises serious questions about adherence to these core Messianic principles. The qualifications for apostleship in the Brit Chadashah (New Covenant) were stringent and unique. An apostle was required to be an eyewitness to the resurrected Messiah, having accompanied Yeshua "the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism until the day Jesus was taken up from us" (Acts 1:21-22, BSB). Sha'ul (Paul) also affirmed this, asking, "Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?" (1 Corinthians 9:1, BSB). This foundational role meant that the apostles laid the groundwork for the faith, as Ephesians 2:20 (BSB) states, the ekklesia (assembly) is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the cornerstone." Their authority was derived from direct, personal commission by Yeshua and their unique witness to His resurrection, a qualification no modern leader can meet. The notion of a continuous line of "apostles" in the modern sense, possessing significant personal wealth, stands in stark contrast to this biblical model. The first-century Hebraic faith emphasized integrity, humility, and a clear distinction between the spiritual authority derived from Elohim and the pursuit of worldly gain. The focus was always on the "faith entrusted once for all to the saints" (Jude 1:3, BSB), not on an evolving leadership structure that could amass fortunes. The Tanakh (Old Testament) also provides a framework for leadership that prioritizes spiritual devotion over material opulence. While kings and priests might have had resources, their primary role was to uphold Torah and serve YHWH, not to enrich themselves. The prophets, often living austere lives, consistently challenged corruption and the love of money among leaders. The concept of a "prophet" or "apostle" accumulating vast personal wealth is alien to the original Hebraic understanding of divine calling and service. The modern LDS claim of ongoing apostleship and prophetic succession, as promoted by figures like Elder Neil L. Andersen and Jeffrey R. Holland (as seen in Gospel Topics Essays, "Beyond the Pulpit: Elder Andersen Ministers in Mongolia"; Mormon Stories, "LDS Church Announces New Prophet and 1st Presidency"), fundamentally redefines the biblical office of apostle, detaching it from its original qualifications and purpose. This redefinition allows for a leadership structure that can accrue significant personal and institutional wealth, a clear deviation from the first-century Messianic ethos.

Adversary Teardown: lds.org

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), through its official channels like lds.org, promotes a narrative of continuous prophetic and apostolic succession, elevating its current leaders to a status akin to the original apostles of Yeshua. This tradition, however, directly conflicts with the biblical understanding of apostleship and Yeshua's teachings on wealth. The LDS Church presents its Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as modern-day apostles, with figures like Elder Neil L. Andersen being introduced as "one of the Savior's Apostles" (Gospel Topics Essays, "Apostle of Jesus Christ Blesses Young Boy with Cerebral Palsy | Elder Neil L. Andersen"). Similarly, Jeffrey R. Holland is consistently referred to as "an apostle" whose words are highly valued (Saints Unscripted, "The ULTIMATE General Conference quiz!!"). This elevation of human leaders, as noted by Mary Alice H. McCann regarding her father, suggests a "near-divine embodiment" or "representation of God's love through a human leader" (referencing Elder Cook's introduction of Holland in Mormon Stories, "LDS Church Announces New Prophet and 1st Presidency"). This practice risks idolatry by placing human intermediaries in a position that diminishes direct reliance on Messiah alone. The issue of wealth becomes particularly salient when examining individuals like Gary E. Stevenson, who, before his calling as an apostle, co-founded the exercise equipment company Icon Health & Fitness (now iFIT Health & Fitness). News reports from sources like The Salt Lake Tribune have highlighted Stevenson's multimillion-dollar stock gains, even after becoming an apostle, leading to public discussion about the personal wealth of LDS general authorities. This accumulation of significant personal wealth by an individual holding the title of "apostle" directly contradicts Yeshua's teachings against storing up earthly treasures (Matthew 6:19-21) and the example of the original apostles who lived lives of relative simplicity, often supported by the communities they served (1 Corinthians 9:14). The LDS Church's claim of ongoing apostleship, which allows for leaders to hold such positions while possessing vast personal wealth, represents a significant break from the first-century Hebraic-Messianic faith. The biblical qualifications for apostleship (Acts 1:21-22; 1 Corinthians 9:1)—being an eyewitness to the resurrected Messiah and directly commissioned by Him—were unique to the foundational period of the faith. As Ephesians 2:20 states, the apostles and prophets formed the "foundation" of the assembly, implying a completed work, not an ongoing office. The LDS tradition, originating with Joseph Smith Jr. in the 19th century (Book of Mormon published 1830), introduced a novel concept of continuous apostleship and a living prophet, which stands in direct opposition to the biblical understanding of a finished revelation (Hebrews 1:1-2; 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and the finality of the apostolic foundation. This departure allows for a system where "apostles" can be financially successful entrepreneurs, a role entirely foreign to the original Hebraic understanding of divine emissaries. Furthermore, the Book of Mormon itself, presented as a "stick of Joseph" and a new scripture, opens the door to such deviations by adding to the canon. However, the Tanakh explicitly forbids adding to or subtracting from YHWH's commands (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:6), thereby closing the canonical door to new "scriptures" like the Book of Mormon and the subsequent doctrines that facilitate the accumulation of wealth by its leaders. The archaeological anachronisms within the Book of Mormon—such as pre-Columbian horses, chariots, steel swords, wheat, barley, and silk, none of which are archaeologically attested in Mesoamerica before 1492 (Coe, "Mormons & Archaeology: An Outside View," Dialogue 1973)—further undermine its claim to ancient origin and divine authority, revealing it as a 19th-century fabrication that paved the way for modern LDS doctrinal and organizational structures, including the current understanding of "apostles" and their financial practices.

Counter-Arguments Anticipated

Objection 1: LDS apostles are called from successful careers, and their past wealth is not indicative of current financial accumulation through their apostolic office.

This argument attempts to compartmentalize an apostle's past wealth from their current role. However, Yeshua's teachings on wealth are not time-bound; they apply to one's entire life. The issue is not merely how wealth is acquired, but whether a spiritual leader, claiming apostolic authority, embodies the spirit of Yeshua's teachings on detachment from earthly treasures (Matthew 6:19-21). Even if wealth is pre-existing, its continued possession and growth by a "prophet" or "apostle" sends a message that may diverge from the self-sacrificing example of the original emissaries and Yeshua Himself, who had "nowhere to lay his head." The original apostles were chosen from fishermen and tax collectors, not wealthy industrialists, suggesting that their authority came from Elohim, not worldly status. The LDS Church's allowance for apostles to retain and even grow personal fortunes, as seen with Gary E. Stevenson, appears to conflict with the ethos of humility and spiritual focus inherent in a traditional understanding of apostleship.

Objection 2: The LDS Church teaches that apostles are paid a modest stipend, not a salary, and their personal wealth is separate from church funds.

While the LDS Church claims its apostles receive a "modest stipend," the issue remains that their personal wealth, accumulated before or during their service, stands in some contrast to the biblical model. The first-century apostles were supported by the community, but their lives were not marked by significant personal riches. Their focus was primarily on the Gospel, not on managing or growing personal fortunes. Yeshua's warning against serving both God and money (Matthew 6:24) applies regardless of the source or timing of wealth acquisition. The very existence of such discussions about an "apostle's" net worth highlights a potential deviation from the spiritual priorities of the original Messianic faith, where leaders were known for their devotion to Torah and Messiah, not their financial portfolios.

Objection 3: Modern apostles are needed for ongoing revelation, and their leadership is divinely guided, regardless of personal finances.

This argument hinges on the LDS doctrine of continuous revelation and modern apostleship, which represents a departure from the Hebraic-Messianic understanding of divine authority. The Brit Chadashah states that Elohim "spoke to our fathers through the prophets. But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son" (Hebrews 1:1-2, BSB), which some interpret as implying the finality and sufficiency of Yeshua's revelation. Furthermore, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17, BSB), which some understand as negating the need for ongoing "revelation" through modern "prophets" or "apostles." The foundational role of the original apostles (Ephesians 2:20) is often considered unique and completed. To claim ongoing apostleship that can accumulate significant wealth, despite Yeshua's teachings, is seen by some as redefining the office and potentially undermining the sufficiency of the written Word.

Position Lock

Position Lock: The accumulation of significant personal wealth by individuals claiming the title of "apostle" within the LDS Church appears to contradict the teachings of Yeshua the Messiah regarding earthly treasures and the self-sacrificing example of His original emissaries, suggesting a deviation from what some consider the foundational Hebraic-Messianic faith.