Yesterday the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints put out a new policy that for the first time seems to expressly endorse the use of alternative translations other than the King James Version and even provides a list of translations the Church views favorably, including the ESV and NIV. This is framed as a help for those who “struggle” with the KJV, which, realistically, is everyone to some degree.

This isn’t a radical shift as over the past few years, Church leaders have been softening their language on this topic and increasingly citing other translations. But still, I’m overjoyed. I love that many more of my LDS friends will be reading the Bible this upcoming year in a language that they can fully understand. I pray that God’s powerful word will touch hearts and open minds.

Interestingly, today I also watched a short documentary about the Worldwide Church of God:

This Church was once led by Herbert Armstrong, a false prophet whose teachings bore striking similarities to Joseph Smith’s. Armstrong rejected the Trinity, taught a form of deification and multiple degrees of heavenly glory, emphasized works over grace, and strongly promoted a Hebrew-Israelite narrative in which British Israelites migrated to America. The parallels are hard to miss.

What struck me most, though, was what happened after Armstrong died in the 1980s. His chosen successor, along with other leaders, took a hard and honest look at the church’s doctrines. They began to study the Bible seriously and to compare what they had been taught with Scripture itself. When they concluded that Armstrong’s teachings did not align with the Bible, they publicly repudiated those doctrines. Most significantly, they embraced the doctrine of grace and they embraced the Trinity.

This decision came at an enormous cost. A majority of their membership left. Financial support declined sharply, especially because they abandoned the aggressive teaching that tithing was essential to salvation. And as a result, many people walked away, and money stopped flowing in.

What made that transformation possible was not a sudden burst of courage or cultural pressure, but a shift in posture toward Scripture. The leaders of the Worldwide Church of God were willing to let the Bible stand over their inherited teachings, even when that meant questioning a revered founder and decades of institutional momentum. I am not claiming the LDS Church is on the same path—or that the same outcome is likely—but what I am saying is whenever Scripture is increasingly read, compared, studied, and allowed to speak for itself, the possibility of reform, however costly, is at least opened.

So how likely is something like this in the LDS Church?

Realistically, I think it’s unlikely. The LDS Church has a much longer history rooted in the teachings of Joseph Smith and subsequent leaders, a far larger global membership, and a deeply ingrained religious culture. Reversing course in such a dramatic way would be extraordinarily difficult.

And yet, I do see encouraging signs. I see leaders like Elder Uchtdorf, Elder Renlund, and Elder Pearson—especially recently—placing a stronger emphasis on grace and moving away from some of the more works-heavy language of the past. I see a growing willingness to read other Bible translations, to engage with scholarship, to ask questions, and to be more transparent about the church’s history.

These are genuinely hopeful developments. Still, it would take a great deal—frankly, it would take a miracle—for a change on the scale of what happened in the Worldwide Church of God.

But I pray for that. I know that God is able. I believe He can take seeds already planted in the soil of Mormonism and, by His grace, bring forth fruit for His glory.