The article addresses many of the points that many ex-LDS or doubters think about. For me, out of the short list given in the NYT article, the priesthood restriction on blacks was probably especially troubling, for many reasons, but especially because it just didn’t make sense in light of the New Testament and an understanding of who Jesus Christ is and what He came to do.
A common LDS apologetic on this, one that I used myself, was that God has always chosen who He would give His priesthood to, i.e. during the Old Testament times when it was given only to a certain lineage of people. The problem is that with Jesus Christ, He established His Kingdom for all people, wants all to come unto Him, and wants all nations to receive the Gospel and the blessings associated with it. With the LDS priesthood restriction, they not only had prophets and apostles, including in official statements and General Conferences (an important point), claim that “Negroes” were inherently “different” spiritually from others, perhaps stemming from conduct in the pre-mortal existence, curse of Cain, curse of Ham, etc (to put it mildly), but they denied an ordinance essential to full eternal life in their restored Gospel, the priesthood, to black males, and further denied both black males and black females the necessary temple ordinances for eternal life/exaltation (the Endowment and Sealing). I still don’t understand why they restricted black females from going to the temple at this time, since it had nothing to do with priesthood (or maybe it did, since in the temple, women do perform certain ordinances for other women, though not ordained per se).
Because of all that, the LDS Church during the time of the restriction sent missionaries to all nations, except those with significant black African populations (I first became aware of that when I watched the PBS documentary on The Mormons, which discussed how people in Africa that believed that the LDS Church was true had to start their own, faux-LDS, local congregations, since the actual LDS Church wouldn’t send priesthood authority to establish stakes and wards, since the blacks couldn’t have such authority themselves…). This became especially problematic in Brazil, where they wanted to build a temple, but obviously Brazil has a very large mixed population, so they wouldn’t really know who could hold the priesthood and who couldn’t. Something tells me that this situation was not commanded by God, and Christ certainly wouldn’t have approved of withholding essential, required ordinances for eternal life from some of His children.
What I’ve found is that the LDS Church is certainly attractive on its surface. “Living apostles and prophets”, “Continuing revelation”, “temple worship just like anciently”, “families are forever”, “restoration of the New Testament Church”, “modern scripture”, “prophets and apostles on the earth today”, “the Heavens are open”, etc. These phrases used many times by LDS sound nice, don’t they. But when you go deeper, every single phrase isn’t what it seems, especially with the 15 prophets, seers, and revelators that don’t prophesy, see, nor reveal anything, unless you count lowering the missionary age, more, smaller temples, and reiterating what has already been said as examples of living, modern prophecy and revelation.
Gone are the days of LDS prophets and apostles talking about, and canonizing, visions, Heavenly visitations, angelic ministrations, having an audience with Christ, etc. Indeed, the view is that even if such things happen, we shouldn’t talk about them publicly. The latest edition of the church magazine the Ensign says as much:
**"Visions do happen. Voices are heard from beyond the veil. I know this. But these experiences are exceptional. And when we have a great and exceptional experience, we rarely speak of it publicly because we are instructed not to do so (see D&C 63:64) and because we understand that the channels of revelation will be closed if we show these things before the world.
Most of the revelation that comes to leaders and members of the Church comes by the “still small voice” or by a feeling rather than by a vision or a voice that speaks specific words to our hearing. I testify to the reality of that kind of revelation, which I have come to know as a familiar, even a daily, experience to guide us in the work of the Lord."**
-In His Own Time, in His Own Way, Dallin H. Oaks, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles