Study and Faith

Counsel for March

2012-03-01T07:06:00.001-05:00

The following comes from W. W. Phelps, Almanac for the Year 1859: The Third after Leap Year; and after the 6th of April, Thirtieth year of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Great Salt Lake City, UT: J. McKnight, 1859), 5:

MARCH is a month of notoriety: wind and weather permitting, gardens, fields and fences should be attended to; stock kept from damaging the fruit and shade trees; radishes, peas, lettuce, and a variety of good things for the table, as well as for ornament, should be put in the ground for an early start. A wise man prepares for good and evil.

Alexander Campbell on Biblical Metaphor and Divine Incorporeality

2012-02-19T15:53:00.000-05:00

I found the following passage of interest and present it here. I take this from Alexander Campbell, A Connected View of the Principles and Rules by Which the Living Oracles May Be Intelligibly and Certainly Interpreted: Of the Foundation on Which All Christians May Form One Communion: And of the Capital Positions Sustained in the Attempt to Restore the Original Gospel and Order of Things; Containing the Principal Extras of the Millennial Harbinger, Revised and Corrected (Bethany, VA: M'Vay and Ewing, 1835), 34.

The anthropomorphists, and other excessive literalists, from a disregard to the highly metaphorical language of the Scriptures, which is both their strength and beauty, and the only language in which things supernatural could be communicated to us, have imagined a human figure for the Deity. On their own principles of interpreting the Scriptures they might, from the following metaphors, imagine him to be like a great fowl: - 'Hide me under the shadow of thy wings,' - 'In the shadow of thy wings I will make my refuge, until these calamities be overpast,' - 'I will trust in the covert of thy wings,' - 'He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou rest.' It is to no purpose to multiply examples, farther than to give an accurate and complete idea of this most common and most beautiful trope. So rich are the Scriptures in this figure, that many thousand examples might be adduced. We have said that there are some of these metaphors both rude and simple; and as the Bible reaches into the most remote antiquity, and exhibits and addresses human nature, in its most simple and unadorned state, it must be expected that it would bear the impress of the people among whom it was written, and to whom it was addressed.

Orson Hyde on Overcoming

2012-02-17T13:15:00.000-05:00

The following address was made by Orson Hyde on 6 October 1853 at General Conference, and the text is extracted from Deseret News 3/20 (29 October 1853): 78.

At the commencement of our Conference, it has fallen to my lot to make a few remarks.

If you will indulge me with your prayerful attention, I will try to communicate to you a few words, which I hope and trust may prove, not only edifying to you now, but a source of comfort and consolation in time to come.

Be it as the Lord will, I shall use my best endeavors for this; and if I fail in it, it will be for want of ability, and not for want of a disposition.

I discover before me many strange faces; I presume they are our friends from the different settlements, South, North, East and West, who have no doubt assembled here for the purpose of obtaining instructions and information respecting the prosperity of the Church, the duty of its officers, and what is to be done in the important period in which we now live.

It is a peculiar and interesting time with us. In the first place, our brethren from abroad who are unaccustomed to a mountain life, or a life in this Valley, are emigrating to this place; and when they arrive here, they do not find every thing, perhaps, as they anticipated, or they find things different from what they have been accustomed to in the places from which they came. Every thing seems new and strange, and it takes a little time (as we say in a familiar phrase) "to get broken into the harness."

Not only so, but we have had some little disturbance with the red man this season, and this is a cause of some digression from the common path of duty we are accustomed to move in.

Under all these circumstances, as we have business of importance to transact during this Conference, it becomes necessary that our minds should become united in one, as far as possible, that we should act in accordance with the mind and will of our Father which is in heaven. Let me here observe that the people of God cannot be united only on that principle that vibrates from the very bosom of heaven. If we are united, if we can touch one point or principle upon which all can strike hands; by that union we may know that our will is the mind and will of God; and what we, in that state, bind on earth, is bound in heaven, for the action is reciprocal, it is the same.

Hence, after so long a separation, we have come together again, under circumstances somewhat peculiar. It is necessary that we seek to be united. How shall we be united? Around what standard shall we rally? Where is the beacon light to which our eyes shall be directed, in order that our actions may tend to the accomplishment of the same purpose and design? The beacon light is him whom our Heavenly Father has ordained and appointed to lead His people, and give them counsel, and guide their destiny. That is the light to which the eye should be directed. And when that voice is heard, let every bosom respond, yea and amen.

But says one, "If this be correct, it is giving to one man almighty power. It is giving to one man supreme power to rule.["] Admit it. What are we all aiming for? Are we not aiming for supreme power? Are we not aiming to obtain the promise that has been made to all believers? What is it? "He that overcometh shall inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he shall be my son." Are we not seeking for this, that we may overcome, that we may inherit all things? For says Paul, "Therefore let no man glory in men; for all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's." Well then, if all things are yours, we should be very insensible to our best interests if we did not seek diligently for that which Heaven promises as a legacy to the faithful. It is our right then; do we not all expect to be armed with almighty power? Is there a Latter Day Saint under the sound of my voice, whose heart is fired with celestial light, but that seeks to be in possession of supreme power (I had like to have said) both in heaven and on earth? It is said, "we are heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ." Does Jesus Christ possess all power in heaven and on earth? He said when he rose from the dead, "All power is given to me in heaven and on earth." Are we heirs of God and joint heirs with that illustrious character? He has so declared! If we are, do we not, in common with him, possess the power that is in heaven and on earth? If one individual then is a little ahead of us in obtaining this power, let us not be envious, for it will be our time by and by. We ought to be the more thankful, and glorify God that he has armed one individual with this power, and opened a way that we may follow him, and obtain the same power, instead of it being a cause of envy. On the contrary, it ought to be a matter to call forth our warmest thanksgivings and praise to God, that he has brought back that power to earth again in our day, by which we may be led step by step to the point we hope to attain.

After reflecting a little this morning, a passage of Scripture occurred to my mind - the words of John the Revelator, or the promise made to him. It says, "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out; and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God which is the New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and I will write upon him my new name."

In the course of my travels in preaching the gospel to different nations, I have often heard it remarked by the people in days gone by, "We have heard your testimony; we have heard your preaching; but really, why does not Joseph Smith, your prophet, come to us and bear testimony? Why does he not come to us and show us the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated? If we could see the prophet and the plates, then we should be satisfied that the work was genuine, that it was of God; but if we cannot see him, and the ancient records, we are still in doubt with regard to the genuineness of the work."

My reply to them was something like the following: "Joseph Smith cannot be everywhere, and the plates cannot be presented to every eye. The voice of Joseph Smith cannot be heard by every ear." And I have said to them, "You that have seen me have seen Joseph Smith, for the same spirit and the same sentiments that are in him are in me, and I bear testimony to you that these things are verily true."

It is generally the case, and I think I may say it is invariably the case, that when an individual is ordained and appointed to lead the people, he has passed through tribulations and trials, and has proven himself before God, and before his people, that he is worthy of the situation which he holds; and let this be the motto and safeguard in all future time that when a person that has not been tried, that has not proved himself before God, and before His people, and before the councils of the Most High to be worthy, he is not going to step in to lead the Church and people of God. It has never been so, but from the beginning some one that understands the spirit and counsel of the Almighty, that knows the Church, and is known of her, is the character that will lead the Church.

How does he become thus acquainted? How does he gain this influence, this confidence in the estimation of the people? He earns it by his upright course and conduct, by the justness of his counsels and the correctness of his prophecies, and the straightforward spirit he manifests to the people. And he has to do this step by step; he gains influence, and his spirit, like an anchor, is fastened in the hearts of the people; and he is sustained, and supported by the love, confidence and good-will of the Saints, and of Him that dwelt in the bush. This is the kind of character that ought to lead God's people, after he has obtained this good will and this confidence.

What then is he to do? Is he to go abroad to the nations of the earth and preach the gospel; to leave his home and the people of his charge? May we not count him as first and foremost in the ranks of them that overcome? I think so! Well then, "Him that overcometh shall be made a pillar in the temple of my God to go no more out." All those who approach the nearest to that standard, we expect will remain in the temple of God at home, and not go abroad to the nations of the earth.

Says one, "If an angel from heaven would descend and bear testimony that this work is of God, I would believe it. Why may I not receive the testimony of angels as well as Joseph Smith or any other person? for God is no respecter of persons! If I could receive it, I would be satisfied then that the work was true." But let me here remark again: suppose the Omnipotent Jehovah that sits upon his throne of glory and power, was to descend and bear testimony, what further credence would you then want? You would want some one to tell you that it was really God himself that had visited you, that you might be satisfied it was not an angel of darkness in the similitude of a heavenly personage.

Remember that God our heavenly Father was perhaps once a child, and mortal like we ourselves, and rose step by step in the scale of progress, in the school of advancement: has moved forward and overcome until he has arrived at the point where he now is. "Is this really possible?" Why my dear friends, how would you like to be governed by a ruler who had not been through all the vicissitudes of life that is common to mortals? If he had not suffered, how could he sympathise and be touched with the feelings of our infirmities? He could not, unless he himself had passed through the same ordeal, and overcome step by step. If this is the case, it accounts for the reason why we do not see him; He is too pure a Being to show himself to the eyes of mortals; he has overcome, and goes no more out, but he is the temple of my God, and is a pillar there.

What is a pillar? It is that power which supports the superstructure - which bears up the edifice; and if that should be removed from its place, the edifice is in danger of falling. Hence, our heavenly Father ascended to a throne of power; he has passed through scenes of tribulation, as the saints in all ages have, and are still passing through; and having overcome and ascended his throne, he can look down upon those who are following in the same track, and can realize the nature of their infirmities, troubles and difficulties, like the aged father who looks upon his race; upon the smallest child, and when he sees them grappling with difficulties, his heart is touched with compassion; why? Because he has felt the same; been in the same situation, and he knows how to administer just chastisement, mingled with the kindest feelings of a father's heart. So with our heavenly Father; when he sees we are going astray, he stretches forth his chastening hand, at the same time he realizes the difficulties with which we have to contend, because he has felt the same; but having overcome he goes no more out.

When the world was lost in wretchedness and woe, what did he do? Did he come here himself? No. But says he, "I will send my son to be my agent, the one who is the nearest to my person, that is bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh; I will send my son, and I will say, he that heareth him, heareth me. Go then my son." He came, and how did he look? He looked just like his Father, and just as they treated him, they treated his Father in heaven. For inasmuch as they did it unto him they did it unto his Father. He was the agent, the representative, chosen and sent of God for this purpose. When it was necessary that the Savior of the world should have help, and strength, should be sustained in the darkest hour, did God himself in person come to his aid? No; but he sent his angel to succor him. When the Savior was born, the spirits around the throne of God were ready to fly to his protection, when the kings and rulers of this lower world sought his destruction. What did they say to the wise men of Israel on that eventful occasion? - "Glory to God, on earth peace, and good will to men."

When he fasted forty days and forty nights, the angels appeared and strengthened him. His heavenly Father did not come himself, but says the Savior, he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; also, "I am just like him, the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person." "The same spirit that is in the bosom of the Father is in me. - I came not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me." Then the character that looked upon the Savior, looked upon the Father; for he was a facsimile of him; and if they would not believe the Son, they would not believe the Father.

The Savior, in the performance of his mission, laid down his life for the world; rose from the dead, and ascended up on high, and few and blessed are the eyes that have seen him since! It is sometimes the case that the veil of mortality has been rent, and the eye of the spirit has gazed upon the Savior like Stephen of old, when he was stoned to death; in his expiring moments, in the agonies of death, what did he say? He said, "I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man, standing upon the right hand of the Father." Stephen saw him in that trying hour.

True it is, that in the most trying hour, the servants of God may then be permitted to see their Father, and elder brother. But says one, "I wish to see the Father, and the Savior, and an angel now." Before you can see the Father, the Savior, or an angel, you have to be brought into close places in order to have this manifestation. The fact is, your very life must be suspended on a thread, as it were. If you want to see your Savior, be willing to come to that point where no mortal arm can rescue - no earthly power save! When all other things fail, when everything else proves futile and fruitless, then perhaps thy Savior and thy Redeemer may appear; his arm is not shortened that he cannot save, nor his ear heavy that he cannot hear; and when help on all sides appears to fail, my arm shall save, my power shall rescue, and you shall hear my voice, saith the Lord. To him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, &c. The Father has overcome, the Savior has overcome, and the angels are overcoming like we are. But let me here observe, it is a good deal with the angels, in my opinion, as it is with us.

We who have been in the valley some length of time, feel that we are at home, and in a goodly place, chosen of God, a secret habitation surrounded by mountains, walled in by natural barriers, where we are secluded from the world, and inhabiting a little world by ourselves. We know the world is opposed to our doctrine. Now if one of us were required to go abroad among the nations, a spirit of patriotic devotion to the interests of God's kingdom, would stimulate us to forego all the pleasures of domestic life, to earn a crown of glory, and shine as the stars in the firmament forever and ever: when if we consult our own individual feelings and interest only, we would say, "O that we might remain at home, and not go out and be buffeted by a cold and heartless world! We would rather remain with our friends, and bask in the sunshine of their good will and favor, and enjoy life as we pass along; but to go out into the world, and meet its scoffing sneers, it is alone for the cause and kingdom of God's sake; and for the sake of this, we not only long to go abroad to the nations of the earth, but to do every thing that is laid upon us to do.

Look at the angels of heaven. If there are so many millions of them, and they manifest such an interest for the welfare of mortals, why do they not come, and visit us more? They may have the same feeling in relation to coming to this earth, that we would have in going to the nations of the world. If they are sent, they will go; but if not sent, it is very likely they will stay at home, as we will; if we are sent we will go; if we are not sent, we are glad to stay at home. This then I presume is their feeling; hence it has become proverbial in the world, that angels' visits are few and far between. And let me here observe, that when a servant of God, clothed with the spirit of his calling, enters a house, a town, or a country, he feels the spirit in a moment that prevails in that house, country, or people among whom he comes. For instance, if he lands upon the shores of a foreign country, the moment his feet press their soil, their spirit presses his heart! he senses it, and if the spirit that reigns in that country is diverse to the Spirit of God, he feels it painfully to his heart; and it is upon this principle that the Savior said to the disciples, "and into whatsoever house ye enter, first say peace be to this house. And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall return to you again." Then when a servant of God enters a strange place, and he feels the son of peace there, let his peace come upon that people, house, and city. If he feels there is an adverse power that holds the sway there, his peace must return to him, and he must go his way after he has faithfully discharged his duty.

I recollect once in a certain place in England, while travelling along with bro. Kimball, it was in a country town called Chatburo, where the people were humble, simple, and honest. They loved the truth, and were seeking for it. When we went there, their hearts and doors were opened to receive us, and our message. What were our feelings? - We felt that the ground upon which we stood was most sacred, and br. Kimball took off his hat, and walked the streets, and blessed the country and the people, and let his peace come upon it. These were our feelings. Why? Because the people were ready to receive the word of our testimony, and us for Christ's sake.

We had been to other places, where the very moment our names were sounded, and it was known we were in a house, there was a similar spirit manifested as there was in the days of Lot when the Angel came to his house to warn him to flee from Sodom; for a mob was raised at once, and demanded the strangers to be given up to them; but we were shielded by friends, and God always opened a way of escape for us. Wherever there is a spirit congenial with the Spirit of God, and a loyalty to the kingdom of the Most High, you will find a hearty welcome, and you are glad to go there.

If we, whose sensibilities are benumbed by this veil of flesh which is around us, have discernment to discriminate where the son of peace is, the angels, who are not clogged as we are; whose sensibilities are keener than ours, do you not think when they approach the world, they know where the son of peace is? In the last days, I will take peace from the earth, saith the Lord by one of the ancient writers, and they shall kill one another; and there was given a great sword unto him that sat on the red horse. And the nations will be armed against each other. The angels are not fond to descend to this world, because of the coldness of the spirit that reigns in it; they would rather remain in heaven around the throne of God, among the higher order of intelligences, where they can enjoy life, and peace, and the communion of the Holy One; when they are sent they will come; but they are tolerably well advanced among them that overcome.

These are some of the reasons why they do not mingle with us; why we cannot see them. But let me tell you, brethren and sisters, if we will be united as the heart of one man, and that general union of spirit, of mind, be fastened upon the Lord Jesus Christ, we should draw down celestial intelligence by the Spirit of God, or by angels who surround the throne of the Most High. It is an electric wire, through which and by which intelligence comes to mortals; it is only necessary for the word to be spoken, and the power of it is at once felt in every heart.

"He that overcometh will I make a pillar in the Temple of my God," etc. Do we ever wish to see the time when we can retire from the scenes of every day life, to the Temple of God, and go no more out? Are we looking for a period of this kind? Yes, - when we shall be made pillars in the Temple of our God. We know when a pillar is placed in a building, it is placed there to remain; pillars are not often removed. All pillars are considered permanent; they are not to be taken away, because the removing of them endangers the safety of the building. In order to be made pillars in the Temple of our God, what are we to do? WE MUST OVERCOME.

Let it be remarked, that the disposition so prevalent in the hearts of many, not to abide the counsel of their superiors, has to be overcome; it must be slain, and laid prostrate at our feet; and we must say that we came not to do our own will, but the will of him that sent us. We came to do the will of him to whom we have plighted our faith, to uphold him as our leader, lawgiver, and seer. We have got to overcome our inclination to revolt at the idea, and be brought into complete submission, and union of spirit.

"O," says one, "how does this look, to be slaves to have no mind or will of our own, but be swallowed up in the will of another, and thus become tools, machines, slaves, and not free men, and independent like other people." Well, my dear friends, I will tell you how it was in heaven. There was a disposition once in heaven that preferred to be independent enough to chalk out its own course. The rebellious angels undertook it, and what became of them? They fought against the throne of God, and were cast down, to be reserved in chains of darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Yes, they are reserved there, and that is their glory, and the honor that is attached to them for being independent, and declaring in the presence of God their independence, but instead of delivering any advantage from this course, down they went to their reward.

I will advance a sentiment by Paul the Apostle, showing that we were there at the time that notable controversy was going on, and no doubt we took an active part with them who sustained the throne of God, and we were therefore permitted to come to this world and take upon us bodies. The devils that fell were not permitted to enjoy this privilege; they cannot increase their generation; glory to God they cannot do it, but we have the power of multiply lives; this is what they are angry about. Says Paul, "Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?" Is it possible that these elders and servants of the Most High who are going abroad among the nations will have power to judge the nations of the earth? Says one, "God will do it and not man." Now, for instance. I am building a house and it is said Solomon built a temple, but do you suppose Solomon quarried the rock, laid it up, etc.? No, but he gave directions to others, and it is said Solomon built a temple; so God will judge the world. The Almighty Ruler will instruct his servants to do it, and the saints will give the grand decision, and the nations that have slain them will have to bow to their word.

What says the good Book again? "And he that overcometh, and keepeth my words to the end, to him will I give power over the nations, (and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers) even as I have received of my Father." Do we not expect to overcome and to have power over the nations? Yes. Says Paul, "the saints shall judge the world; not only this, but they shall judge angels." Why says one, "I thought that angels are greater in might and power than we, and is it possible that we the servants of God are going to judge angels? you are surely exalting yourselves above all that is called God; for God shall judge the world." How is it that we do not recollect anything now that took place before we took upon us these bodies? When we lay them off we shall remember everything, the scenes of those early times will be as fresh in our view as the sun was this morning when he rose over the mountains. The saints will say to their fallen brethren, you were arrayed under the command of Lucifer, and fought against us; we prevailed, and it now becomes our duty to pass sentence against you, fallen spirits. You have been reserved to this condemnation, and bound with a chain. With what chain? That you could not multiply your race. There were limits put to you that you could not increase. It was never said to you, go forth into hell and multiply, but it was said to man go forth and increase on the earth. Here were stakes set they could not go beyond; and this is what they are angry about; this makes a hell to them, because they "can't do it." They see the superiority of the saints who have kept their first estate, and they are envious, and now it becomes their duty to pass sentence upon them. The saints shall judge angels, even those spirits who kept not their first estate, and have been a long time in chains like criminals who are kept in bondage to await their sentence. It will be the prerogative of the servants of God to pass a decision upon them, and not only upon them, but upon the world, among whom they have been associated, and having combined in them the judicial power, and power of witness, they will have power to judge and determine, for the saints shall judge the world.

How will the wicked feel when they come up at the last day, (or at some day, be it last or middle,) how will they feel when they see, perhaps one whom they have persecuted, one whom they have killed as an impostor, or because they said he was an impostor, when they see that person exalted upon the judgment seat, and they themselves arraigned before him, and compelled to hear from his lips their sentence? Sadly will they be mistaken. Says John, the beloved disciple, when speaking of the Savior, "If they have persecuted me they will also persecute you." They knew him not, neither did they know his disciples. Well did the Savior say at one time, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." They did not understand the power that was lodged in the breast of their victim; but when the day of his wrath will come, they will say to the mountains and rocks "fall on us, and hide us from the face of him who sitteth upon the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the day of his wrath is come, and who shall be able to stand." It will not only be the Lamb that will come in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory, but his angels and saints that have gone before him; myriads of spirits will come, wafted as it were through the air to earth's cold regions to call the sons of men to an account for their doings.

Now, "to him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God," "and to him that overcometh will I give power over the nations." Do we want to overcome this worldly ambitious spirit that is ever burning to be independent, that is, self sufficient and proud? Overcome this, and bring every power and faculty of the soul in subjection to the power of the Most High, and you are safe. What have you to overcome next? You have to overcome that untiring disposition to do wrong, to overreach your neighbor, that thereby you may acquire for yourselves a paradise, or heaven in this world, while in its fallen state. Remember this one thing, if you want to be free from the curse. You know it is said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." Who then can be saved? Again, says the Savior, "What is impossible to man is possible to God." Let me show you the philosophy of this, why it is impossible for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. God said in the beginning, "Cursed be the ground for thy sake;" that is, earth and earthly things are cursed. Now the man who has the most of it has the greatest amount of the curse; therefore if a man acquire a great deal of earthly things, he acquires a great deal of this curse. For they that will be rich are made to pass through many sorrows and they have to harden their hearts, and their faces, and oppress the poor to acquire it; and when they have acquired it, what have they got? It is to them something like a red hot ball in the hands of a child, it burns; they have acquired it, and have got a great curse along with it. It is hard for such to enter into the kingdom of God. The gate is narrow, and the curse is wide, so if they wish to go in at that gate they must be stripped, and become destitute of the love of this world's goods. I recollect a beautiful illustration of this in the case of the rich man and Lazarus that was poor and full of sores and who laid at the rich man's gate. There was the rich man clothed in fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day. By and by he died, and went to hell, and saw Abraham afar off with the same poor Lazarus in his bosom. Says the rich man, "Father Abraham have mercy upon me and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue for I am tormented in this flame." He was so humbled as to accept one drop of water from Lazarus, who while he lay at the rich man's gate was ready to eat the crumbs that fell from his table. How reverse the scene. Abraham with the kind feelings of a father, at the same time with that justness and dignity which is ever the characteristic of the upright said "Son remember that thou in thy life time receivedst good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented." His arm was too short to reach that one drop of water to him, "for there was a great gulf fixed, so that they that would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence." The scene was changed. This is enough to admonish, and to make us adopt the advice of the Savior, "Seek first the kingdom of God and its righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you."

When should we want to be rich? When the curse is taken from the earth. We do not want the earth while it is cursed, for "cursed be the ground for thy sake," etc. Let the world that love darkness rather than light, be heirs of the curse if they will; but do not let us seek after it with too greedy hearts, until the curse is taken away; and when the curse is rebuked, and the earth undergoes such a change that it will shine forever and ever, and there is no night there, then we may have it, and it will do us good. It is like this: We say that wheat and barley are excellent when we use them in their native state; but when we extract the spirit from these grains, and drink it, it intoxicates; but when they are used in their native state, they make bread which gives life to the body, while in the other state, they destroy. So the earth when the curse is taken away, will sustain an endless life. Though the figure is not altogether correct, still it serves to illustrate the principle. The Savior did not say the Saints should inherit the earth while the curse is still upon it, but he said, "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth." He will not give them something to destroy them, but they have got to stay until the earth has fulfilled the measure of its creation; and then the angel will raise his hand to heaven, and swear that time shall be no longer. - What becomes of the earth then? Why, says the prophet, it shall "reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it, and it shall fall, and not rise again." If the earth falls, which way will it go, up or down? Tell me ye wise men, ye philosophers. Will not the greatest, or most powerful planet attract it whether it goes up or down? for the greater bodies attract the lesser. If the earth falls and is not to rise again, it will be removed out of its present orbit. Where will it go to? God says he will gather all things into one; then he will gather the earth likewise, and all that is in it, in one. The gathering will be upon a larger scale in time to come; for by and by the stars of heaven will fall. Which way will they go? They will rally to a grand centre, and there will be one grand constellation of worlds. I pray that we may be there, and shine among those millions of worlds that will be stars in the Almighty's crown.

The earth will have to be removed from its place, and reel to and fro like a drunkard. The fact is it has got to leave the old track in which it has roamed in time passed, and beat a new track; and saith the Lord, "come up here." What is he going to do with it? - Why, take it where the sun will shine upon it continually, and there shall be no more night there; and the hand of God will wipe away the tears from all faces. "Come up here, O earth! for I want the Saints who have passed through much tribulation to be glorified with you, and then I will give the earth to the meek. For I will take the curse from it, and rebuke the destroyer for your sakes, and bring all things in subjection to you, and you shall dwell in everlasting light." Now it is half day and half night, but I tell you it is not going to be half and half, but there will be no night there. We have but one sun to shine upon us, but when the earth is taken out of this orbit, it will come in contact with the rays of other suns that illuminate other spheres; their rays will dazzle our earth, and make the glory of God rest upon it, so that there will be no more night there.

Is it possible then that there are worlds reserved in eternal night, in an eternal eclipse, rolling in the shade, an eternal night? What is their use? They are the homes of them that love darkness rather than light; "and it shall be said unto them, depart ye cursed into outer darkness." There are planets that revolve in eternal darkness, that you who love darkness rather than light may go and find your own home. There is a place prepared for every body, no matter what their character. Says the Savior, "I go to prepare a place for you;" there is a place for every person. There is a place for every body that comes into this valley if they can only find it. So there is a place in yonder world for every person; but to him that overcometh will I give power over the nations, and he shall be a pillar in the Temple of my God, and go no more out.

If there is any thing in this world my soul desires the most, it is that I may overcome, and be made a pillar in the Temple of my God, and remain at home in the society that is continuedly warming my spirit, encouraging my feeling, with that which is congenial with every principle of my nature; let me bask in their goodly presence, live in their affections, dwell forever in the midst of their society, and go no more out. And may God in his mercy help us all to overcome every obstacle, and endure hardships like good soldiers of the Lamb, and dwell eternally in the mansions of light; which may God grant for Christ's sake: AMEN.

Brigham Young: "What Mystery is There About It?"

2012-02-13T13:59:00.000-05:00

The following is the latter portion (minus the two concluding paragraphs) of a discourse given on 8 June 1873 by Brigham Young, apparently following on the heels of a prior discourse by Brigham's brother Joseph Young. The following text is extracted from "Discourse by President Brigham Young, delivered in the New Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, June 8th, 1873", The Deseret News 22/20 (18 June 1873): 308-309. Note his discussion of the beginningless of the plurality of Gods; his affirmation that Adam is our God, the creator of the earth who himself had earlier experienced mortality on another world and fathered our spirits after attaining exaltation, and brought one of his wives here as Eve; his sentiment of thankfulness for the Fall; his clear statement that God is still growing in knowledge and will be so forever; and his indication that faithful believers will become Gods and make their own earths.

I wanted to make a few remarks upon the subject touched upon by my brother, but I shall not have the time. I frequently think, in my meditations, how glad we should be to instruct the world with regard to the things of God, if they would hear, and receive our teachings in good and honest hearts and profit by them. I have been found fault with a great many times for casting reflections upon men of science, and especially upon theologians, because of the little knowledge they possess about man being on the earth, about the earth itself, about our Father in heaven, his Son Jesus Christ, the order of heavenly things, the laws by which angels exist, by which the worlds were created and are held in existence, &c. How pleased we would be to place these things before the people if they would receive them! How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me - namely that Adam is our father and our God - I do not know, I do not inquire, I care nothing about it. Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was made expressly for him, and after it was made he and his companions came here. He brought one of his wives with him, and she was called Eve, because she was the first woman upon the earth. Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who ever have or who ever will come upon the earth. I have been found fault with by the ministers of religion because I have said that they were ignorant. But I could not find any man on earth who could tell me this, although it is one of the simplest things in the world, until I met and talked with Joseph Smith. Is it a great mystery that the earth exists? Is it a great mystery, that the world can not solve, that man is on the earth? Yes, it is; but to whom? To the ignorant - to those who know nothing about it. It is no mystery to those who understand. Is it a mystery to the Christian world that Jesus is the Son of God, and still the son of man? Yes it is, it is hidden from them, and this fulfils the Scripture - "If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost," who have no faith, and who pay no attention to the Spirit of God. These things are called mysteries by the people because they know nothing about them, just like laying hands on the sick. Is it a mystery that fever should be rebuked and the sick healed by the laying on of the hands of a man who is endowed with authority from God and has been ordained to that gift? "Oh yes," say the ignorant, "we know nothing about it." That is true, but where is the mystery? Will the ignorant receive the truth when they hear it? No, they will not, and this is their condemnation, that light has come into the world, and they choose darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil. That is the fact in the case. What is the mystery about it? They do not understand invisible things. Ask the wicked, "Do you know anything about the laying on of hands?" "Oh yes, such a man" - a man who is wicked in his whole life - "has the art of laying on of hands for curing the tooth-ache, fevers, wounds," &c.; and now, in fulfillment of the words of the ancient prophet, thousands of people seek unto "wizards who peep and mutter," &c., but they will not seek unto the living God. I can say to all the inhabitants of the earth that before what is called spiritualism was ever known in America I told the people that if they would not believe the revelations had given he would suffer the devil to give revelations that they - priests and people - would follow after. Where did I declare this? In the cities of New York, Albany, Boston, throughout the United States and in England. Have I seen this fulfilled? I have. I told the people that as true as God lived, if they would not have truth they would have error sent unto them, and they would believe it. What is the mystery of it?

The Christian world read of, and think much about, St. Paul, also St. Peter, the chief of the Apostles. These men were faithful to and magnified the priesthood while they were on the earth. Now, where will be the mystery, after they have passed through all the ordeals, and have been crowned and exalted, and received their inheritances in the eternal worlds of glory, for them to be sent forth, as the Gods have been for ever and ever, with the command - "Make yourselves an earth, and people it with your own children?" Do you think the starry heavens are going to fall? Do the Christian world or the heathen world think that all things are going to be wrapped up, consumed, and annihilated in eternal flames? Oh fools, and slow of heart to believe the great things that God has purposed in his own mind!

My brother said that God is as we are. He did not mean those words to be literally understood. He meant simply, that in our organization we have all the properties in embryo in our bodies that our Father has in his, and that literally, morally, and socially, by the spirit and by the flesh we are his children. Do you think that God, who holds the eternities in his hands and can do all things at his pleasure, is not capable of sending forth his own children, and forming this flesh for his own offspring? Where is the mystery in this? We say that Father Adam came here and helped to make the earth. Who is he? He is Michael, a great prince, and it was said to him by Eloheim, "Go ye and make an earth." What is the great mystery about it? He came and formed the earth. Geologists tell us that it was here millions of years ago. How do they know? They know nothing about it. But suppose it was here, what of it? Adam found it in a state of chaos, unorganized and incomplete. Philosophers, again, in talking of the development of the products of the earth, for instance, in the vegetable kingdom, say the little fibres grew first, then the larger vegetation. When this preparatory stage was completed then came the various orders of the animal creation; and finally man appeared. No matter whether these notions are true or not, they are more or less speculative. Adam came here and got it up in a shape that would suit him to commence business. What is the great mystery about it? None, that I have seen. The mystery in this, as with miracles, or anything else, is only to those who are ignorant. Father Adam came here, and then they brought his wife. "Well," says one, "Why was Adam called Adam"? He was the first man on the earth, and its framer and maker. He, with the help of his brethren, brought it into existence. Then he said, "I want my children who are in the spirit world to come and live here. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state. I was faithful, I received my crown and exaltation. I have the privilege of extending my work, and to its increase there will be no end. I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh, that their spirits may have a house, a tabernacle or a dwelling place as mine has,["] and where is the mystery?

Now for mother Eve. The evil principle always has and always will exist. Well, a certain character came along, and said to Mother Eve, "The Lord has told you that you must not do so and so, for if you do you shall surely die. But I tell you that if you do not do this you will never know good from evil, your eyes will never be opened, and you may live on the earth forever and ever, and you will never know what the Gods know." The devil told the truth, what is the mystery about it? He is doing it to-day. He is telling one or two truths and mixing them with a thousand errors to get people to swallow them. I do not blame Mother Eve, I would not have had her miss eating the forbidden fruit for anything in the world. I would not give a groat if I could not understand light from darkness. I can understand the bitter from the sweet, so can you. Here is intelligence, but bind it up and make machines of its possessors, and where is the glory or exaltation? There is none. They must pass through the same ordeals as the Gods, that they may know good from evil, how to succor the tempted, tried and weak, and how to reach down the hand of mercy to save the failing sinner. The Lord has revealed his gospel and instituted its ordinances that the inhabitants of the earth may be put in possession of eternal life. But few of them, however, will accept it. I have preached it to many thousands of them who are naturally just as honest as I am, but through tradition there is an overwhelming prejudice in their minds which debars them of that liberty I have in my heart. They would be glad to know the ways of God, and to know who Jesus is, and to reap the reward of the faithful, if they had the stamina, I will call it, the independence of mind necessary to embrace the truth, to say, "I know this is true, and if there is no other person on the face of this earth who will defend it, I will to the last." But this is not in their hearts, it is not in their organization, consequently they do not manifest it. What mystery is there about it? None whatever. What is the mystery in Jesus being the Son of God and at the same time the son of the Virgin Mary? You know what the infidels say about this, but their words are no worse than the practice of many in the Christian world.

I do not want to be found fault with, but if I am it is all the same to me. There is no mystery to me in what God has revealed to me, or in what I have learned, whether it has been through Joseph, an angel, the voice of the Spirit, the Holy Ghost or the Spirit of the Lord; no matter how I have learned a thing, if I understand it perfectly it is no mystery to me. It is like making one of these pulpits, or a house like this. This is no mystery to me, I dictated it, and a great many say it is a great piece of architecture to have a single span, so large as this roof and composed of wood that will sustain itself. But it is no mystery to me. I know the strength of the materials and how to place them together. It is no mystery to me to build a temple or a common house. But you take a gentleman or lady who was never beyond the confines of a densely populated city, who never saw wheat grow, and who never saw cattle in the fields, and it is a great mystery to them to see them. Why? Because they never saw such things before, and they know nothing about them, but it is no mystery to those who know all about such things. Do you think it is any mystery to angels to know how the various organizations are brought on earth? Not the least in the world. There is no mystery in all this to the Gods, no mystery in them to the prophets and apostles whom they send, and to whom they reveal them; it is all plain, every day, common sense, just as much so as with anything else in the world - we understand it.

Some may say to me, "Why, Brother Brigham, you seem to know it all." I say, "Oh no, I know but very little, but I have an eternity of knowledge before me, and I never expect to see the time when I shall cease to learn, never, no never, but I expect to keep on learning for ever and ever, going on from exaltation to exaltation, glory to glory, power to power, ever pressing forward to greater and higher attainments, as the Gods do. That is an idea that drowns the whole Christian world in a moment. Let them try to entertain it and they are out of sight of land without a ship, and if they had a ship it would have neither sail, rudder nor compass. "What," they say, "God progress?" Now, do not lariet the God that I serve and say that he can not learn any more; I do not believe in such a character. "Why," they say, "does not the Lord know it all?" Well, if he does, he must know an immense amount. No matter about that, the mind of man does not reach that any more than it comprehends the heaven beyond the bounds of time and space in which the Christians expect to sit and sing themselves away to everlasting bliss, and where they say they shall live for ever and for ever.

If we look forward we can actually comprehend a little of the idea that we shall live for ever and ever; but you take a rearsight, and try and contemplate and meditate upon the fact that there never was a beginning and you are lost at once. The present and the future we can comprehend some little about, and the past is all a blank, and it is right and reasonable that it should be so. But if we are faithful in the things of God they shall open up, our minds will expand, reach forth and receive more and more, and by and by we can begin to see that the Gods have been for ever and for ever.

Some of our philosophers have tried to reveal the first cause. I would change the position of the whole affair. I would plant my position in the ignorance of man that undertakes to prove or show the existence of a first cause. He had better go to work and prove himself a fool to begin with and then stop, for all his reasonings, arguments and researches with regard to the first cause only prove that he is a fool. Excuse me for this rough expression, perhaps it would be better to say that he comes far short of knowing or understanding himself in the least degree, and his researches are contracted to that degree that he is lost in ignorance of himself. Is this the fact? It is. We can know nothing until we learn it, and when we come to a knowledge of facts they are no mystery to us. Take one of these native Navajo women down south here into a factory and show her the machinery for weaving baskets, and if she has never seen anything of the kind she would laugh at such nonsense. Says she, "That is not the way to weave blankets, why do you not tie your web up to the limb of a tree, fasten the other end down, and then take a stick and do just so? That will never weave a blanket." By and by she sees the blanket finished, but it is a mystery to her, and she can not understand anything about it, because she has not learned it. It is so with the whole human family.

Adam Our Father and Our Head

2012-02-10T14:42:00.000-05:00

Lately I've been posting a couple old LDS perspectives on the idea (once held in LDS circles) of Adam as father, head of the human race, and even as God. As a counterpoint, I'd like to share a hymn by Isaac Watts, which I extract now from its appearance (with highly modified text) as Hymn 42 ("Original sin; or the first and second ADAM") in Joshua Smith, et al., Divine Hymns, or Spiritual Songs, for the Use of Religious Assemblies and Private Christians, 7th ed. (Elizabethtown: J. Woods, 1800), 47-48. Really, only the first verse is directly relevant, but I find the whole thing to be beautiful.

Adam, our father and our head,
Transgres'd, and justice doom'd us dead,
The fiery law speaks all despair,
There's no reprieve nor pardon there.

Call a bright council in the skies,
Seraphs, the mighty and the wise,
Speak; are you strong to bear the load,
The weighty vengeance of a God?

In vain we ask; for all around
Stand silent thro' the heavenly ground;
There's not a glorious mind above,
Has half the strength, or half the love.

But O! unmeasurable grace!
The eternal Son takes Adam's place;
Down to our world the Savior flies,
Stretches his naked arms and dies.

Amazing work! look down ye skies,
Wonder and gaze with all your eyes;
Ye saints below and saints above,
All bow to this mysterious love.

Melvin Ballard on Exaltation and Marriage

2012-02-09T10:09:00.000-05:00

The following is a snippet from a discourse delivered by Melvin J. Ballard (then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles) during General Conference on 6 April 1921. For the following quote, see Ninety-first Annual Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1921), 167-168.

My brethren and sisters, again, not only do we desire that our sons and daughters shall marry within the fold, but we desire that they shall come into the house of the Lord and enter into the sacred and holy obligations of matrimony in the Lord's approved and appointed way. We desire it again for their peace, for their salvation. Our records show that the divorce rate among those who enter into marriage in this holy, approved way is very much lower in the Church among that group than among the group who marry for time only. And why? Of course it is significant to all of us that those who enter into these holy bonds of matrimony for time and eternity do not begin to plan to separate and to part, but they begin to plan to live together not only in time but in eternity, for we are not building for time, we are building for eternity also. And there are connected with these blessings certain privileges, of course, that except men shall enter into them in this life, or they are performed in this life for men and women, those who fail to receive these blessings cannot come into the celestial kingdom of God where God and Christ dwell. It is a "Mormon" truism that is current among us and we all accept it, that as man is God once was and as God is man may become. That does not signify that man will become God. I am sorry to say, and yet it is a truth, that not many men will become what God is, simply because they will not pay the price, because they are not willing to live up to the requirements; and still all men may, if they will, become what God is, but only those who are heirs of the celestial glory shall ever be possible candidates, to become what God is. We desire, therefore, that these boys and girls shall have the safety and protection of this kind of marriage.

Joseph Fielding Smith on a Qualified 'Adam-God' Theory

2012-02-07T16:21:00.000-05:00

The following excerpts are extracted from a General Conference address delivered by President Joseph Fielding Smith on 4 April 1965, as printed as "Marriage And Family Are To Be Forever", The Deseret News [Church News] (10 April 1965): 7; compare the following to the same quotes as found in Official Report of the One Hundred and Thirty-Fifth Annual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ([Salt Lake City, UT]: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1965), 10-11. Note carefully exactly how Joseph Fielding Smith navigates the issue of the 'Adam-God Theory' and modifies it for his purposes; compare with how Brigham Young himself and other earlier writers actually articulated it; consider whether the underlying logic has been tweaked here in any appreciable way.

Let us remember that the first marriage on this earth, that of Adam and Eve, was performed before there was any death in the world, therefore it was intended to be forever. Marriage, if performed by divine authority, is to last forever. In the Temples of the Lord men and women are married with an everlasting covenant. Children are born to them in this covenant to be theirs forever and therefore the family union was intended to endure forever....

In this, the final dispensation, the Prophet Joseph Smith was taught by revelation that the union between a man and his wife was to endure forever. Death, while it would intervene was to be only a temporary separation and the union of husband and wife would continue on through all eternity. And then the family union would also endure forever and that each generation, in the kingdom of God, would be eternally joined to the one that went on before from the end of time back to the beginning. Thus the children of the covenant would eventually be joined together and the children of God become one grand family. Each generation would be linked to the one which went on before of all those who would receive the Gospel and become members of the Divine Family of God.

Now I would like to express another thought which is vital to us one and all. President Brigham Young has been unjustly condemned for a statement that he made to the effect that Adam is our God and the only one with whom we have to do. President Young's statement has been unmercifully condemned, but what he said is a righteous principle and in full accord with the doctrines of the Kingdom of God. It is the doctrine of primogeniture in the Kingdom of God, and a glorious principle when it is fully and clearly understood....

Thus we learn by virtue of the law of primogeniture, that all who are saved in the Kingdom of God, will be subject to Adam, for by divine appointment he holds these keys under the direction of Jesus Christ. I might carry this law a little further. According to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Joseph Fielding Smith will be subject to his father, and his father to his father in the family of God and so it will go back from the end to the beginning and we will all be obedient to Adam, whom the Prophet Joseph Smith declared holds the keys of salvation, for his posterity who are redeemed but under the "council" and direction of The "Holy One" who is Jesus Christ who stands at the head because he is the Redeemer of the world who gave us, through His atonement, the resurrection and eternal life if we will only repent and keep His laws and commandments....

Divorce was never contemplated in the Gospel plan, and, where true love exists, disharmony between father and mother and children to parents would not arise. We are all of us here in this mortal world on probation. We were sent here primarily to obtain tabernacles for our eternal spirits. Secondly to be proved by trial, tribulation as well as the abundant joy and happiness that can be obtained through a sacred covenant of obedience to the eternal principles of the Gospel. Mortality, as Lehi informed his children, is a "probationary state." It is here where we are to be tried and tested to see if we will when shut out of the presence of our Eternal Father - but still instructed in the way of eternal life - love and revere Him and be true to his Beloved Son, Jesus Christ. These principles should be laid in the foundation of every home. No prayer should be neglectful in regard to the sacred principles of the Gospel of our Redeemer. The Lord has commanded us, one and all, to bring our children up in light and truth. Where this spirit exists, disharmony, disobedience and neglect of sacred duties will not, cannot fail.

Today's Quote for Thought

2012-02-06T09:23:00.000-05:00

Today's quote for thought comes from the "Varieties" section of The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 14/23 (31 July 1852): 366.

MEN will wrangle for religion; write for it; fight for it; die for it; anything but live for it.

To be faithful to the present moment, hour, day, and its state, is a weighty matter, and demands most serious consideration.

Think on these things. I know I will.

Ryan Cragun on Baptism Speed and Retention Rates

2012-02-04T18:24:00.006-05:00

Today I was listening to a recent episode of John Dehlin's popular Mormon Stories podcast - specifically, episode 319: "Changing Mormon Demographics in the U.S. with Dr. Ryan Cragun", in which John Dehlin (with Scott Holley) interviews University of Tampa sociologist Ryan T. Cragun about the latter's work on LDS sociodemographic trends in the United States from 1990 to 2008. It's an episode that's well-worth listening to, and I look forward to listening to episode 320 ("Changing Demographics in the Worldwide LDS Church with Matt Martinich of the Cumorah Foundation") later tonight. But during episode 319, there was a very interesting (to me) interval from 1:29:45 to 1:32:22, which I transcribe roughly as follows; consider it just one of many possible samples of why the podcast is worth listening to:

Dehlin: So this is... well, is it a big deal that the Church's growth is flatlining and maybe been declining? I mean... and, do you get a sense that other churches are more successful at retention overseas than we are?

Cragun: Seventh-Day Adventists are. That's... again, it's a paper that I'm working on with Ron Lawson. They still lose members, right, but not nearly at the rate that the LDS Church does, and I think that has to do in part with the way they do about converting members, right? So the LDS Church still has a very specific kind of proselytizing program, and they haven't modified it very much since the 1960s. You've got, you know, a series of discussions – I know they've got a newer version out, and they say that you can kind of go with it how you need to, but the emphasis from the very beginning – I don't know what it was like in your guys's missions, but we were told by our mission president to invite people to be baptized during the first discussion.

Dehlin: Yeah, for sure we were.

Cragun: Yeah, and I don't think they do that now, but there's still very much the push to, Let's get these people to church, let's get them baptized, um, rather than, Hey, let's teach them and walk them through this process and actually make them wait until we know that they've actually had kind of a change in the way that they think, they've been integrated into the congregation, and now we can actually have them baptized. For Jehovah's Witnesses, it's about a six-month process at a minimum before somebody can be baptized. And for Seventh-Day Adventists, it can two years, right?

Dehlin: Right.

Cragun: So we're comparing that to, for Mormons, right, six weeks? Eight weeks? Maybe a couple of months, at most? You know, yeah, there are some that linger on and on and on and on, but for many of the converts, particularly when I was serving, right, if we went longer than six weeks with some investigators, we thought, Now they're never going to get baptized, and we would drop them. Well, by the end of my mission, the people I had converted at the beginning of my mission, they were already inactive.

Dehlin: So are we saying that if the Church required a longer time to actually be able to join, and were more methodical about making it harder to join, we would actually see an increase in both number of baptisms and an increase in retention?

Cragun: Yeah, I think that's true.

For any of my LDS readers in particular, what do you think of this? Are there disadvantages to the swiftness of baptism in the 'ideal' LDS conversion scenario?

Quick Note

2012-02-04T15:42:00.002-05:00

I'd like to direct attention to two recent posts by my best friend, in which she details an agreement she and I made to have a deep discussion of our respective faiths. In the first, she details how - in a series of installments (the topics and projected dates of which, she lists in the second post) - she's in the process of sending me a paper she's writing in defense of the claims of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and, in turn, I'll write a paper in defense of my beliefs, where they differ, and offering some evaluation of her arguments on behalf of her positions. If she can make a persuasive enough case, I'll gladly reconsider the testimony I've received on behalf of my beliefs; and I trust her integrity enough to know that she'd do the same if I made a persuasive enough case. My sole request of my readers is to bathe the scenario in prayer and godly counsel, to the end that the fullness of God's light may win out.

Rock of Ages, Cleft for Me

2012-02-03T14:01:00.001-05:00

I have a difficult time imagining many classic hymns that quite so powerfully capture the evangelical spirit as Augustus Toplady's justly famed "Rock of Ages", three verses of which are included as Hymn #111 in the Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; below I'll share a rendition I particularly enjoy, and my quotations of the lyrics will be from it. It has an air of intimacy, of direct 'I-Thou' personal relation to Jesus, confessing the singer's complete helplessness to be righteous ("All the labors of my hands / Could not meet Thy law's demands. / Could my zeal no respite know, / Could my tears forever flow, / All for sin could not atone...") and Jesus' complete all-sufficiency to save ("...Thou must save, and Thou alone"). The confession of a need for a "double cure" for sin, a salvation and sanctification gained only through Jesus' "wounded side"; the impassioned simplicity of the singer's emptiness ("Nothing in my hands I bring, / Simply to Thy cross I cling"); the singer's depiction of him- or herself as "naked" and "helpless", needing to rush to the divine "fountain" of amazing redeeming grace to be washed clean by the Savior or else die... could there be a better Evangelical anthem, or indeed a better Christian anthem?

The Conversion Sojourn of J. Eckersley

2012-02-02T13:39:00.000-05:00

In a two-installment series published in 1890, an English Latter-day Saint named J. Eckersley offered an account of his journey to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. What follows is from his "How I Became a 'Mormon'" as it appeared in The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 52/10 (10 March 1890): 145-147 and 52/11 (17 March 1890): 163-165.

It was in the latter part of January, 1886, when, for the first time in my life, I became acquainted with the doctrines of the "Mormon" Church. I was at that time visiting friends at a small village called Patricroft, near Manchester, the place where I passed my boyhood days. For several years I had been a devout member of the Wesleyan Methodist Church - was honest in my convictions, endeavoring to serve God to the best of my ability, according to the light and knowledge I possessed. One evening, in company with two near friends, I attended a Methodist prayer meeting, and on returning to the house of Mr. R., whom I was visiting, we were met by a gentleman with whom I had previously some little acquaintance, and he having been formerly a Methodist preacher, I still believed him to be engaged in that profession. In course of conversation, addressing my friends he said it would afford him much pleasure to be favored with an opportunity of spending an evening with them, for the purpose of pointing out the path in which God would have them walk. Knowing that my friends were devout Methodists, of unblemished character and good repute, and believing that we were all walking the narrow path that leads to the Father's presence, I felt somewhat indignant at what I then considered the strange remarks of Mr. N., for I well knew that he was acquainted with the fact that we were already professing Christians, attended Church regularly, and were taught by our ministers.

Before retiring to rest that evening, Mr. and Mrs. R. and I entered into conversation upon religious topics, and feeling a little curious at the remarks made by Mr. N., I made some inquiries respecting him, when, to my dismay and astonishment, I was informed that he had united himself to the "Mormon" Church, and was actively engaged propagating the doctrines and principles of "Mormonism." Having heard many scurrilous stories concerning the "Mormons," I was a little curious to learn, from an authoritative source, something concerning the faith and practice of this despised people. At first my friends hesitated to enlighten my mind, fearing that I might oppose, and not being members of the "Mormon" Church themselves, they desired to evade any opposition, or feelings that might arise in giving their views respecting the faith of the Latter-day Saints. Finally, however, they commenced to repeat to me the Articles of Faith, and never shall I forget the feeling that pervaded my whole system on that occasion. I had always been taught that the Latter-day Saints were a low, degraded, and immoral community, who gathered together to some remote part of the globe, that they might be exempted from the law, and thus be at liberty to practise all manner of abominations and crime, without the fear of any punishment. But the false impressions and the prejudices I had imbibed, fled before the light of truth and love, as the morning mists vanish before the rays of the rising sun. My soul was filled with ecstasy, as my friends talked to me upon the necessity of baptism for the remission of sins, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, the gifts and blessings promised to believers, and the organization of the Church of Christ - apostles and prophets being the officers. This kind of organization - a Church with apostles and prophets, which laid claim to all the gifts and blessings enjoyed by the primitive Christians, was what I had been seeking all my life.

If time and space would permit, I might relate many circumstances which transpired while earnesly endeavoring to serve God as a Methodist, that would prove how dissatisfied I was with the teachings of uninspired men, and how I longed to see the power of God made manifest as anciently. Feeling dissatisfied with the religions of to-day, (for although I was a member of the Methodist Church, I had wandered from place to place in hopes of obtaining satisfaction of mind,) often I had petitioned God to direct me into the sure path, and reveal unto me the whole truth; and now the light of truth had commenced to penetrate my soul, God was revealing unto me the things I had so earnestly sought after, and my heart was filled with joy inexpressible. On retiring to rest, I humbly knelt and petitioned God with more zeal and earnestness than ever before, to remove from my eyes the scales of darkness, and enable me to conform with the requirements necessary, in order to possess the knowledge promised to obedience. My mind was exercised to that extent, that sleep was almost impossible, and I lay awake for hours, meditating on the truths that had been taught me.

Next day was the Sabbath. I attended services at the Methodist Church, and never was it made more manifest unto me, than on this occasion, that learned divines were teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. Circumstances necessitating my return home, and feeling deeply concerned about what I had already learned respecting the faith of the Saints, and hungering and thirsting for more knowledge, I reluctantly bade my friends farewell, obtaining a promise that they would make application for some tracts, written by prominent Elders of the "Mormon" Church, and would mail them to my abode. A few days after my arrival home, my friends sent me a number of tracts, which I eagerly perused with intense interest, praying for the inspiration of the Spirit of God to assist me in understanding the things that I read. The more fervently I investigated, the more light and truth I received, and the more deeply grounded in my mind became the conviction that so-called "Mormonism" was none other than the true and everlasting Gospel, as taught in the New Testament. The following Sabbath I attended a meeting of the Saints, and heard the word of God as it fell from the mouths of His servants. The first speaker, who has since passed into the spirit world, spoke upon the organization of the Church of Christ, and the second discoursed upon the laws and ordinances necessary to membership in that Church. I had previously listened to many eloquent sermons, delivered by learned and talented men; but never before in all my life did I hear the Scriptures more clearly explained or the plan of salvation so plainly marked out, than by these humble men, to say nothing of the power that accompanied their words, which in very truth was sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing my heart to the very centre. At the close of the meeting, the last speaker approached me, asking how I had enjoyed the service, and, after a little conversation, invited me to accompany them to tea, and stay to the evening meeting. I did so, and the pleasant time we spent together will long be remembered; they were delighted at the opportunity of teaching me the Gospel, and I was overjoyed at the privilege of hearing its joyful sound. They related to me many of the experiences through which they had passed, the persecutions and trials endured by them for the Gospel's sake, and the slander and abuse heaped upon their heads by their once nearest friends - professed Christians - for accepting and clinging to the "Mormon" faith; all of which appealed to my reason as stronge evidences in favor of their honesty, and also of the divinity of the principles they had espoused.

In the evening I again attended meeting, which was similar to the one held in the fore part of the day, and I returned home with a firm conviction that I had found at last the strait and narrow way. But now came the test, whether or not I would obey the truths revealed to me, and take up my cross and follow Christ; my reputation was at stake; relatives and friends would all forsake me, and by one and all I should be despised. The sacrifice was indeed great, but I sought wisdom and strength from Him who has promised liberally to all who seek with humble and contrite hearts. Feeling thoroughly satisfied that I could only obtain a salvation through obedience to the Gospel as taught by the Latter-day Saints, I finally resolved to be baptized for the remission of my sins, and endeavor to keep the commandments of God, irrespective of the results that might follow. No sooner had I made this resolution, than I was taken seriously ill, being for several days confined to my bed; and my affliction was of such a violent nature, that had I not exercised faith, I should certainly have entertained strong doubts of my recovery. But having an assurance that God would restore me, and that this affliction was only one of the trying ordeals which He had ordained me to pass through, as a test of my faith, I bore testimony to my friends that God had a work for me to perform, and that I should recover, and ere long be a member of the "Mormon" Church.

Apparently, the assertion made that immediately on my recovery I should identify myself with the Saints, caused my friends much grief, and never shall I forget their pleadings with me to consider the step I was taking, asserting it was a delusion into which I had fallen. Several times my faith was sorely tried; Satan seemed to employ all the means in his power to weaken my faith, and prejudice my mind against the truths which I had so earnestly investigated. Those who should have been my best friends, and should have aided me in my search after truth, were the very instruments employed by the prince of darkness to turn me aside from the light that had dawned upon me; by their craft they sought to pervert the doctrines of Christ, and very frequently assured me that the Almighty had stricken me down, that I might have time for reflection, be led to see the folly of my ways, and be saved from the terrible sin of apostasy. In the midst of these trials, I prayed earnestly unto the Lord to spare my life, and restore me to perfect health, promising to dedicate my days to His service, if He would only grant my request. My prayer was heard, my request granted, and soon I was sufficiently recovered to be able to leave my bed; and although very weak, I attended Sunday services, and applied for baptism. On the following evening, I was initiated into the fold and family of Christ by baptism, Elder C. B. Orrock officiating. It must be remembered that I had not yet fully recovered from my sickness; but I bear testimony that in coming forth out of the water I was perfectly whole, which caused my heart to rejoice greatly, and the next day I followed by usual employment in the enjoyment of perfect health and strength, without any feelings of pain or distress. Three days later I attended a cottage meeting, held at the house of one of the members, and was confirmed a member of the Church by Elder Thomas Sleight, who promised me the Holy Ghost, and predicted many great blessings that should befall me, if but faithful to the covenants I had made with God. The power of God manifested at that meeting, will long be remembered by those present. When the servants of God laid their hands on my head, the Holy Ghost descended upon me in mighty power, and my whole being was suffused by a heavenly influence, such as I had never before felt, and a testimony was given to me that my sins were pardoned, and that God accepted me as His child. Not only was this heavenly influence enjoyed by myself, but all in the house felt the quickening power of the Spirit of God - priest and people alike rejoiced, and many wept for joy.

The news that I had embraced "Mormonism" soon became known to all my friends and acquaintances. One by one they separated themselves from my company, upbraiding me for the sin of apostasy, and ignoring my every appeal to them to investigate the claims made by the Latter-day Saints. Thus, my forebodings that becoming a "Mormon" would constitute an offense, sufficiently heinous in the eyes of my friends to exclude me from their company, were fully realized. The persecution received from my nearest and best friends, was a testimony unto me that I was a disciple of the Lord Jesus, and, like fuel, only added to the flame of zeal that had already commenced to kindle in my breast; and being filled with an earnest desire to impart unto others the light which God had revealed to me, I at once applied my mind to the obtaining of knowledge concerning the plan of salvation, as taught in the Bible, in order that I might be able to controvert false doctrine, and withstand the attacks of those who, by their vain wisdom and much learning, have perverted the oracles of God. In my pursuit of knowledge God blessed me greatly, and having committed to memory many passages of Scripture, I visited as many of my former friends as would receive me, and reasoned with them upon the doctrines of Christ, bearing testimony that God had spoken again from the heavens, and, in fulfillment of predictions made by the prophets, restored the everlasting and holy priesthood. Each day brought with it additional testimonies, that the principles and doctrines I had espoused were of God, and that their validity and truthfulness could not successfully be repudiated.

About two weeks after my conversion, I determined to visit the Methodist Church, of which I had formerly been a member, for the purpose of resigning my post as a teacher in the Sabbath school, and of requesting that my name be struck off the church record. Accordingly, on the Sabbath, I attended school, and interviewed the superintendent and my class leader. After a little conversation, I made known my errand, whereupon they asked the cause of my being desirous of separating myself from their church. This led to a discussion, and the manner in which the Spirit of God operated upon me I shall never forget. The gentlemen referred to were both learned, and had studied the Scriptures from their youth, one having been engaged in the ministry for many years. I was a youth of nineteen, of very limited education, and yet I was enabled to answer the questions they propounded in the manner to astonish and bewilder them! At first they endeavored to controvert the doctrines I advanced; but finding themselves unable to accomplish that arduous task, they finally gave way to a burst of passion, asserting many things in support of which they could not produce a particle of proof, saying that Joseph Smith was an impostor, and that his followers were a wicked and licentious people, and telling many fabulous stories of Joseph Smith's adventures in England. Before taking my departure, I reminded them of the fact that the Saints had ever been subjected to ill-usage and misrepresentation - that they who will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution, and that it was habitual for some men to resort to slander and abuse, when by fair argument they failed to establish their claim. I might relate many experiences through which I passed, of a similar nature to the above; but suffice it to say, that being acquainted with a multitude of professed Christians, it gave me opportunity to bear my testimony to many, and the more I discussed it with my former friends, the more clear to my mind became the fact that mankind have transgressed the laws of God, changed the ordinances, and broken the everlasting covenant, and are enveloped in gross darkness, and I praised God the more for being so mindful of me, as to open my eyes to discern His precious truths.

In answer to my prayers, I obtained the authority to preach the Gospel, and was ordained a priest in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, by Elder John Holt. I endeavored to magnify my holy calling whereunto God had called me, and was greatly blessed in so doing. I took untold pleasure in assisting to hold open-air meetings, and in rendering every possible assistance in spreading the everlasting Gospel. About this time the gifts of the Gospel were made manifest in a miraculous manner in the Branch of the Church of which I was then a member - the gift of tongues, the interpretation of tongues, the gift of prophecy, and the healing of the sick, were of common occurrence, God dividing these precious gifts among the Saints severally as He willed, according to their faithfulness. Thus my knowledge and testimony increased daily, and I rejoiced greatly in the realization of the promises made to me by the servants of God.

In October, 1887, I was ordained to the office of an Elder, by Elder W. G. Phillips. I was subsequently called into the ministry, and sent forth, like the disciples of old, to preach the Gospel without purse or scrip, encountering like difficulties, but rejoicing in the same hope, namely, that of eternal recompense. Nearly four years have now passed away since I identified myself with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and although I have encountered many hardships, and endured much persecution for righteousness' sake, it has been the happiest period of my life, and not all the wealth of this world could purchase the experience and knowledge obtained through humble obedience to the will of God.

Should this article, the experience of a humble youth, fall into the hands of any who are dissatisfied by the doctrines of men, and who desire to become acquainted with the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, I earnestly exhort them to read the above with an unprejudiced mind, and I bear testimony that as many as will follow my example, and do the will of the Father, shall, like me, obtain a knowledge and testimony from God, that He is a rewarder of all those who diligently seek him. "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."

Counsel for February

2012-02-01T07:04:00.000-05:00

FEBRUARY should be considered the month of preparation. If the weather permits spade the ground, lay off the gardens, make ready for onions, they may be sown in this month as well as in March and April. Prepare for asparagus by manure to coax it up early. A diligent hand upon a medium sized body accomplishes more than a lazy giant.

Tim's Open Letter to Evangelicals

2012-01-31T14:04:00.000-05:00

Tim, primary contributor to the excellent LDS & Evangelical Conversations blog, has recently provided a superb, thought-provoking post titled "An Open Letter to Fellow Evangelicals". It's the sort that I heartily recommend everyone read. Tim posits that, given the current state of LDS affairs, perhaps the time has come for a new Evangelical approach in which we "focus on explaining how and why we live out our faith", indeed "step[ping] up these messages at the expense of talking less about Joseph Smith", because - Tim contends - the Internet era has already resulted in the exposing of the "questions that threaten the LDS church". Tim concludes with the following lines:

We have a new mission. Let us recognize that our battle is not against Mormon flesh and blood but rather against Mormon powers and principalities. Begin your transition. It's time to be spiritual healers. It's time to be pastors. Let us no longer erect bulwarks against those lost to Mormonism. Let us now build bridges for those Mormonism has lost.

Now, of course this is specifically intra-Evangelicalism discourse; our LDS readers may not cotton to the way Tim phrases things, or the very concept of a mission of proselytism to Latter-day Saints at all. For my own part, yes, I do believe in the mission to reclaim Latter-day Saints for the fullness of the historic Christian faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints in former days and has enlivened and invigorated the ever-present church of Jesus Christ for millennia. And while I do think that a depth-analysis of traditional and nontraditional LDS teaching is requisite for this task, I also agree with Tim that there's a need to become at least as starkly pro-Jesus, pro-gospel, pro-orthodoxy, pro-Evangelicalism as to be a critic of whatever errors and faults one might find within the LDS variant on the Christian message and its practice. For more details, I once again encourage the reading of Tim's open letter.

Past and Future Existence

2012-01-30T03:26:00.001-05:00

The following article, theologically enlightening (but rather mean-spirited and ill-informed, if I may editorialize very briefly there for a moment), previously appeared as Orson Pratt, "Past and Future Existence", The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 28/46 (17 November 1866): 721-723.

There are but few persons, who have correct ideas, concerning any state of existence, except the present. They find themselves here; but where they came from, or whither they are going, they have but a faint idea. Indeed, the greater part of the millions of Christendom, do not believe in the Bible doctrine of pre-existence: they look upon the natural birth of man as the origin or commencement, not only of the body, but also of the spirit. They readily admit the pre-existence of the materials which enter into the composition of the body; but discard the idea of a pre-existing spirit either organized or disorganized. They suppose each individual spirit to be created from nothing at or about the time of the organization and birth of the infant tabernacle. That then, it is supposed, we awoke from nothing to consciousness, from non-existence to existence, from vacancy to substance, that thoughts and perceptions sprang into being, assumed identity, and began their career as movable intelligent souls. This unscriptural, and most absurd, and unreasonable doctrine originated in the brains of a corrupt Priesthood, and is unworthy of the consideration of any but lunatics and madmen.

It is strange, that men professedly wise, capable of reason, and common sense, could possibly work up their minds into a belief that human spirits are called into being from nothing at the average rate of about twenty every minute. How much more consistent is it to believe that the substance of our spirits, like the substance of our bodies, had a pre-existence; that both are eternal, and that not one particle of either ever sprang from nothing; that creation signifies organization of pre-existent materials, and not the production of these materials from nothing? The former is a Scriptural truth; the latter a vague, foolish, unphilosophical, absurd speculation of men who believed in an immaterial god "without body or parts," which is equivalent to no God. When will man burst the shell of his traditions, and have common sense! When will he turn from such disgusting absurdities to the word of God!

Man is not only ignorant of his pre-existence, but seems to have but a very imperfect idea of his future state. It is true, Christendom expect a future state of being, but have endeavored to make such a state, as shadowy, as unlike everything connected with real existence, as they could possibly imagine. Their heaven is a spiritual, immaterial world, "beyond the bounds of time and space," having no connection with time, no relation to space, no parts, no whole, nothing in common with matter. Their future being is immaterial, shapeless, bodiless, occupying no space, has nothing to do with duration, is destitute of all properties common to matter, possessing, like their imaginary god, neither "parts nor passions." Such is their own description of their imaginary heaven; such their avowed belief in regard to their future existence. The Devil could not possibly invent ideas more atheistical, than these. The worst forms of heathen divinities do not begin to compare with the absurdities of the sectarians' god: a heathen heaven is a place compared with the sectarian heaven, excluded from time and space: the heathens' idea of a future existence, though false, is incomparably better than an "immaterial existence," which is only another word for total annihilation.

It is, indeed, comforting to know whence we came, and have a correct understanding in regard to our future. This interesting and most important knowledge is only to be obtained by divine revelation. God has abundantly revealed these things that man might rejoice in them. There are no people upon the earth who have so great reason to rejoice as the Saints; for to them God has spoken, and plainly manifested much, concerning both the past and the future; and hence, they know what kind of an existence to pray for, what blessings to hope for, and where they shall receive their everlasting inheritance.

A Saint, who is one in deed and in truth, does not look for an immaterial heaven, but he expects a heaven with lands, houses, cities, vegetation, rivers, and animals; with thrones, temples, palaces, kings, princes, priests, and angels; with food, raiment, musical instruments, &c.; all of which are material. Indeed, the Saints' heaven is a redeemed, glorified, celestial, material creation, inhabited by glorious material beings, male and female, organized into families, embracing all the relationships of husbands and wives, parents and children, where sorrow, crying, pain, and death will be known no more. Or to speak still more definitely, this earth, when glorified, is the Saints' eternal heaven. On it they expect to live, with body, parts, and holy passions: on it they expect to move and have their being; to eat, drink, converse, worship, sing, play on musical instruments, engage in joyful, innocent, social amusements, visit neighboring towns and neighboring worlds: indeed, matter and its qualities and properties are the only beings or things with which they expect to associate. If they embrace the Father, they expect to embrace a glorified, immortal, spiritual, material Personage; if they embrace the Son, they expect to embrace a spiritual Being of material flesh and bones, whose image is in the likeness of the Father; if they enjoy the society of the Holy Ghost, they expect to behold a glorious spiritual Personage, a material body of spirit; if they associate with the spirits of men or angels, they expect to find them material.

Materiality is indelibly stamped upon the very heaven of heavens, upon all the eternal creations; it is the very essence of all existence. While an immaterial substance does not exist, in heaven, earth, or hell, and cannot even be conceived of, thought of, or known, as substance. The very idea never could have been originated, only in the wild wanderings, and vague hallucinations of disordered brains.

We smile at the absurdities incorporated in heathen mythology, and pity the poor weak minds which could be gulled with such superstitions; but we defy the whole race of modern Christendom to show from heathen ethics one feature so glaringly absurd, as the modern Christians' immaterial god, consisting of three persons "without body, parts, or passions." How one of these bodiless persons could have been crucified, is among the incomprehensible mysteries of sectarianism! How one of these persons, "without body or parts," could have been dead and buried, or could have arisen and ascended into heaven, is another most astounding mystery of sectarian theology!

Such are the absurdities incorporated in the ethics of nearly two hundred millions of human beings, calling themselves Christians. With such disgusting nonsense in their creeds, it is very difficult to persuade ones self that it is possible for them to be sincere: yet from the exertions which many make to sustain these monstrosities, it is evident that some of them are so lost in the depths of idolatry, that they really do believe in the absurdities above alluded to. It is a shame and disgrace from man, to think that any portions of his species have fallen so far below the fables of heathenism, as to render themselves so supremely ridiculous, and so apparently devoid of all glimmerings of reason or common sense.

It may have been a wonder to some, why the heathens have not sent forth missionaries, among the benighted nations of Christendom, to convert them. But it is evident, that the frightful disgusting picture of the modern Christians' creed, would have disheartened the most zealous among them, from undertaking so hopeless a task. There are none, perhaps, who would have courage and fortitude to attack so formidable a monster, unless he were armed, like the Latter-day Saints' missionaries, with divine authority from heaven. It is not to be expected, however, that even an angel from heaven, will arouse those who have been in such gross darkness, whose traditions have so long cherished the worship of a being "without parts."

But let the Saints bear with patience the gross ignorance of this degraded race: let them be filled with pity towards the deluded masses: let them seek by reason, by the word of God, by kindness and long-suffering, to reclaim as many as possible; or, at least, if they cannot lift them up out of the deep mire, to faithfully discharge the duties of Saints towards them, that the consequences of their false religions may be upon their own heads, and not on the heads of the children of the kingdom. Teach them, that in the great judgment day, they will learn to their sorrow, unless they repent, that eternal justice will be executed by a God who has passions, whose fury will come up in his face, and whose wrath will burn to the lowest hell, upon all the unrighteous and the ungodly. Teach them that he who sits upon the throne is not an inconceivable nonentity "without body or parts," but a glorious Personage, a mighty King, a wise Law-giver, a great Judge. Teach them that a future state is not an immaterial, dreamy, shadowy, existence, but a tangible, substantial, material reality, a heaven that has foundations, a world that has stability.

Questions and Answers with Orson Pratt

2012-01-28T02:10:00.000-05:00

The following is an interesting Q&A session printed in the Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 28/33 (18 August 1866): 516-519. The questions were all posed by an English Latter-day Saint named William Wolstenholme, and answers were provided by Orson Pratt.

Mr. William Wolstenholme, of Preston, has addressed fourteen questions to Elder O. Pratt, touching items of considerable interest in relation to doctrine, future events, &c., requesting answers through the medium of the STAR. The following are the questions with Elder Pratt's answers.

Question 1st. - "How does it happen that the Elders who have gone to different nations and different peoples, have not preached the Gospel to them in their own language, without learning the same?"

Answer. - One of the great objects with the gift of tongues, is to preach the Gospel to different nations in their own language. This gift, like all other gifts of the Spirit, is obtained by faith. When a servant of God is called to go to a foreign nation, he is not only to exercise faith enough to perform the journey, but when he arrives he is also to exercise faith to speak in a foreign tongue. Without faith and exertion, he could not properly obtain the gift of preaching, by the power of the Holy Ghost, even in his own tongue; much less, without mighty faith and great exertion or works, could he expect to speak by the inspiration of the Comforter in a foreign language. It is, however, an indisputable fact, that many of our missionaries, acquire this great gift, in so marvellous a manner, that within a very short period they find themselves preaching to large congregations in a foreign language. This often occurs to the astonishment of themselves, and to the astonishment of their hearers. Others, whose faith has been weak, have been longer: but in almost all cases the gift has been given, in an incredibly short time. I have heard young and timid Elders, who formerly were without experience in public speaking, testify that within a few weeks, after arriving among a people of another tongue, they have called upon God in fervent prayer, and ventured to arise before a congregation, and have been filled with the Holy Ghost to that degree, that they have spoken with ease and great fluency; words, before unknown to them, have been given at the very moment, and their tongues seemed to be operated upon by a power which could only have come from God. It is not to be expected that all will have the same faith; but it is an invariable rule, that God fulfils his promises, according to the faith of his people. Missionaries have been sent to almost all the principal nations of Europe: and in many cases the Elders arrived without purse or scrip among a strange people of a strange language: and as a testimony that God has been with them, they have succeeded in building up churches in their midst. The Lord has not only helped them to speak, but has confirmed the word by giving the Holy Ghost to the obedient, and by healing their sick. If Mr. Wolstenholme, will read section 85, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the book of Doctrine and Covenants, he will learn that the missionaries who are sent with this great latter-day message, are destined to "go forth unto the ends of the earth, unto the Gentiles first, and then behold, and lo, they shall turn unto the Jews; and then cometh the day when the arm of the Lord shall be revealed in power in convincing the nations, the heathen nations, the house of Joseph, of the Gospel of their salvation. For it shall come to pass in that day, that every man shall hear the fulness of the Gospel in his own tongue, and in his own language, through those who are ordained unto this power, by the administration of the Comforter, shed forth upon them, for the revelation of Jesus Christ." By this extract from modern revelation, it will be perceived that we do not look for the full manifestations of the Lord's power, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Although we now look for the blessings and signs, promised to believers, yet we know that there will be a manifold increase of these precious gifts and powers, when the day alluded to shall arrive. We are thankful to obtain blessings even in a small degree; and when we see these blessings increasing from year to year, in proportion to our faith and diligence, we are still more encouraged to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints, believing that as the gifts ceased gradually, and not all at once, in proportion to the decrease of faith, so they will be restored gradually in proportion to the increase of faith.

Question 2nd. - "What are we to understand by the saying of our Savior, John 10:1. 'He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber?' Does the door spoken of mean water baptism or our Savior?

Answer. - In the 7th verse, Jesus said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep." None can enter the sheepfold, through and by the authority of Jesus, only those who obey the whole plan as given by our Savior; and that plan embraces, true faith, true repentance, water baptism, and the baptism by fire and the Holy Ghost through the ministrations of an authorized servant, commissioned by revelation. Jesus is the only door, and the Gospel is the only means of entrance through the door.

Question 3rd. - "When will the second coming of our Savior take place, and the Millennium commence? And will the first resurrection immediately precede the Millennium?"

Answer. - Both ancient and modern revelations testify that the exact time of the second coming of Christ is unknown. The word of the Lord, given in March 1831, reads as follows: "Thus saith the Lord, for I am God, and have sent mine only begotten Son into the world for the redemption of the world, and have decreed that he that receiveth him shall be saved, and that he that receiveth him not shall be damned. And they have done unto the Son of Man even as they listed; and he has taken his power on the right hand of his glory, and now reigneth in the heavens, and will reign till he descends on the earth to put all enemies under his feet, which time is nigh at hand. - I, the Lord God, have spoken it; but the hour and the day no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor shall they know until he comes." Doctrine and Covenants, page 217. Although we are precluded from knowing the hour and day, yet we are not left in uncertainty in regard to the period or age. Again, let me refer you to a new revelation given in answer of the question, "What are we to understand by the sounding of the trumpets, mentioned in the 8th chapter of Revelations?" Answer - We are to understand that as God made the world in sixth days, and on the seventh day he finished his work, and sanctified it, and also formed man out of the dust of the earth; even so, in the beginning of the seventh thousand years will the Lord God sanctify the earth, and complete the salvation of man, and judge all things, and shall redeem all things, except that which he hath not put into his power, when he shall have sealed all things, unto the end of all things; and the sounding of the trumpets of the seven angels, are the preparing, and finishing of his work, in the beginning of the seventh thousand years; - the preparing of the way before the time of his coming." Pearl of Great Price, page 34. The seventh Millennium will commence at the beginning of the seventh thousand years; in the morning of this period the seven angels will sound. The first resurrection will take place soon after the first angel of the seven sounds: but the whole seven must sound before the preparations are complete; after which Jesus and his Saints will reign on the earth with power and great glory. But before this universal reign, Jesus will suddenly come to his temple upon mount Zion, and will be manifested in a cloud and flaming fire upon all the dwellings of Zion.

Question 4th. - "Will the Latter-day Saints return to Jackson county, Missouri, within ten or twelve years from this time?"

Answer. - I do not know the exact time. They will most certainly return and build a temple upon the consecrated spot in that county, before all the generation who were living in 1832, have passed away.

Question 5th. - "Will a good Methodist, or Roman Catholic, or devotee of the Church of England, who have been privileged to live, where the Gospel, as taught by the Latter-day Saints, is preached from Sabbath to Sabbath, ever attain to a telestial salvation, and if they do, will they attain to any higher state or kingdom and afterwards die?"

Answer. - All who reject the everlasting Gospel, now sent forth for the last time, will be thrust down to hell, to suffer the wrath of Almighty God, in the society of the Devil and his angels, and there remain until the last resurrection, which will take place at or near the time of the passing away of the earth; when, if they repent, they can be saved in a telestial kingdom: whether they will, in the lapse of ages, ever attain to a higher kingdom is not revealed: but it is revealed that "where God and Christ are, they cannot come worlds without end."

Question 6. - "When will the Government of the United States be changed from a human to a divine Theocracy."

Answer. - Never.

Question 7th. - "How is it that the American war has terminated, without any or all of the nations being drawn into it? How is it that Great Britain has not been called by the Southern States to assist them against the Northern States? And how is it that the slaves have not arise en mass in accordance with the revelation and prophecy given to Joseph Smith? For there are no slaves in America now, the Civil Rights Bill having passed both houses of Congress."

Answer. - First, there is nothing in the revelation, alluded to, which either indicates or declares that all nations, or even one foreign nation should be drawn into the American war. Second, The Southern States did, by their representatives sent to England expressly for the purpose, call most earnestly upon Great Britain to assist them against the North: but Great Britain did not yield to their entreaties. Third, There is no revelation that the slaves should arise "en mass;" but it reads thus: "And it shall come to pass, after many days, slaves shall rise up against their masters, who shall be marshalled and disciplined for war." Before the termination of the American war, the North brought into the field on Southern soil about one hundred thousand of marshalled and disciplined slaves to fight against their masters. But the greatest terrors of the American Republic are yet to come. And the black race who one third of a century ago, were called slaves in the prophecy, in contradistinction to their masters the white race, will "after many days" inaugurate a scene of general massacre far more horrible than anything that has yet occurred. Moreover, the Lord gave us a sign that we might know the beginnings of a war which would eventually become universal. Or as the revelation expressed it: "The days will come that war will be poured out upon all nations, beginning at that place," meaning South Carolina mentioned in the previous sentence. England is mentioned by name as being one of the participators in the general calamity. The days will come when every jot and tittle of this great modern revelation will be fulfilled; when Zion, in America, will be the only people upon all the face of the earth dwelling in peace. For further information on this subject, you are referred to an article in the 32nd No. of the present Vol. of the STAR, entitled "THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE LATTER-DAY WARS."

Question 8th. - "Will the wicked be destroyed at our Savior's second coming, and will none but those who obey and believe the true Gospel live and reign with our Savior during the Millennium?"

Answer. - "For behold the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, and it shall leave them neither root nor branch." (Malachi 4:1.) "And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power: when he shall come to be glorified in his Saints." (2 Thess 1:7, 8, 9 and 10.)

Question 9th. - "Will Zion and Jerusalem both be built up between this time and the expiration of the Millennium? Will both be caught up from the earth, while the earth is cleansed by fire?"

Answer. - Both cities will be commenced before the coming of Christ; but how far they will be finished when he comes is not revealed. They may receive some additions during the thousand years. Before the earth passes away by fire, both cities will be caught up. For further particulars see my pamphlet entitled "New Jerusalem," also the Book of Ether.

Question 10th. - "What is the price of your new work on Equations?"

Answer. - 8 shillings.

Question 11th. - "What is meant by the second death, recorded in the Revelations of St. John?"

Answer. - To answer this, I will refer you to a new revelation, which reads thus: "Wherefore, it came to pass that the devil tempted Adam, and he partook the forbidden fruit and transgressed the commandment, wherein he became subject to the will of the devil, because he yielded unto temptation. Wherefore, I the Lord God caused that he should be cast out from the garden of Eden, from my presence, because of his transgression, wherein he became spiritually dead, which is the first death, even that same death which is the last death, which is spiritual, which shall be pronounced upon the wicked, when I shall say - Depart ye cursed." Doctrine and Covenants, page 116. Also see Book of Alma, chap. 9: par. 3.

The 12th question, as to whether any one can be saved without obeying the ordinances of the Gospel, is so clearly answered in all our writings, that it would seem almost superfluous to give a repetition of the doctrine.

Question 13th. - "When will the great Pacific railway through Salt Lake City be completed?"

Answer. - It is to be hoped that it will be finished within four or five years. Perhaps sooner. When done, it will greatly facilitate the gathering of the Saints, and place it within their power to emigrate to their mountain home, at all seasons of the year.

In answer to Question 14th, in relation to a prophecy concerning a seven years' famine, we would say that we have never been made acquainted with the supposed prophecy. That there will be great and terrible famines, during the present dispensation, is most certainly true. And it becomes all Saints to humbly incline their hearts to receive the warning message, and depart out from among the wicked, if they would escape the approaching calamities, and be made partakers of the great blessings of this last dispensation.

Lorenzo Snow on the Grand Destiny of Man

2012-01-25T14:05:00.000-05:00

The following discourse is a significant message delivered by Lorenzo Snow (fifth president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) during his presidency (1898-1901), specifically at the Mill Creek Ward Meeting House on 14 July 1901. It was printed as "The Grand Destiny of Man", Deseret Evening News (20 July 1901): 22; I here omit an assortment of newspaper-style subheadings as unnecessary. The significance lies partly in setting forth and expounding the 'Lorenzo Snow couplet', though this is not the first published source to have done so.¹

Your Bishop, brethren and sisters, wishes me to address you with a short time, and I have pleasure in answering his wishes.

Over sixty years ago I saw for the first time Joseph Smith, the Prophet of the Lord. He was holding a meeting in the town of Hiram. He was about three miles from where I was born and brought up. He was standing by a door and talking to an audience of about 250 persons under a bowery. I was about eighteen years of age. I had heard something about the "Mormon" Prophet, I felt some anxiety to see him and judge for myself, as he was generally believed to be a false prophet. My mother and my two sisters (one of whom was Eliza R. Snow) received the principles of "Mormonism" and were baptized. At the time I refer to, Joseph Smith was not what would be called a fluent speaker. He simply bore his testimony to what the Lord had manifested to him, to the dispensation of the Gospel which had been committed to him, and to the authority that he possessed. As I looked upon him and listened, I thought to myself that a man bearing such a wonderful testimony as he did, and having such a countenance as he possessed, could hardly be a false prophet. He certainly could not have been deceived, it seemed to me, and if he was a deceiver he was deceiving the people knowingly; for when he testified that he had had a conversation with Jesus, the Son of God, and had talked with Him personally, as Moses is said to have talked with God upon Mount Sinai, and that he had also heard the voice of the Father, he was telling something that he either knew to be false or positively true. I was not at that time what might be called a religious boy, but I was interested in what I saw and heard there. However, being busy in other directions, it passed measurably out of my mind. Some two years and a half later, business called me to Kirtland. My two sisters had been there for some time, and I made my home with them. There I became perfectly acquainted with Joseph Smith, the Prophet. I sat at his table and had a number of conversations with him. I also became somewhat intimate with his father. The first time I saw Father Smith he was holding a patriarchal blessing meeting, at which there were twelve or fifteen persons present. I was then searching to know whether there was many truth in "Mormonism." I had never experienced anything supernatural, with one slight exception, and I did not know that anything supernatural had ever been exhibited among the children of men. I had heard Methodists, Presbyterians and others relate their experiences, but I thought I could attribute all they said to natural causes. It was hard to me to be convinced that there could be such extraordinary manifestations as I saw exhibited in visiting the temple and listening to the testimonies of persons and hearing the extraordinary accounts of what the Lord had manifested to them. Talking with President Joseph Smith, and being with him and with his father, I could not help but believe that there was something more than common in what was called "Mormonism."

At this meeting that Father Smith held I listened with astonishment to him telling the brethren and sisters their parentage, their lineage, and other things which I could not help but believe he knew nothing about, save as the Spirit manifested them unto him. After he got through with this meeting, I was introduced to him, and in the course of the conversation he remarked, "Why, Brother Snow [he called me Brother Snow, although I had not been baptized, and did not know that I ever would be], do not worry; I discover that you are trying to understand the principles of Mormonism." I replied that that was the object I had in view. "Well," said he, "do not worry, but pray to the Lord and satisfy yourself; study the matter over, compare the scriptures with what we are teaching; talk with the brethren that you are acquainted with, and after a time you will be convinced that "Mormonism" is of God, and you will be baptized, and you will become as great as you will want to be - as great as God Himself, and you cannot wish to be greater." Of course, such expressions as those I could not understand. I thought it was wonderful that a man professing what he did should talk in that way. Anyone seeing old Father Smith as he then appeared and having read of old Father Abraham in the scriptures, would be apt to think that Father Smith looked a good deal like Abraham did; at least, that is what I thought. I do not know that any man among the Saints was more loved than Father Smith; and when anyone was seriously sick Father Smith would be called for, whether it was night or day. He was as noble and generous a man as I have ever seen.

One Sunday the Prophet Joseph arose in the pulpit just before the meeting closed and said, "A young man by the name of Lorenzo Snow wishes to be baptized, and Brother John Boynton (who was then one of the Twelve Apostles) will baptize him." I was baptized in the stream that ran through Kirtland, and hands were laid upon me by Hyrum Smith and some others. I received no special manifestation at that time, but I was perfectly satisfied that I had done what was wisdom for me to do under the circumstances. I had studied the scriptures and was convinced that the Gospel as preached by the Latter-day Saints was in accordance with that taught by the Son of God and by His Apostles in former days. A peaceable, good spirit came upon me that I had never experienced before, and I felt satisfied at the sacrifice I had made. Since then I have been ashamed to call it a sacrifice, but at that time it was a sacrifice to me, because I could see that it would change my whole future and perhaps destroy all my worldly prospects and aspirations, besides being a great disappointment to my relatives and friends.

About two weeks after that, Elder Sherwood, at that time one of the right hand men of the Prophet's, said to me, "Brother Snow, have you received the Holy Ghost since you were baptized?" That question struck me with almost consternation. The fact was, while I had received all I had needed perhaps, I had not received that which I had anticipated; and after Brother Sherwood put this question to me I felt disatisfied, not with what I had done, but with myself. With that feeling I retired in the evening to a place where I had been accustomed to offer my devotions to the Lord. I knelt down under the shade of a tree, and immediately I heard a noise over my head like the rustle of silken garments, and there descended upon me the Spirit and power of God. That will never be erased from my memory as long as memory endures. It came upon me and enveloped my whole system, and I received a perfect knowledge that there was a God, that Jesus, who died upon Calvary, was His Son, and that Joseph the Prophet had received the authority which he professed to have. The satisfaction and the glory of that manifestation no language can express! I returned to my lodgings. I could now testify to the whole world that I knew, by positive knowledge, that the Gospel of the Son of God had been restored, and that Joseph was a Prophet of God, authorized to speak in His name, just as Noah was in his day.

I do not remember ever having related these incidents before in a public meeting as I now tell them to you, but I felt, from the remarks made by Brother Winter, that it would be a good opportunity for me to testify something in regard to my first experience in connection with this holy Gospel. I received these truths with an open heart, and I was determined not to rest there. I was then attending a high school in the temple at Kirtland, and preparing myself for some eastern college or university. A professor by the name of Haws was teaching us, and President Woodruff and other brethren attended this school. I began to be a little worried in my mind whether, after having received this wonderful knowledge, it was proper for me to remain without testifying in reference to it. Young men who had been sent out upon missions were returning and testifying of the blessings that had attended them in their traveling without purse or scrip in Ohio and other places, and I began to think that, instead of preparing myself for an eastern college or university, I ought to start out and bear testimony to what the Lord had so fully given me a knowledge of. At the same time I did not like to give up my prospects of an education, because I had had it in mind for a long time, and I then had an opportunity and the means to accomplish it. I concluded to go for advice to President Rigdon, who was then President Joseph Smith's first counselor, and with whom I had been acquainted before he joined the "Mormons," when he was a Campbellite and used to preach in my father's neighborhood. I told him what I wanted, and he said, "Brother Snow, I would not give anyone else such counsel as I feel to give you, under the circumstances. If I were in your place, I would go on with my intentions and get an education." That was just the very thing I wanted him to say, and it pleased me. I was contented for a time; but in the winter season, hearing these young Elders testify of their success in preaching the Gospel, I began to think about it still more. The Lord had given me a knowledge that He was coming upon the earth, and that there was a preparation necessary to be made; He had given me all that I had asked for, and more; for the baptism which I received, of the Holy Ghost and the perfect knowledge then given to me was more real and convincing than my immersion in the cold water; and I felt that there was a responsibility resting upon me. So I shut up my books, laid my Latin and Greek aside, and I have never seen them since. I started out without purse and scrip, and under the circumstances that was about as great a sacrifice as I have ever made. I had not been accustomed to depend upon anybody for food or shelter. If I were going off any distance, my father would make sure that I started out with plenty of money for my expenses. And now, to go out and ask for something to eat and for a place to lay my head, was very trying to me, it being so different to my training.

I remember my experience the first night after I started out. About twenty miles from Kirtland I stopped at my aunt's. She was a Presbyterian, a very wealthy woman, and a woman of considerable experience. I was telling her that I expected to be treated like other Elders, turned out of doors, etc., and she said, "Lorenzo, I don't believe a word of that. They will know you are an honest man, and you will not be turned out." "Well," I replied, "I do not expect to be treated any better than my brethren." - and I was not. After leaving my aunt that night, I walked several miles, and as the sun was going down I thought it was about time to make an experiment and ask for some place in which to stop. I did so, and I shall never forget the house - where it stood, its distance from the road, the picket fence, and the gate that I went through. I walked up to the house, knocked, and was bidden to come in. A gentleman and his wife were there, and I told them that I was a "Mormon" Elder, travelling without purse or scrip, and would be very much obliged if I could get a night's lodging. They made some kind of an excuse. I told them I was not particular; the privilege to lie down on the floor with a blanket would suit me. But no; they did not want to keep me. Well, I had a little more courage when I came to the next house, but was met with the same objection. So it went on until I got to the ninth house, where I got a night's lodging, but had to leave without breakfast. The next day or two I arrived at one of my aunt's, and preached there for the first time in my life. I was quite bashful then, and, not having spoken in public before, it was a very difficult thing for me to get up there and preach to my kindred and the neighbors who were called in. I remember that I prayed nearly all day preceding the night I was to speak. I went out by myself and asked the Lord to give me something to say. My aunt told me afterwards that she almost trembled when she saw me getting up to speak; but I opened my mouth, and what I said I never did know, but my aunt said I spoke fine for three-quarters of an hour. I held another meeting the next night, and the night after that I was invited to speak in the Medina court house by the party who had it in charge. After I got through speaking there a gentleman came to me and said, "Now, Elder Snow, I am a much older man than you. You are a young man, just starting out, I see, to be a minister. I want to give you a little counsel. If you continue to talk as loud as you talked tonight, in six months you will be taken to the cemetery." I thanked him very much and told him that I would try and benefit by his counsel. Then I thought I owed a duty to my uncles and aunts and my schoolmates, and they let me have the school house in which to preach to them. The house was nearly filled by my grandfather, my uncles and aunts, and a numerous lot of cousins. I thought I was going to convert them all, but after I got through talking and bearing testimony, all I could get from them was, "Well, Lorenzo is an honest boy, but he is deceived." Then I got the town house in the place where I was born, and preached there, as well as in a Presbyterian meeting house. The result of it all was, I baptized a few, very few, of my classmates.

The first time I ever attempted to speak was at one of Father Smith's evening testimony meetings, at which there were probably twenty or twenty-five brethren and sisters present. Father Smith was an exceedingly kind and gentle old soul, and he would beg the brethren and sisters to get up and speak. He would not want the meeting dismissed until every one had spoken. He would say in a very kindly spirit, "Now brother (or sister) you must get up and say something, no matter how little, or if you don't you will be sorry when you leave, and I am afraid you will lose the Spirit." But I did not like to get up, I was so bashful and diffident; nevertheless I could not bear the idea of having the meeting dismissed without making the attempt; so when nearly all had spoken I got up, and everything I could think of to say was said in about one minute.

I am telling you these things so that if any of you can derive any benefit from my inexperience, I want you to have it. We were talking here this morning about President Snow being a Prophet, and creating almost a furore among the children to hear a Prophet, and I imagined that when I got up they would expect to hear something extraordinary, but I told them that they would probably hear no more than they had heard before. I tell you these things, brethren and sisters, that none of you need be discouraged. You that are members of the Young Men's and Young Ladies' Mutual Improvement associations, do not be afraid to get up and speak; you cannot do any worse than the President of the Church has done; you cannot make yourselves any less than he has done, not only once, but several times. But there is one thing to say in this connection: When the Lord gave me the revelation that I have mentioned, I made up my mind that I would do my duty, and that has been my guide through life.

Now, I have told you what Father Smith said to me, that I should become as great as I could want to be, even as great as God Himself. About two years and a half after, in Nauvoo, I asked Elder Sherwood to explain a certain passage of scripture, and while he was endeavoring to give an explanation the Spirit of God fell upon me to a marked extent, and the Lord revealed to me, just as plainly as the sun at noonday, this principle, which I put into a couplet:

As man now is, God once was;
As God now is, man may be.

That fulfilled Father Smith's declaration. Nothing was ever revealed more distinctly than that was to me. Of course, now that it is so well known it may not appear such a wonderful manifestation, but when I received it, the knowledge was marvelous to me. This principle, in substance, is found also in the scriptures. The Lord said to John, as recorded in the third chapter of his Revelation:

"To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father on His throne."

Have you ever heard the ministers of the day preach a doctrine of that kind? They read it, but do not believe it. Paul says in his second epistle to the Corinthians, 12th chapter:

"I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
And I knew such a man, (whether in the body or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)
How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter."

This same Paul, writing to the Philippians, says:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."

Do we ever hear ministers try to explain that? But these things are undoubtedly clear to your minds. I say to you sisters, your husbands, if they are faithful, will be Gods in eternity. After we have passed through the various ordeals of life and go to the other life, where our Father dwells, even the God of heaven, the promise is that we shall be like Him. The Apostle John says:

"Beloved, now we are the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him."

As an illustration, here is an infant on its mother's breast. It is without power or knowledge to feed and clothe itself. It is so helpless that it has to be fed by its mother. But see its possibilities! This infant has a father and a mother, though it knows scarcely anything about them; and when it gets to be quite a little boy it does not know much about them. Who is its father? Who is its mother? Why, its father is an emperor, its mother is an empress, and they sit upon a throne, governing an empire. This little infant will some day, in all probability, sit upon his father's throne, and govern and control the empire, just as King Edward of England now sits upon the throne of his mother. We should have this in mind; for we are the sons of God, as much so and more, if possible, than we are the sons of our earthly fathers. You sisters, I suppose, have read that poem which my sister composed years ago, and which is sung quite frequently now in our meetings. It tells us that we have not only a Father in "that high and glorious place," but that we have a Mother too: and you will become as great as your Mother, if you are faithful.

Wives, be faithful to your husbands. I know you have to put up with many unpleasant things, and your husbands have to put up with some things as well. Doubtless you are sometimes tried by your husbands, on account perhaps of the ignorance of your husbands, or perchance at times because of your own ignorance. I wonder if any of my sisters whom I am now addressing ever saw a time when they wished they had a better husband and perhaps entertained the idea of getting a divorce. I tell you how I used to do when I was President of the Boxelder Stake of Zion. Once in a while a woman would come to me with the information that she had been abused by her husbands and she wanted a bill of divorce. What has your husband done? I would ask. Well, he had done such and such things. Have you ever done wrong? said I. Well, she thought perhaps she might have done wrong sometimes. "Have you ever prayed that your husbands might be a better man?" She did not know that she had prayed for him very hard, because at times he had been so abusive that she could scarcely exercise much faith in that direction. "Well," said I, "you go home and think about it; see if you have not been unwise sometimes and offended your husband; and go into a secret place and pray for him." I had at that time some very nice apples growing in an orchard which I had planted in an early day. One tree especially yielded some choice red apples, and I would pick six apples from that tree and give them to her, three for herself and three for her husband, and I would ask her to be sure and give him those three apples without saying that I gave them to her for that purpose. "Then," I said to her, "if things do not get better, in about two or three months come to me again and I will see what I can do for you." Well, the apples I gave and what I said to her accomplished the object. Sisters, I do not say but that your husbands are bad - just as bad as you are, and probably some of them are worse; but, never mind; try to endure the unpleasantnesses which arise at times, and when you meet each other in the next life you will feel glad that you put up with those things. To the husbands, I say: Many of you do not value your wives as you should - unless you are different from any audience of this size that I have ever had before me. Be kind to them. When they go out to meeting, you carry the baby at least half the time. When it needs rocking, and you have not much to do, rock it. Be kind when sometimes you have to make a little sacrifice to do so: feel kind anyway, no matter what the sacrifice.

I wonder if there are any bachelors in this audience. Now, when a young man is twenty-one years of age he ought to get married; and if he does not get married, let the Bishop or the President of the Stake send me his name, and we will send him on a mission for two or three years. On the other hand, if he gets married when he is twenty-one, and he happens to be called to go on a mission, just let me know and we will give him the privilege of staying at home for one year. That is what they did in ancient Israel, and Israel did just right in some things. You will find this provision recorded in the 24th chapter of Deuteronomy:

"When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken."

I think we ought to be as liberal as the old Israelites were.

Now, God bless you, my brethren and sisters. I am pleased that your Bishop was determined I should come to see you. He came to my office three or four times to remind me that I was to come today; and I have come, and have talked to you as I have, and I trust I have done you no harm. God bless you. Amen.

¹ Lorenzo Snow's autobiographical writings, in Eliza R. Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, One of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret News, 1884), 46-47: "I here record a circumstance which occurred a short time previous - one which has been riveted on my memory, never to be erased, so extraordinary was the manifestation. At the time, I was at the house of Elder H. G. Sherwood; he was endeavoring to explain the parable of our Savior, when speaking of the husbandman who hired servants and sent them forth at different hours of the day to labor in his vineyard. While listening attentively to his explanation, the Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me - the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun at noonday, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which expresses the revelation, as it was shown to me, and explains Father Smith's dark saying to me at a blessing meeting in the Kirtland Temple, prior to my baptism, as previously mentioned in my first interview with the Patriarch. 'As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be.' I felt this to be a sacred communication, which I related to no one except my sister Eliza, until I reached England, when in a confidential private conversation with President Brigham Young, in Manchester, I related to him this extraordinary manifestation."

Come, Come Ye Saints

2012-01-23T17:31:00.005-05:00

One of my favorite LDS-authored hymns is William Clayton's 1846 composition "Come, Come Ye Saints" (initially titled "All is Well"), written en route from Nauvoo to Utah. The following, I think, is one of the better performances available on YouTube, since the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rendition is too... choir-y... for my taste:

Personally, I think it's beautiful, both musically and lyrically. (And have I mentioned that I'm a total sucker for the word "wend"?) It's also one of the few LDS hymns that's been adapted and adopted by Protestants. A while back, a woman named Avis B. Christiansen modified the third verse slightly to make it more suitable for Protestant audiences; I'm told that it's appeared in a United Church of Christ hymnal.

This past week, I've spent an inordinate amount of time at the headquarters of my denomination, going through a Pastoral Assessment Center (which went well, with the result that they'll be recommending that the conference approve me as a candidate for the ordination process; those interested may feel free to read a trial evangelistic sermon I preached while there). While there, I had a chance to look at the most recent hymnal we've published, The Singing Church, which my own congregation has never used but which, apparently, my best friend's church does. Somewhat to my surprise, I found that we've got "Come, Come Ye Saints" in there, in Christiansen's adaptation. Small world!

Zion's Freedom: An 1889 LDS Poem

2012-01-17T09:06:00.002-05:00

The following poem by T. W. Brookbank is taken from The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 51/49 (9 December 1889): 784. The historical context, I'd surmise, is the legal repression that the Latter-day Saints faced for their continued violations of the anti-polygamy laws of the day, as warranted by the Edmunds Act of 1882 and later the Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887; this state of affairs reached a turning point when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints publicly renounced polygamy in the Manifesto of 1890, though continuing to practice it covertly until this was exposed, requiring a Second Manifesto (1904).

Christ the Lord will succor Zion -
King of mighty Kings is He -
'Tis His arm the Saints rely on.
For their promised victory:
Gentile sway shall soon be broken;
Haughty foes before Him flee;
For this word our God hath spoken,
"Zion's people shall be free."
Then, O foemen, bind your chains,
Saints of God despise their pains,
Nor can death their souls appall;
And your tribes ere long shall see
Dearest Zion strong and free;
High enthroned above you all.

Though the Saints you hail to prison,
Boast not rashly in your pride;
Never yet have there arisen
Tyrant hopes no ills betide:
Zion's armies do surround her,
Marshalled there from heavens wide,
And in their glory they will found her,
When her sons are fully tried.
Then, O foemen, build your jails,
Not one hero spirit quails,
Freedom's hosts you'll ne'er subdue;
But your tribes ere long shall see
Dearest Zion strong and free,
And enthroned in glory too.

Spoil our rights by charter granted;
Plunder consecrated gains;
Breathe out war, where now implanted,
Smiling peace so sweetly reigns;
Tear protection from the mother;
Seize our homes and fertile plains;
Zion's hopes you cannot smother,
E'en when bound in felons' chains.
Then, O foemen, fill ye up
Direst woe's most bittter cup,
You shall drink its dregs at last;
While the Saints in Zion free
Shall outspread from sea to sea;
Glorified by troubles past.

You may safely hunt the lion
When no lion is in view;
But your safety don't rely on
When the lion is hunting you;
Thus you war against Jehovah,
And you wage it fiercely, too;
But before your days are over,
He will wage a war with you.
Then, O foemen, fill ye up
Direst woe's most bitter cup;
You shall drink its dregs at last;
While the Saints in Zion free,
Shall outspread from sea to sea;
Glorified by troubles past.

Adam as Father and God: An 1853 LDS Article

2012-01-14T20:49:00.003-05:00

The following article appeared as an editorial (during the editorship of Samuel W. Richards) in The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 15/50 (10 December 1853): 801-804. I feature it here as an item of historical interest, since this piece has gotten a slight bit less attention than some other 'Adam-God' statements of the early 1850s, and at any rate I think it good that such statements be read in their fuller literary context. Note that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer wholly endorses the theology here espoused.¹ The article that follows is a reaction to the pushback and surprise that was felt by some readers about some things printed two issues previously; those items were a discourse by Brigham Young in which he expounded his 'Adam-God' thesis,² and an editorial note to the effect that the Saints must remember to pay close attention to these latest messages received through the Lord's appointed servants.³ All inserts in square brackets are my own for reference; 2 Nephi 2 as a whole is important background on the LDS perception of the Eden narrative and the story of the Fall, and also D&C 27:11 for an identification of Adam, Michael, and the Ancient of Days.

Adam, the Father and God of the Human Family

The above sentiment appeared in Star No. 48, a little to the surprise of some of its readers; and while the sentiment may have appeared blasphemous to the ignorant, it has no doubt given rise to some serious reflections with the more candid and comprehensive mind. A few reasonable and Scriptural ideas upon this subject may be profitable at the present time.

Then Adam is really God! And why not? If there are Lords many and Gods many [cf. 1 Corinthians 8:5], as the Scriptures inform us, why should not our Father Adam be one of them? Did he not prove himself as worthy of that high appellation as any other being that ever lived upon the earth? Certainly he did, so far as history informs us, unless we can except the Son of God. We have no account in Scripture that Adam ever wilfully transgressed, when we consider him independent of the woman. The Apostle informs us distinctly that the woman was in the transgression, being deceived, but Adam was not deceived [1 Timothy 2:14]. Adam fell, but his fall became a matter of necessity after the woman had transgressed. Her punishment was banishment from the Garden, and Adam was necessitated to fall, and go with her, in order to obey the first great command given unto them - to multiply and replenish the earth [Genesis 1:28]; or, in the language of the Prophet Lehi, "Adam fell that men might be." [2 Nephi 2:15] The fall of Adam, therefore, was virtually required at his hands, that he might keep the first great command, and that the purposes of God might not fail, while at the same time the justice of God might be made manifest in the punishment incurred by the transgression of the woman, for whom the man is ever held responsible in the government of God.

The Scriptures inform us that Christ was as a lamb slain from before the foundation of the world [Revelation 13:8]. If, therefore, the plan of salvation was matured before the foundation of the world, and Jesus was ordained to come into the world, and die at the time appointed, in order to perfect that plan, we must of necessity conclude that the plan of the fall was also matured in the councils of eternity, and that it was as necessary for the exalting and perfecting of intelligences, as the redemption. Without it they could not have known good and evil here, and without knowing good and evil they could not become Gods, neither could their children. No wonder the woman was tempted when it was said unto her - "Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." [Genesis 3:5] No wonder Father Adam fell, and accompanied the woman, sharing in all the miseries of the curse, that he might be the father of an innumerable race of beings who would be capable of becoming Gods.

With these considerations before us, we can begin to see how it is that we are under obligations to our father Adam, as to a God. He endured the sufferings and the curse that we might be; and we are, that we might become Gods. Through him the justice of God was made manifest. Jesus came into the world, endured, and suffered, to perfect our advantages for becoming Gods, and through him the mercy of God abounded. By the first man, Adam, came death, the triumph of evil; and by the second, came life everlasting, the triumph of good [cf. Romans 5:17]. Each was necessary in the order he appeared; if the first Adam had not performed his part, the second could not have had his work to do. Both acted the part assigned to them, in a most God-like manner, and the Great Eloheim accepted the work at their hands as His own, "for by the power of my Spirit created I them; yea, all things, both spiritual and temporal: firstly, spiritual - secondly, temporal, which is the beginning of my work; and again, firstly, temporal - and secondly, spiritual, which is the last of my work." [D&C 29:31-32] Thus the great I AM owns all things - the temporal and the spiritual, the justice and the mercy, to be His own work. Then why may not Adam be a God, as well as any of his sons, inasmuch as he performed the work to which the Great Eloheim appointed him?

In ancient times they were called Gods unto whom the word of God came [John 10:35], because of which Moses became a God unto Pharoah. The Almighty was not so jealous of His Godly title but that He could say to Moses - "See, I have made thee a God to Pharoah." [Exodus 7:1] And if John's saying be true, God has purposed to make him that overcometh, a pillar in the temple of God, and to "write upon him the name of my God." [Revelation 3:12] "His name shall be in their foreheads." [Revelation 14:1]

This is the hope of all Saints who have a just conception of the future; and why should we not be willing for father Adam to inherit all things, as well as for ourselves? He is the first, the Father of all the human family, and his glory will be above all, for he will be God over all, necessarily, standing as he will through all eternity at the head of those who are the redeemed of his great family. Though all the sons should, through their faithfulness, become Gods, they would still know that the Son was not greater than the Father.

Were we to trace this subject in all its bearings, we should find the principles of the Godhead planted in every righteous and well-organized family upon the earth, and that they only require cultivation to cause their expansion and development to be equal to anything we can now conceive of as adding power and glory to the God of all worlds. The Great Eloheim rules over all worlds. He is God over them, because of His right and power to rule, govern, and control. The exercise of this power is a natural right in the order of Priesthood, which belongs to every Patriarch, or Father, in the human family, so long as he rules subordinately to the laws of Heaven. According to the order of that God by whom we are ruled, a man is not only permitted to hold full jurisdiction over his own family, but he is held responsible for any violation, by them, of the revealed will of Heaven. A man that controls a work, is the only one that can be held responsible for that work. It would be most unjust to require responsibility where there is no power to govern and control. Every man who has a family, and power to control them, is exercising the rights and power of a God, though it may be in a very small capacity. There are two grand principles, by virtue of which all intelligent beings have a legitimate right to govern and hold dominion; these are, by begetting children from their own loins, and by winning the hearts of others to voluntarily desire their righteous exercise of power extended over them. These constitute a sure foundation for an eternal throne - a kingdom as perpetual as God's. No usurped power, to be maintained by the shedding of blood, is connected with such a government. It is upon this foundation that the throne of Michael is established as Father, Patriarch, God; and it is for all his children who come into this world, to learn and fully understand the eternity of that relationship.

Could we view our first Parent in his true position, we should find him acting in a similar capacity to the whole family of man, as each father does to his individual family, controlling, at his pleasure, all things which relate to the great object of their being - their exaltation to thrones and Godlike powers. We can conceive, from Scripture, principle, and analogy, that Adam's watch-care is ever over mankind; that by his own approbation and direction Gospel dispensations have been revealed from heaven to earth in different ages of the world; that he was the first that ever held the keys of Gospel power upon the earth, and by his supervision they have been handed down from age to age, whenever they have been among men; that under his direction a Deluge once swept the earth of the wickedness which was upon it, and laws were given to Israel, as a nation, to lead them to Christ; and that he will in the end call men to judgment for the privileges which have been extended to them in this world.

Hear what the Prophet Daniel says upon this subject - "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days (Adam) did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him; thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the judgment was set, and the books were opened. . . . . . . . And behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." - (Dan. vii. 9, 10, 13, 14.)

Again, the word of the Lord through the Prophet Joseph, gives additional importance, if possible, to the part which Adam acts relating to his children, which reads as follows - "But, behold, verily I say unto you, before the earth shall pass away, Michael, mine archangel, shall sound his trump, and then shall all the dead awake, for their graves shall be opened, and they shall come forth; yea, even all." [D&C 29:26]

From the foregoing we are enabled to draw important conclusions, that before the coming of the Lord Jesus in the clouds of heaven, to take the reins of government upon the earth, Adam comes and gathers around him all that have ever held the keys of power under him upon the earth, in any of the dispensations thereof to man; he calls forth the dead from their graves, at the sound of his trump; he brings them to judgment, and they render unto him an account of their several stewardships; the books are opened that a righteous judgment may be rendered by him who now sits upon his throne, not only as the Father, but the Judge, of men; and in that capacity thousands minister unto him. An august assemblage are now gathered in one grand council around the great Patriarch of all Patriarchs, consisting of his sons, who have been faithful in that which was committed to them; and all this preparatory to that great event, when the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven should be given to the Saints of the Most High. Daniel saw that the Saints possessed the kingdom, by virtue of which Adam was once more in possession of the dominion given unto him before the fall, which was over every living thing that moved upon the earth, which rendered him the universal Sovereign and Lord of all.

At this important period, when Adam is reinstated with full power upon the earth, seated upon his throne, as Daniel saw him - a glorious and an immortal God, one like the Son of Man comes in the clouds of heaven (as oftimes represen[ted] by the Apostles), to the Ancient of days, and receives from him dominion, glory, and a kingdom; or in other words, Michael, having accomplished the work committed to him, pertaining to this world, delivers up an account of his stewardship of the same, to that character represented as Yahovah in the creation of the world, who reigns in unison with those upon the earth, until his work is fully accomplished - till the last great contest with the enemy, who has been released for a little season, is won; then he in turn delivers up the kingdom to the great Eloheim, that in the language of the Apostle, "God may be all in all." [1 Corinthians 15:28]

This final surrender, we are to bear in mind, does not detract from the God-like power and dominion of our first Parent, nor of our Lord Jesus Christ. In the Patriarchal order of government, each and every ruler is independent in his sphere, his rule extending to those below, and not to those above him, in the same order. While the God of unnumbered worlds is acknowledged to be his God and Father, Adam still maintains his exalted position at the head of all those who are saved from among the whole family of man; and he will be God over all those who are made Gods from among men. Each and every God will be honoured and adored by those over whom he reigns as a God, without any violation of the laws of heaven - without any encroachment upon that command which saith, "thou shalt have no other Gods before me," [Exodus 20:3] for the glory and honour of all true Gods constitute the glory, honour, power, and dominion of the great Eloheim, according to His own order of government.

We can conceive of no higher, or more perfect order of government than that which is embraced in Patriarchal authority. By virtue of this order, all Gods, whether in heaven or on earth, exercise a righteous power, and possess a just dominion. In this order, all are both subjects and rulers, each possessing Almighty rights and powers - Almighty rulers over those who have descended from them, at the same time rendering all honour and power to those from whom they have descended. What a glorious system of order is here portrayed - one in which an innumerable succession of Gods, Patriarchs, and rulers, can reign forever in the greatest possible harmony that can be comprehended by intelligences, while each is independent in his position, as is all intelligence. As the great Eloheim is supreme and Almighty over all His children and kingdoms, so is Adam as great a ruler, or God, in his sphere, over his children, and the kingdom which they possess. The earth and all things upon it were created for Adam, and it was given to him of his Father to have dominion over it. In that dominion he will be sustained throughout all eternity.

In relation to this earth alone and its inhabitants, Michael and Gabriel have perhaps held the greatest keys of dominion and power. They were, both in their day, Fathers of all living, and had dominion given unto them over all things. Gabriel, or Noah, held the keys of this power under Michael, and to him he will render an account of all things before Michael renders an account of his stewardship to Him whose dominion reaches over many worlds, and who is God over all Gods. These two important personages have ever been watchful of the interests of their children, hence we find them ministering from time to time to holy men upon the earth - Gabriel often appearing unto Daniel, and opening to his view the most wonderful visions of the future, by which he could act as a God to the people, outvie the wisdom of the astrologers, and so control the elements that the burning furnace could have no power over him; Michael also coming to the release of Gabriel, when he was withstood one and twenty days from answering Daniel's prayer [Daniel 10:13].

We also read of Michael disputing with the Devil about the body of Moses, probably because the Devil was not willing that Moses should be translated, inasmuch as he had sinned; but even in this, Michael was the great deliverer [Jude 1:9]. Again we read that Michael shall stand up for the children of his people in a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation, and at that time every one that shall be found written in the book shall be delivered, and those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake [Daniel 12:1-2].

From these and many other Scriptures, we find that those important personages are clothed upon with no mean authority, and that Michael has power to deliver men from the power of the Devil, which is death; that by the sound of his own trump - the trump of the archangel, the nations of the dead shall awake and come forth to judgment, and there render an account to the ANCIENT OF DAYS seated upon his burning throne. Then shall the nations know that he is their Judge, their Lawgiver, and their God, and upon his decree hangs the destiny of the assembled dead. Yes, our Judge will be a kind and compassionate Father, by whom none can pass, but through whom all glory, dominion, and power, will be ascribed to the great ETERNAL.

A few questions for discussion:

How does this article's exposition of 'Adam-God' ideas compare to other discussions of Adam-God by, e.g., Brigham Young and others?
Early on, the author labors to distance Adam from any connection with sin or disobedience. How does his treatment fit into the history of LDS treatments of the Fall?
How does the author's perception of the Fall and his discussion of its position in salvation-history relate to discourse about the Fall in the broader Christian tradition?
What appears to be the relationship between 'Eloheim', 'Yahovah', and 'Michael/Adam', as the author conceives of it?
The author states that "we are under obligations to our father Adam, as to a God". What sort of 'obligations' would we have to Adam at the present moment, if the author is correct?
In the theology of the author, what might be our relation to "the Great Eloheim"?
What might the author be inclined to say if pressed to talk further about the present-day role and status of Gabriel/Noah?
In light of the author's discussion of other issues, how might the author conceive of his own statements about humans "becoming Gods"?
The author uses language of "control" on numerous occasions throughout the article when he describes the power that a Patriarch has over his subjects. How does this language relate to the concept of free agency?
How does the author envision gender relations? What reception might his vision have in a modern-day LDS ward?
How does the author envision family dynamics? What might the author think of a 'typical' LDS household today?
How does the author's approach to various biblical passages quoted or alluded to, compare to other LDS and/or Christian interpretations?
What in the article still comports with modern-day LDS teaching, and what does not?

¹ Spencer W. Kimball said: "We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine." See Official Report of the One Hundred Forty-Sixth Semi-Annual Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Held in the Tabernacle on Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Utah, October 1, 2, 3, 1976 (Salt Lake City, UT: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1977), 115.
² [Brigham Young], "Adam, Our Father and God", The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 15/48 (26 November 1853): 769-770; excerpted from Brigham Young's 9 April 1852 talk as printed in Journal of Discourses 1:46-53 (excerpted portion on 50-51). The most famous quote from this talk, as reprinted here on page 769, is: "When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken - HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later." A close second, appearing on page 770, is Brigham Young's statement that "Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven", which should be read in light of the earlier statement (pp. 769-770): "When the virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession."
³ "Our Father Adam", The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 15/48 (26 November 1853): 780. The statement is as follows: "OUR FATHER ADAM. - The extract from the Journal of Discourses may startle some of our readers, but we would wish them to recollect that in this last dispensation God will send forth, by His servants, things new as well as old, until man is perfected in the truth. And we would here take occasion to remark, that it would be well if all our readers would secure a copy of the Journal of Discourses as it is issued, and also of every standard work of the Church; and not only secure these works, but attentively read them, and thoroughly study the principles they contain. Those of the Saints who fail to obtain the standard publications of the Church, will not be likely to prove very intelligent Saints, and will be very liable to wake up some day, and find themselves wonderfully behind the times, and consequently will not be able to stand the day of trial, which will come upon all the world. Without the intelligence that comes through the Holy Priesthood, the Saints cannot gain salvation, and this intelligence is given in the various publications of the Church. Who then will endanger his salvation by being behind the times? Not the wise, certainly."

Lorenzo Young on Scriptural and Apostolic Authority

2012-01-10T16:23:00.000-05:00

The following quotation comes from a discourse that Lorenzo Dow Young delivered on 29 August 1852 at a special conference held in the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City:

Now, brethren, the calling of an Apostle, is to build up the kingdom of God, in all the world; it is the Apostle that holds the keys of this power, and nobody else. If an Apostle magnifies his calling, he is the word of the Lord to this people all the time, or else he does not magnify his calling - either one or the other.

If he magnifies his calling, his words are the words of eternal life and salvation to those who hearken to them, just as much so as any written revelations contained in these three books. (Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants.) There is nothing contained in these three books, that is any more revelation, than the words of an Apostle that is magnifying his calling.¹

Sorting out the complex web of religious/doctrinal authority within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has for a long time been a contentious issue between various parties both inside and outside of its institutional parameters. Where did Lorenzo Dow Young fall on the issue? How did Lorenzo Dow Young seem to understand the respective doctrinal authority of the Standard Works on the one hand and the General Authorities on the other hand?

¹ Minutes of Conference: A Special Conference of the elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Assembled in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, August 28th, 1852, 10 o'clock, a.m., pursuant to public notice (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret News, 1852), 25.

On Resignation from a Discussion Group

2012-01-10T16:01:00.005-05:00

During the past few weeks, I had some involvement in a Facebook group/page professedly devoted to LDS-Evangelical civil dialogue. Over my time there, I've found several aspects of the group profoundly disturbing, and with recent turns of events I find that I could no longer in good conscience even participate in that environment. The following is a message I sent this morning to the group's initial creator setting forth my reasons for terminating my association with the group; names have been partially redacted in the interest of the privacy of those individuals involvement.

While I joined [this Facebook group/page] with great hope and optimism for high-quality, even-handed, grace-filled, mutually edifying discussions, I found myself routinely disappointed by the strong double standards that prevailed. Rules against 'debate' seemed to be persistently abused, for instance. People who actually lifted the quality of conversation through civil, respectful, well-documented, and well-reasoned comments (e.g., [AS] – who, shockingly, has now apparently been accused by [DH] without substantiation of being an insincere paid shill) were removed temporarily from the group from time to time. On the other hand, people who dramatically lowered the quality of conversation through uncivil, disrespectful, condescending attacks on others and on their beliefs (e.g., [DB]) do not seem to have faced much censure from any administrator, nor even from most Latter-day Saint participants. If an Evangelical had behaved even a tenth as poorly as that, I have no doubt that such an Evangelical counterpart would have found himself removed from the group within several days at most. (I do note, however, that in a comment I just now read, you've told [DB] that he is "bordering on being banned" – as I think is only fitting.) This was not merely a one-time event, but rather an enduring state of affairs that commenced well before I joined the group and that exists without diminution at present. This is not merely a flaw, I think, in the administration of the rules, but also highlights worrying facets of the group's culture, facets that prove themselves obstacles to productive civil discourse – which is supposedly one of the five points of the group's purpose.
The same double standard appears to be active with regard to any rules against attempting to dictate the beliefs of others to those others. On the one hand, many Evangelical participants were routinely censured for this, though I have seen precious few instances of it. On the other hand, some Latter-day Saint posters (e.g., again, [DB]) made a frequent sport of this tactic, even transforming it into a sort of art form, in informing Evangelicals of what Evangelical doctrine is. No action was taken, nor did the offenders cease when their contravention of the rules was publicly pointed out to them.

Further, I note with dismay that various negative Evangelical 'buzzwords' like "cult" and "blasphemy" are forbidden explicitly in the rules; but, despite a semi-recent public push by Evangelical posters for equitable treatment, no similar action has been taken with respect to LDS 'buzzwords' like "anti-Mormon". Contrary to [TB]'s belligerent grandstanding, if the extremely rare positive adoption of "anti-Mormon" (under some understanding of the term) by some precious few Evangelical critics of the LDS faith justifies keeping it on the table, then the more common adoption of "cult" (again, under some understanding of the term) by some few Latter-day Saints necessitate that it receive equal standing.

Most recently, I've witnessed extremely heavy-handed tactics by [SS], who apparently deleted a thread that in his opinion was non-doctrinal and inappropriate, based on his sudden decree from his lofty administrative heights that only "doctrinal" LDS topics are appropriate for discussion. This, of course, creates another blatant double standard, as no comparable constraint of 'officiality' appears to bind LDS posters (e.g., [SS] himself, [DB], and so forth) who wish to take potshots at Evangelical beliefs of varying degrees of prominence, universality, etc. Moreover, [SS] has further qualified his edict by insisting that only those things that can be demonstrated to be LDS doctrine from 'scripture' are permissible for discussion, and that 'scripture' must be taken to encompass the Standard Works exclusively. On both of these points, however, there exists a spectrum of positions within LDS circles, let alone outside of them, and hence [SS] has evidently taken to abusing his administrative position to enforce his own understandings of LDS doctrine and scripture on the group as a new standard, and has also engaged in bullying of those who dissent. [RM] challenged the boundaries of Stephen's definitions and had her LDS testimony called into question by a professing fellow Latter-day Saint in return; [RM] also indicates that, contrary to the group's stated purpose to "forge links, not to break them", she lost at least one contact/friendship as a result of daring to speak out. Meanwhile, while in the course of challenging [SS]'s policy and tactics, [KD] – herself a very devout Latter-day Saint – suddenly found herself removed from the group, with no warning, no justification given, having committed no breach of the rules, and without even an identification of the party or parties responsible for the decision. Even [CB] – a noted LDS blogger whose conduct here has been beyond approach – has recently been challenged (by [DH]) for not toeing the party line and for daring to stick up for respect and civility; and she has also been attacked (by [DB], predictably) as having "an agenda against the Church", and hence allegedly she "should not group [her]self with the LDS"; and, later on, "We know you're not active LDS, and that you have an agenda of undermining the Church". In addition to a few of the things mentioned here highlighting gross administrative abuse on the part of certain aforementioned parties, all of this also displays a group culture markedly at odds with the group's stated purpose.

I'm genuinely saddened by the way things have gone. Aside from the sheer practical factor of keeping up with the pace of the discussions, and the difficulty of carrying out any substantive exchange through the medium of Facebook comments, I've found that I'm too profoundly disturbed by the overall tenor of the group to continue my membership and/or involvement so long as overzealous LDS administrators are permitted to run roughshod over the rules (and over common decency) and perpetuate double standards, and so long as little effort is made to evenly discipline participants without regard to their religious affiliation. I send this to you directly since, no longer being a member of the group, I cannot post it as I otherwise might have.

Peace in Christ,
[JB]

EDIT [11 January 2012]: On a somewhat more pleasant note, the response I received informed me that several of these problems are in the process of being addressed now (including, fortunately, the permanent ban of one of the worst offenders, 'DB'), and so I hope and pray that the group will become a healthier place in the weeks to come; perhaps I'll find a place there again. However, so far as I can tell, 'SS' remains a heavy-handed administrator; his edicts remain essentially in place; 'TB' still seems set on antagonizing Evangelicals; 'CB' has been banned for undisclosed reasons, and many LDS participants defend that ban (though a few Latter-day Saints remain who have the courage to question it, such as 'RM'); and participants are widely being encouraged to leave if they dislike the patently immoral operative policies still in place, and these tactics are engaged in by another LDS administration, 'DJ', and defended by 'DH'. This is the latest message I've sent to the group's creator:

Thank you very much, [WK]! I appreciate that. I can only imagine how busy it would be to clean things up - especially since, from the looks of things whenever I peak in, they and others seem intent on creating more ([SS]'s edicts against anything 'speculative' or 'unscriptural' as he sees it; the ban of one of the best contributors to the group [CB]; the mild bullying of [RM] by [DJ] and [DH]; [TB]'s continued antagonism toward Evangelical participants; and so forth). If things clear up and settle down at some point, I'd definitely consider coming back to a healthier version of the group. (And as an Evangelical, I'm not personally affronted by the new name; I just thought I remembered one or two Roman Catholic members when I first joined.) I look forward to hearing back from you when you have a chance, and I thank you for the effort you've put into these things.

Peace in Christ,
[JB]

In the meantime, another group has been started containing of a few of the unjustly banned and others dissatisfied with the original group's course, and so I may join that in the meantime.

[EDIT: As a further note, I ought to add that, contrary to all claims of a permanent ban on [DB], he was permitted to return, and no measures seem to have been taken whatsoever against any of the other major abuses that occurred in the group. It's a real pity.]

Hyrum Mack Smith on 'False' Churches

2012-01-07T15:27:00.003-05:00

The following is a considerable excerpt from a talk by Hyrum Mack Smith (member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, son of then-President Joseph F. Smith, brother of future-President Joseph Fielding Smith, and father of future-Presiding Patriarch Joseph Fielding Smith; also maternal grandfather of M. Russell Ballard of the current Quorum of the Twelve Apostles), delivered at the October 1916 Semi-Annual General Conference, as printed in the official conference report (pp. 41-43 for the following quotation):

The Latter-day Saints who have been gathered out of the world and planted in the valleys of the mountains have in a sense been born again. When they have taken their citizenship in this goodly land they should have foresworn allegiance to foreign lands, and to the dominion of corrupt kings and princes, and they should hold themselves aloof and apart from the quarrels and the wars that the nations of the earth engage in. It would be just as consistent for the Latter-day Saints, who have come out of the Protestant churches or the Catholic church, or for the children of men and women who came out of the Presbyterian church or the Baptist, or the Methodist, or the Congregationalist, to take sides with those corrupt and apostate churches in their contentions and their quarrels among themselves. We, or our fathers who received the gospel of Jesus Christ, as it has been proclaimed by divinely appointed and authorized men in this dispensation, have been born again. We have forsaken the corrupt religions of the world, and we have foresworn all allegiance to these false churches. We have no interest in their contentions. At least the only interest we have in them is a desire that the adherents of these various churches may also see the light, come to a knowledge of the truth, and forsake evil and error and falsehood, and receive the gospel of Christ which is the power of God unto salvation. The only interest which the Latter-day Saints have or can have in the contentions of the nations of the earth, political or otherwise, is that the time may come when peace may be restored, when men shall cease to make war upon each other, and live in peace and love and in a desire to make every land a blessed land and all men brothers.

[...]

Christianity, as it is known in the world today, has fallen far short of the accomplishment of what might have been expected of it. It has failed in establishing those principles which Christ taught among the children of men. The great Catholic division of the Christian world, the Catholic church, is a national liability to any country. It wields a great power over the minds and the hearts of the children of men, but it is a power for evil rather than for good. It brings countless thousands regularly to confession; it rarely brings a single man to repentance and the abandonment of his sins. The power wielded by that organization is one that does not promote civilization, nor advancement morally or spiritually, but it binds its adherents in the thralldom of superstition and ignorance and fear, and denies them the liberty to make an open-minded investigation of other questions; and the nations and peoples governed and controlled by that power are the least advanced intellectually and morally and industrially of any people in the world called Christian or civilized.

The Protestant division of Christianity has practically ceased to exert any influence whatever over the hearts and the minds of the children of men. Mankind has largely ceased to be very much interested in Protestantism, as one prominent official in the British Government told me when I had occasion to visit him, that all professors of religion and particularly the ministers of religion were narrow-minded and that no broad-minded man, no thinking man in this day paid any attention to the religions of Christianity, or other religions for that matter. That was his view. My observation confirms, that view. What is the reason for this? Why, my brethren and sisters, even the dumb brute will not answer many times to the call to the crib or the lick, when no food or salt is provided. They will soon cease to come, when they have learned that nothing is provided for them, and it is the same way with Protestant Christianity. Are men less intelligent than the lower animals? The call is made to the people to come, and when the people have come they have been given, too often, the empty husk or the blighted ear, therefore many have ceased coming. Yet I would not have you understand me as believing all mankind, Christian or otherwise, have turned away entirely from thoughts of God and from the hope of salvation. The very image of God is impressed upon the children of men. They belong to him; He owns them, and he will never rest until he has brought them into a condition where they gladly and voluntarily render unto God what belongs to God. They have been deceived and are deceived by corrupt professors, corrupt ministers.

Let me explain, when I use the term "corrupt" with reference to these ministers of the gospel, that I use it in the same sense that I believe the Lord used it when he made that declaration to Joseph Smith, the prophet, in answer to the prophet's prayer. He did not mean, nor do I mean, that the ministers of religion are personally unvirtuous or impure. I believe as a class they, perhaps, in personal purity, stand a little above the average order of men. When I use the term "corrupt" I mean, as I believe the Lord meant, that they have turned away from the truth, the purity of the truth, the beauty of the truth, and have turned to that which is false. A false doctrine is a corrupt doctrine; a false religion is a corrupt religion; a false teacher is a corrupt teacher. Any man who teaches a false doctrine, and who believes in and practices and teaches a false religion is a corrupt professor, because he teaches that which is impure and not true. That is the trouble with Christianity today. It is not true. Christianity is, perhaps, no truer or falser than any other religion, than Mohammedanism, Confucianism, Buddhism or any other ism or philosophy. In fact, my brethren and sisters, if the falsity of a religion can be measured in any degree by the amount of trouble and turmoil and strife and bitterness and hatred that it has engendered in the hearts of men, if it can be judged by the number of wars it has carried on and the rivers of blood it has shed, the amount of misery and sorrow, it has caused, or the extremes of impurity, found among its adherents, then Christianity, that which is known as Christianity, is the falsest of all religions in the world. For in these last sixteen hundred years, if not longer, the small minority of the population of the earth known as Christians, have carried on the great majority of the wars of the world and have destroyed the greatest amount of life and of property and have inflicted on the world the greatest degree of misery. And, so far as my observation goes - and I have tried to observe some of these things - there is less of piety, genuine sincerity and honesty in living up to their professions among Christians, than you will find among the confessors of any other religion whatsoever. The trouble is, as God declared to Joseph the Prophet, mankind have gone astray. Their religions are an abomination in his sight, and their professors are corrupt because they have turned away from the truth and have turned unto fables. When men go to church nowadays they do not receive that which satisfies the soul, which the soul longs for; they are not instructed in the ways of life and of purity and right. They go away empty and disappointed.

Ordinarily I just post these selections without commentary, but in this case, allow me to restrain my impulses and make the very brief understatement that I do not "go away empty and disappointed", and nor have I seen greater 'instruction in the ways of life and of purity and right' in any sacrament meeting than I have in the services of my own congregation.

Bill McKeever: "Not on Our Watch"

2012-01-06T02:34:00.006-05:00

Recently while listening to the Viewpoint on Mormonism podcast of Mormonism Research Ministry, I heard an interesting statement that Bill McKeever prepared and read (with minor variations in phrasing) in all three parts of their "Not On Our Watch" series. I found it interesting and can definitely sympathize with the sentiment (whether or not I ultimately agree with Bill's position), and so I think it's worth quoting the statement here (as he gave it in the first episode) along with citations to the LDS sources lying behind it, most of which were quoted during the remainder of the podcast series. (In a few cases, I don't have access to the texts they mentioned, and so forgive me if any citations are mistaken.) The series, and this statement, was essentially a reaction to two claims: (1) the claim that it's ridiculous to suggest that the LDS faith is in some important sense outside of the Christian fold, and (2) the claim that Latter-day Saints never level harsh criticism at other faiths or at their adherents.

But let me see if I understand this correctly, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Let's see. You say my church is "wrong"¹, you say my creeds are an "abomination"², my pastor is "corrupt"³, my Heavenly Father is 'invented'⁴, my Jesus is "mythical"⁵, my Trinity is a "monster"⁶, my justification is "pernicious"⁷, my grace is a "fallacious doctrine originated by Satan"⁸, and my Bible is not trustworthy.⁹ Then when I attempt to offer any sort of disagreement or rebuttal, you accuse me of hatred and bigotry, or even of being 'un-Christlike'. And if that isn't enough, to add insult to injury, you want to steal my name [of 'Christian']! Let me just say, folks: not on my watch. I am not going to be manipulated by people that try to use these type of measures to coerce me into embracing an organization that teaches things that are blatantly unbiblical, just so that we might have peace.

I offer this provocative statement here for several purposes: (1) to stir up discussion; (2) to provide some counters at least to the mantra that Latter-day Saints (individually or corporately) never criticize other faiths; (3) because I think this quote offers some insight into both (3.1) why non-LDS Christians might feel naturally combative when confronted with LDS sentiments about their own faith and (3.2) why some non-LDS Christians might be reluctant to award the title of 'Christian' to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a whole; and (4) simply for easier future reference..

Hopefully sometime in the next few days or weeks I'll have the opportunity to offer some belated replies to a few people, draft a number of the posts I've been meaning to write, and reply to any comments here.

¹ Joseph Smith History 1:19
² Joseph Smith History 1:19; Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1979), 440-441; Hyrum M. Smith, "Discourse by Elder Hyrum M. Smith", Liahona The Elders' Journal 14/27 (2 January 1917): 419.
³ Joseph Smith History 1:19; Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology (Liverpool: F. D. Richards, 1855), 167; Hyrum M. Smith, "Discourse by Elder Hyrum M. Smith", Liahona The Elders' Journal 14/27 (2 January 1917): 418-419.
⁴ Edward L. Kimball, ed., Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1995), 426.
⁵ Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1979), 269.
⁶ Joseph Smith, "Sermon in the Grove", 16 June 1844, quoted in History of the Church 6:476, and reprinted in Joseph F. Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1977), 372. The word "monster" was added in the reconstruction of the sermon, and does not appear in Thomas Bullock's original notes, though these themselves make clear that Joseph Smith leveled a great deal of hostile mockery at this sacred and central Christian teaching, and certainly whoever introduced that particular word was also LDS.
⁷ James E. Talmage, The Articles of Faith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret News, 1899), 120; Joseph Fielding Smith, The Restoration of All Things (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret News, 1945), 192.
⁸ Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1969), 206.
⁹ Articles of Faith 8; Orson Pratt, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon (1850), reprinted in A Series of Pamphlets on the Doctrines of the Gospel (Salt Lake City, UT: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1884), 218-220; Neal A. Maxwell, "The Wondrous Restoration", Ensign (April 2003), 35.

Counsel for January

2012-01-01T07:00:00.000-05:00

JANUARY gives time for reflection, and our Father gives the earth time to increase and man the strength to labor, sow and reap the benefits of his works: so that he that cultivates the soil successfully does more than he that commands armies. Meditate, then, in this month, what will increase grain, fruit and home made wares the coming year. Wise is that wise does.

2011: A Year in Review

2011-12-31T23:21:00.000-05:00

Well, as I begin to type this post, it's 10:45 PM on 31 December 2011, and so 2012 is just around the corner. This is the first full calendar year that Study and Faith has been up and running, so it seems like a good time for me to at least remind myself what sorts of things I've done since this time last year. Counting this post, I estimate that I've made a total of... 138 posts... since that time. The busiest month was March at 24, though that's still short of the 29 posts I made in December 2010.

I've asked some questions that never got answered (see here, here, here, here - though I'm sure answers are out there), and some that did (see, e.g., [partial] answers here and here). I've had one guest post, and I'm always up for hosting others - especially seeing the popularity of the first! I've tried to highlight a few other blogs, posts, projects, and articles/stories that I thought were noteworthy; I wrote a cursory review of the seven ecumenical councils to the best of my knowledge at the time; I started a review of Richard Bushman's Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, but I haven't gotten around to finishing it. I hope I will. I've also had much more of a focus on highlighting selections from older literature, particularly 19th- and early 20th-century LDS writings. In keeping with that, most recently I put up a late-19th-century series on gospel principles by one Daniel Tyler. This ties in with the reading project I initiated in an effort to begin working through freely available early LDS and anti-LDS literature... something I've also apparently decided to mostly set aside for lack of time, but which - like the book reviews - I'm adamant about resuming in the future. I've had some quite popular posts (e.g., here and here), including a few that - at least for a while (I haven't checked lately) were top hits on Google for relevant search terms, and I'm sure that brought in some traffic. In addition to all that, I've also extensively revised my introductory post. Oh, and I created the site banner currently in use.

Offline, I also started once again meeting with some LDS missionaries (at their initiation), but they terminated my 'investigator' status when they decided that I was a bit too tough a sell, and that their time would be better spent with easier targets, essentially. I've also read a few relevant books during the past year, including:

Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling by Richard L. Bushman
Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed, 1842-1845: A Documentary History, edited by Devery S. Anderson and Gary James Bergera
Delusions: An Analysis of the Book of Mormon by Alexander Campbell
The Nauvoo Endowment Companies, 1845-1846: A Documentary History, edited by Devery S. Anderson and Gary James Bergera
Mormonism Unvailed by Eber D. Howe
View of the Hebrews by Ethan Smith
The Refiner's Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844 by John L. Brooke
Baptism on Account of the Dead (1 Cor 15:29): An Act of Faith in the Resurrection by Michael F. Hull
Mormonism and the Nature of God: A Theological Evolution, 1830-1915 by Kurt Widmer
The Melchizedek Tradition: A Critical Examination of the Sources to the Fifth Century AD and in the Epistle to the Hebrews by Fred R. Horton Jr.
Currently reading: Early Mormonism and the Magic World View by D. Michael Quinn

Recently I haven't had a time to do much in the way of original posting here (not since November!), partly because the end of the semester and the Christmas season have been quite hectic, and partly because my computer crashed and I lost all of my data. (My back-ups are all in Kentucky, and I won't have access to my files, notes, and documents until the end of January.) I hope to resume in earnest in 2012 and to keep it up to the extent I'm able. It's been a busy year; it's been a good year, where involvement with LDS matters is concerned. I'm certain there's a great deal I'm forgetting.

I want to thank everyone who's followed, viewed, contributed, or commented here at Study and Faith during 2011. As of this year, I've finally hit the 'ten official subscribers' mark through Blogger, which doesn't include RSS feed subscriptions (I have no idea if there are any of those) or people who simply make a habit of swinging by from time to time. I hope you all have a blessed new year, and that we can continue to edify one another during it. In the meantime, feel free to celebrate by reading the beautiful poem that Blair Hodges posted at the By Comment Consent blog.

Peace in Christ be with you all,
JB

Daniel Tyler on the Resurrection

2011-12-28T13:14:00.002-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Resurrection", Juvenile Instructor 13/23 (1 December 1878): 269.

"But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" (1st Cor., xv., 35).

Some professed Christians answer the above question by saying that the body goes down into the grave and the spirit ascends to God, after which, if the party was righteous, it remains on the right hand of God to all eternity, singing praises to Him, ceasing only long enough on the great day of judgment to hear the plaudits of welcome. While, on the other hand, the wicked, including all except religious folks, no matter how moral, honorable, benevolent or good, must, as soon as the spirit leaves the body, be cast into a lake burning with fire and brimstone, there to remain eternally, except during a period just long enough to hear the awful sentence to return to the same dreadful lake, and be perpetually burning, but never consumed. While others believe that when Christ comes to reign on the earth a thousand years, the spirits of the righteous will receive bodies similar to our mortal bodies - out of the same kind of material, but not the same bodies.

Were we to tell you all the different conflicting views of this wicked, perverse generation of pretended Christians we should have no room or time to tell you the facts in the case.

Well, then, "With what body do they come?" Joseph Smith said they would come with the same body they had here, in all of its parts except the blood. To all Latter-day Saints, that should settle the question, once for all. But as there are some who read the Juvenile Instructor who are not Latter-day Saints, and that our youth may be prepared to answer those not of our faith, I will quote a few passages from the old scriptures, which are also corroborated in the new.

St. Paul, in the same chapter from which we have quoted, comparing the spirit to the germ of grain, says, "God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body." In other words, each spirit, no matter whether of man, of beasts, of fowls or of fishes, will receive its own body in the resurrection. The different elements comprising the different kinds of flesh will not be amalgamated. It will be observed that although the Apostle mentions the body, he no where mentions the blood; in fact, no part of the scriptures indicate that blood, which is the life of the mortal body, will be restored in the resurrection. But they do say that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." It is no where written that neither flesh nor blood can enter into that kingdom. That is to say, flesh with the blood cannot enter. They must be separated. Jesus, who is the type of the resurrection, had His blood shed for the sins of the world, yet He arose with every component part of His body except blood, as He said to His disciples, "handle me, and see: for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." The prints of the nails will still be visible in His hands and feet when he appears on Mount Olivet to deliver the Jews in the last days. In answer to their inquiry, He will say, "These are the wounds with which I was wounded in the house of my friends." Perhaps some will say all that might be, as His body never decayed or saw corruption. If Jesus was a pattern of the resurrection, as we have indicated, this would make no difference. To show that the same rule holds good with decomposed bodies, we will refer you to the 37th chapter of Ezekiel. Ezekiel saw in a certain valley a great quantity of bones which he says were very dry. How long they had been bleaching we are not told, but the flesh and sinews were gone from off them. After informing us that he had been commanded to prophesy unto them, and promise them life, the prophet says: "So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them." Why is the qualifying adjective the so oftenly repeated - the bones, the sinews, the flesh, the skin? The answer is plain. It is that there may be no mistake as to whether the bones, sinews, flesh and skin were the same that the individuals had before they were slain or died a natural death. This is doubtless done to remove the last doubt from the minds of those who believe in the revelations of God to man.

Should there be any who still doubt, the Lord tells them in the same chapter that when He brings them out of their graves and places them in their own lands, they shall know that He spoke it, and performed it. He says He will put His spirit in them and they shall live. Thus, you see, instead of having blood in their bodies they will be filled with spirit.

Daniel Tyler on the Atonement

2011-12-20T13:42:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Atonement", Juvenile Instructor 13/21 (1 November 1878): 242-243.

On the subject of the atonement, this and many previous generations who have called themselves Christians, are and have been as much in the dark as upon the subjects already treated upon. In fact, plain as is the gospel taught in the scriptures, if there is one principle not shrouded in mysticism, but "held in uprightness," by all the men-made churches, we would not know where to look for it.

Several of the churches hold with John Wesley, in substance, "that the offering Christ once made is that of perfect atonement, propitiation and redemption for all of the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone;" while believers in John Calvin, and others of his type, hold that a definite number of God's children, both angels and man, before the foundation of the world, were elected to be saved, while others were doomed to be damned; and that the number is so definite and certain that it cannot be increased or diminished; and that Christ only died for the chosen few who are to be saved.

Neither of these views is warranted either by scripture or sound reasoning. That Christ died for all the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve is correct; but that atonement only applies to the effects of the sin of Adam and Eve, commonly denominated "the original sin." Paul tells us that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." (See Cor., xv, 1.)

Adam's death was such in its nature as to bring upon him and his offspring not only an eternal separation of spirit and body, but an eternal banishment from the presence of God. By the voluntary death of Christ, all mankind, both the righteous and the wicked, will be raised from the dead, and brought before Christ, the Son, to judgment, as He saith "if the Son of man be lifted up he will draw all men unto him." But this does not guarantee a full salvation to all. Adam, before the fall, was an immortal being; and so will all other mortals become immortal through the redemption of Jesus. But immortality is one thing, and a fullness of glory and eternal life is another. They must have their resurrected bodies before coming to judgment, so that they may "be judged according to the deeds done in the body," and "every man be rewarded according to his works." Not according to Adam's, but according to his own works. The atonement, healing the wound of Adam's fall, leaves children free from any charge of sin until they are old enough to know right from wrong. They are then like our first parents were in the garden, with respect to their agency. If they sin they must abide the penalty of the law they violate, unless their sins be remitted through repentance and baptism. Hence the commandment, "Repent, and be baptized for the remission of sins * * * be baptized and wash away they sins" - not Adam's, but your own sins. Death was the penalty of Adam's sin - "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

The Book of Mormon tells us that were it not for the atonement of Christ we were eternally lost, or banished from the presence of God. Peter tells us the same, in substance, when he says "Christ hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God." If we could get to God in any other way, Christ would not have suffered for that purpose.

Daniel Tyler on Christian Denominations

2011-12-17T14:07:00.006-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles", Juvenile Instructor 13/20 (15 October 1878): 232.

It may seem strange to some of our readers, and especially the young, that there should be so many different Christian denominations, and all teaching different doctrines. One would naturally conclude that almost any person of ordinary ability could understand plain, simple language, such as is found in the Old and New Testaments, which they all profess to believe. Still more strange does it appear when we learn the fact that educated men, who have spent the best part of their lives in the study of literature and religion, differ more widely on religious points than the common people; yet such is the case.

Those differences among learned religionists in olden times were attributed to a species of insanity, as the term is often used in our day: "He is religiously insane." Hence it was that a learned judge once said to St. Paul, "Much learning hath made thee mad." The word mad here is used for insane, vulgarly called crazy, which signifies the same thing.

The learned ministers under the Mosaic law were just as much in the dark as are the present Christians. One of those devout preachers being impressed with the divinity of Christ's mission, more on account of His miracles than of the truths He taught, went to Jesus by night and asked the Savior about the plan of salvation. He was told that "except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." The minister thought this a new and strange doctrine, and asked a further explanation. He was then told that after a person had been born again to see the kingdom, he must be born of water and of the spirit in order to enter into it. It was too great and too mysterious for the learned priest, or rabbi, as Nicodemus was called. He could not comprehend it. Jesus told him the reason was, that he was not born of the Spirit. He said "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." The man knows that he has felt the divine influence as well as you know when you inhale a gentle breeze of air; but if you have never had that Spirit, he cannot tell it to you so that you can comprehend it, any more than you could explain to an unborn babe the sensation of the atmosphere of this world. It must be felt to be understood.

St. Paul says, "The things of man knoweth no man but by the spirit of man that is in him; even so the things of God knoweth no man but by the spirit of God." The same Apostle says, "The Spirit searcheth all things, yea even the deep things of God." For this reason, when Jesus arose from the dead, and did not design to remain much longer with His disciples to tell them just what to say to the people, He would not allow them to preach in their uninspired condition, lest they should, without that Spirit, lead the people astray, as uninspired men do now. He told them to tarry or wait at Jerusalem until they were endowed with power from on high; or, in other words, until they were born of the Spirit, having already been born of water.

The reason, then, that this generation of so called Christians but really infidels, do not understand the gospel plan as it is, is because they have not the spirit of God. There is a passage of scripture to the effect that the wisdom of this world cannot find out God. That those professing to be wise have not the Spirit of God, which is inspiration and revelation to those who enjoy it, must be plain to everyone, from the fact that they claim that all of the gifts and graces which anciently attended the Holy Ghost are done away, and no longer needed. No matter how plain the plan of salvation is, it requires the Holy Spirit to understand it. So say the scriptures, and the experience and observation of all our Elders are that the doctrine herein set forth is correct. Kind reader, if you have not done so, repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins, and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, by the laying on of hands by proper authority, that you may the more fully learn how to be saved; for on those conditions "the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." Do "not neglect so great salvation." You cannot obtain it in any other way.

Daniel Tyler on Signs and Miracles

2011-12-14T13:54:00.002-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Signs and Miracles", Juvenile Instructor 13/19 (1 October 1878): 221.

"Give us a sign, and we will believe," is familiar to the ear of every Elder who has come into contact with the religious teachers of this generation. If there are cripples or sick persons in the vicinity they will say, "Heal them and we will all believe." If there are none, then they will ask the Elder to break or amputate some member of his body and restore it to its former place and strength. Now this proves two points against them; first, that, although they profess the religion of Jesus Christ, they are infidels. Second, that, although they profess virtue and purity, they are adulterers, and, instead of setting up a howl and cry against the pure principles of celestial marriage, they should remember the proverb, "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

That they are infidels, is plain from the fact that Jesus said, "these signs shall follow them that believe," etc. (see Mark xvi. 17). Now, if they are believers, and hence not infidels, the signs must follow them, for it says they "shall follow them that believe." This language is positive; hence, if the signs do not follow them, they are not believers, as they were promised to all believers. They must be unbelievers, or infidels. Their God is also a nonentity - nothing, being without body or parts.

As to being adulterers we have the same authority as for the other. The statement of the Savior was "an evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign," and He refused to give any except that of His own death and resurrection. What, then, were and are signs given for? Not to convince an adulterous generation of hireling priests, of whose adulteries, the newspapers abound, but to confirm and strengthen the faith of those who already believed. Where they did not believe, Jesus "could do no mighty miracles." "So they went everywhere preaching and confirming the word with signs following." The word was, of course, confirmed to the believer, who alone had the promise, while unbelievers were hardened, and sought to destroy those who worked such wonderful miracles, to prevent the news from spreading, and even sought to kill Lazarus, who had been raised from the dead. The Latter-day Saints are the only true believers who enjoy these blessings. The signs follow them, and no others, in all of their varieties, such as speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, prophesying, healing the sick, etc. These blessings are not to our leaders alone, but to ourselves. The writer has witnessed all the gifts in the Church, and many sick have been healed under his administration, and evil spirits have been cast out and returned no more. Thousands of others have the same testimony to bear. Those relieved have been from infancy to old age.

Daniel Tyler on the Spirit World

2011-12-11T13:43:00.002-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles", Juvenile Instructor 13/18 (15 September 1878): 213.

In writing for the Juvenile Instructor, a few plain, simple facts only can be given in a brief article. In addition to what has been said before on the subject of baptism for the dead, I will refer to the case of the thief on the cross. Jesus said to him, "this day shalt thou be with me in paradise." This is often quoted to prove that the thief went right into heaven with Jesus as soon as he was dead. Nothing is, however, further from the truth. That both went to the same place, I will not dispute; but that place was not where God the Father and Jesus, our elder Brother, reside. The Spirit of Jesus went to the spirit world between the time of His death and resurrection, as will be presently shown. No doubt that many, both before and after the crucifixion, in their dying moments, called upon God for mercy and salvation. But His purposes are governed by laws which are immutable and unchangeable. One of those laws declares that "every man shall be rewarded according to his works," which means, "according to the deeds done in the body," and not according to his dying words. Such kind of repentance is not taught by the gospel, but is one of the dogmas of this priest-ridden generation. All will be weighed in the balance, and if good preponderates, they will be rewarded according to the balance in their favor.

As to where Jesus and the thief went after death, or between death and the resurrection, we will let the Apostle decide. Peter says Jesus went and preached to the spirits in prison - the antediluvians. Jesus told the penitent thief he should be with him in paradise. This simply means the unseen world - sometimes called hades, prison, hell and the spirit world. Jesus had not time then, while on the cross, to enter into explanations, but as He was about going to preach to other sinners, many of whom were doubtless penitent in their last moments like himself, He told the thief he should be with Him, where of course, he would hear the gospel as preached to them. But this did not mean in heaven; for, after Jesus arose, and Mary was about to embrace Him, He told her plainly not to touch Him, for He had not yet ascended to His Father.

Daniel Tyler on the Godhead - Part III

2011-12-08T13:00:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Godhead", Juvenile Instructor 13/16 (15 August 1878): 183.

Before leaving the subject of the Godhead, I wish to show that the doctrine enunciated by Joseph Smith that men might become as Gods is a scripture doctrine. All claim Jesus as one of the three persons of the Godhead. Paul says He is our elder brother. He also says we shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Him. What! joint heirs with the second person in the Godhead? So said the inspired Apostle, and "the scriptures cannot be broken." Joint heirs is where two or more hold in common. And His (God's) name shall be in their foreheads (Rev. xxii, 4). In the 7th chapter we are told that one hundred and forty four thousand shall be sealed with the seal of the living God in their foreheads. In another place the same writer says that Jesus shall be crowned King of kings and Lord of lords. Now He could not be so crowned unless there were other kings and lords besides Him and under Him. John says Jesus "gave all who received him power to become the sons of God." In fact, the Lord's prayer implies that all who use prayer legitimately are sons and daughters of God. Otherwise it would be mockery to say "Our Father." Jesus said He and His Father were one - God the Father and God the Son. He prayed that His disciples and all who believed on Him, through their word, might be one, even in same sense that He and the Father were one; or, to use His own words, "even as we are one." This opens up an extensive field of thought. Is it true that Jesus, under His Father, is to be Lord of lords, the "elder brother" among the "joint heirs with him?" and that the joint heirs are to be acknowledged lords as well as Himself? Perhaps some of our Christian friends will claim that such an idea is preposterous - blasphemous. Well, so thought the Jews when Jesus taught the same doctrine. We might quote many passages to the same effect, but our space will only admit one, with a few remarks.

St. Paul, the great Apostle to the Gentiles, says, in the 2nd chapter of Philippians, 5th and 6th verses, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus." What mind was that? Read the connection, and see: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." Have the same mind or ambition is the exhortation. To seek the same thing. The Apostle also says, "There are Lords many and Gods many, but to us there is but one God." Jesus is our Lord and we may be lords under him, He being Lord of lords, our posterity standing to us as we stand to our Father, He being over all. Who then is our Father?

Daniel Tyler on the Godhead - Part II

2011-12-05T22:46:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Godhead", Juvenile Instructor 13/15 (1 August 1878): 173.

The Lord's prayer is coroborative of the doctrine set forth in our last. Common sense teaches us if we have a father in heaven we must have a mother also. The fact of there being a Father clearly implies the existence of a mother; neither one could exist without the other. Both are included in the word God, in the same sense that the first man and woman on this earth were included in the word Adam, the latter being in the image and likeness of the former. The ancient Israelites understood this doctrine. But during the apostasy from the early church many discarded the Father, as this generation discards the mother. Hence, they ignorantly worshiped the mother, or the "queen of heaven." This is perhaps sufficient to make this part of the subject plain.

Now, has God a body and parts? The scriptures tell us that he ate and drank with Abraham. Jacob said, "I have seen God, face to face, and my life is preserved." We read that Moses "saw his back parts." Isaiah "saw him sitting on his throne, high and lifted up." Jesus looked so much like other men that He was crucified as a criminal; yet He looked so much like the Father that He told Philip that he had seen Him had seen the Father. St. Paul coroborates this statement by saying that Christ was not only in the brightness of His Father's glory, but "the express image of his person." As to passions, anger and love are the two strongest, and He possesses both. "He is angry with the wicked every day." "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." He "loved Jacob and hated Esau." He "hated the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes."

The Father and Son each have a separate body, although their features are so much alike that Joseph Smith said when he saw them in his first vision the only difference he could discern was that one looked a trifle older than the other. The image of the person was precisely the same. In person they cannot each be in two separate places at the same time. The Holy Ghost, however, which is a divine spirit, power and influence, emanating from the Father and the Son, is omnipresent, or everywhere present, and fills immensity of space. It is that Spirit from which the psalmist, David, inquired where he could flee to escape from. If he soared to the heavens he was there. If he fled to the uttermost parts of the earth, or to the depths of hell he could not hide from it. It is that Spirit which Joel said should be "poured out upon all flesh." The same that would fill the earth with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the great deep. The same that Ezekiel saw fill the bodies of the slain of Israel, and they arose from the dead. In short, it is the minister of God, and reveals His will to the children of men. It opens the vision of the mind to behold eternal things, and foretells future events. It also unfolds the hidden things of the past. By it, through the Son of God, the worlds and all created things were made and are upheld.

Daniel Tyler on the Godhead

2011-12-02T10:59:00.001-05:00

I found the following as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Godhead", The Juvenile Instructor 13/14 (15 July 1878): 166.

Plain as is the doctrine of the "Godhead," as contained in the Old and New Testaments, it is a lamentable fact that the Christain [sic] world has for centuries been drifting into atheism. It would be, perhaps, less surprising if this remark applied only to non professors of religion. But such is not the fact. The very fundamental articles of faith in God, of most denominations, are laid in infidelity. To this cause mainly may be traced the infidelity of the outside world. The great mass of sectarian creeds have the following language: "There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts or passions." A few leave off the word passions.

Now, my dear readers, reflect for a moment and ask yourselves if you can conceive of the existence of anything, no matter how small, "without body or parts." Your answer must be "No! there could be no such existence. It is nothing." Just so professed atheists argue. Then they say if God is nothing, there is no such a being.

The God we worship is a living, material Being, with body, parts and passions. Such is the God described in the Bible. A Being in form like unto ourselves. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness," etc. (Genesis 1st chapter, 26th verse.) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him: male and female created he them" (27th verse).

Now, if man is a material form, then is God the same, for man was made in His image and likeness. This is what Adam who had dwelt with Him taught his offspring, and the same was committed to writing by Moses.

We may also infer that woman formed a part of the heavenly family, as we are taught in our beautiful hymn. This should be a comfort to the daughters of Eve – that our Father in heaven was not alone when enthroned in the heavens before the world was. "They twain were one flesh," says the inspired writer, and in this the earthly is without doubt a pattern of the heavenly. This Scripture is in harmony with modern revelations as given by the prophet Joseph, and also with the ancient writings of inspired men. The Church after the death of Jesus gradually departed from the truth, and taught the practice of celibacy, forbidding marriage to the priesthood and degrading women from her proper position as necessary to the completeness of man, for man is not perfect without the woman.

The 1st and 2nd verses of the 5th chapter of Genesis says "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God created he him; male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

This subject is beautifully illustrated in a discourse preached in Beaver some time ago by Elder Erastus Snow, and published in the Deseret News.

Asa Shinn on Agency

2011-12-01T13:58:00.001-05:00

The other week, I was involved in an online thread in which a Latter-day Saint commenter started a discussion of the notion of 'agency' with a couple other Evangelicals. The Latter-day Saint began by defining agency as the "power to exercise one's own moral choices", and was curious whether mainstream Christianity affirmed that we humans really do have agency. Some of my fellow Evangelicals, while affirming that we have 'free will', were concerned over the meaning of "agency", both suggesting that this was just another case of Latter-day Saints redefining an established term. One defined agency as "acting for another person or entity, not yourself", and thus being "pretty much the opposite of free will". He concluded, "I find it strange how mormons tend to assign a completely opposite definition to a word." The other Evangelical, meanwhile, suggested that Joseph Smith had perhaps been impressed by the fancy word 'agency' (and others) in a business context and had then "incorporated them into his new religion without really understanding the implications".

Now, this all seemed odd to me. I'd never had any difficulty understanding what 'agency' meant in LDS use, because I know that the concept of 'agency' is still an important one in the philosophy of action. However, to get to the bottom of things, I decided to see if the term 'agency' had any currency in theological discourse of Joseph Smith's time. The first author I consulted was Asa Shinn, an American Methodist theologian who was a somewhat older contemporary of Joseph and who became one of the co-founders of the Methodist Protestant Church. Searching briefly through two of Shinn's works, I found an abundance of references to 'agency' with usage that seems to roughly align with the way 'agency' is discussed in LDS scripture. I would love to get some LDS input on the following quotations from Shinn, both in terms of their use of the term 'agency' and in terms of how a Latter-day Saint might react to Shinn's arguments.

From Asa Shinn, An Essay on the Plan of Salvation: In Which the Several Sources of Evidence are Examined, and Applied to the Interesting Doctrine of Redemption, in Its Relation to the Government and Moral Attributes of the Deity (Baltimore, MD: Neal, Wills and Cole, 1813), 212:

He [God] is perfectly free and voluntary in all his actions, because he is omnipotent, and cannot be controlled by any other power or authority. To deny his free agency, is to ascribe our being and happiness to necessity, seeing if God be not a free agent, they depended not upon his liberty of option, and could not be otherwise than they are. It is to deny that power belongeth unto God; because a power to do any thing, includes a power to leave it undone, and to affirm a being has power, who is destitute of agency, is an absolute contradiction.

From Asa Shinn, An Essay on the Plan of Salvation, 212-213:

That God did in fact endow his creatures with free agency, is evident from their fall: for if they were not free, it is certain that they were made wicked, or else were driven into sin by some other power; if they were made wrong, the fault was in their Maker, not in themselves; and if they were forced into sin by the agency of another, God only could be the author of it, because there was no other power in the universe. Therefore we are reduced to this dilemma: either to believe that our creator is essentially wicked, or that his creatures were made free, and introduced evil by an abuse of their liberty.

But why was this agency or active power bestowed upon them? We must answer that it was essential to the enjoyment of moral happiness, or that it was not: if it was, this good and perfect gift is resolvable into the divine beneficence; if it was not, then we say God bestowed a useless power upon his creatures, which could do them no good, and which might prove fatal to their tranquillity. If we say he gave it in order to ruin them, we charge him with malevolence, and if we say he gave it for no end, we charge him with folly: therefore the only modest and rational conclusion is, that he gave it through benevolence, because it was essential to their spiritual or moral happiness.

From Asa Shinn, An Essay on the Plan of Salvation, 213:

His giving them a moral law is, of itself, an incontestable proof of their free agency. For had God intended to regulate all their actions by the force of destiny, nothing more would have been necessary than to subject them to the mechanical laws of matter, because these are entirely sufficient to accomplish the end.

From Asa Shinn, An Essay on the Plan of Salvation, 214-215:

But waving the case of beasts for the present, it is sufficient to our purpose that all men are conscious of a degree of power over their actions, and that their highest happiness arises from knowledge, and is inseparable from a voluntary choice. The exercise of virtue, or the enjoyment of moral happiness against our consent is impossible; because it implies a state of complete slavery.

If it be asked, why was not the will inclined to choose all the proper means of happiness, as necessarily it is inclined to choose happiness as its end, in preference to misery; I think the proper answer is, that it was impossible for creatures to possess moral rectitude, and of consequence, moral happiness, without the liberty of option, or, which is the same thing, without a degree of power, which essentially implies that agency of will that can choose one thing or its contrary; - that can perform an action, or omit the performance of it - that can determine, or omit the determination.

If this be true (and that it is so, I hope to prove directly) it clearly follows that the reason why God did not hinder the introduction of moral evil, by making it impossible for his creatures to sin, was because it could not be done without making it impossible for any creature to enjoy holiness or moral happiness. God left his creatures free, because God is love; and being love, he delights to see his creatures enjoy that sublime felicity, which the chains of destiny would have deprived them of forever.

From Asa Shinn, An Essay on the Plan of Salvation, 230:

Had it been our Saviour's purpose to save mankind by force, or any particular part of them, he doubtless had power sufficient to accomplish his design, without dying on the cross; and had such a compulsive system been consistent with the moral attributes of God, I have no doubt but he would have done so: he would have changed every man from sin to holiness, or rather, from bad propensities to good ones, by an absolute and irresistible influence; but the actions of a person thus compelled could have no relation to morality, and therefore God's moral perfections demanded that they should be saved, if at all, in a way that should not destroy their agency: for this reason our Saviour's atonement had relation to the moral attributes alone, and therefore his plan must be so laid as only to influence sinners by motives, and leave them to the liberty of choice.

From Asa Shinn, On the Benevolence and Rectitude of the Supreme Being (Philadelphia, PA: James Kay, 1840), 72:

Another attribute constituting the greatness of the Deity, is his Almighty Power. By this we mean his ability to do any thing which it is possible for agency to do. The bounds of possibility are known only to himself; but to some extent we are able distinctly to conceive them. [...] To say that God has Almighty Power, is to say, in other words, that he is an Almighty Agent. He who does any thing without agency, does it by necessity, which is not power, but the want of it. Whenever an agent acts, he could, at the same time, have omitted the action; and therefore He who possesses the greatest power, enjoys the most perfect liberty of any being in existence.

From Asa Shinn, On the Benevolence and Rectitude of the Supreme Being, 73-74:

There is, in short, no other alternative but to believe either that God is a perfectly Free Agent, or to embrace a system of atheism. An intelligent being without agency, that is, without power, however good in his disposition, and however clear in his intelligence, could do nothing; and his understanding could serve no other purpose than to gaze at the course of necessity, as a man bound down with a chain might look up and watch the course of the wind and the clouds.

From Asa Shinn, On the Benevolence and Rectitude of the Supreme Being, 99:

Secondly, our agency, or freedom of will, is another gift bestowed on us by infinite goodness. This power is essential to three great purposes: 1. to furnish each individual with the happiness of spontaneous action; 2. to give each the capacity to contribute to the good of society; and 3. to render both men and angels amiable in the sight of their Maker, as his cheerful, free, and voluntary servants and children. Without the gift of moral agency, all these great and valuable ends would have been prevented; and both men and angels would have been placed on a level with brute creatures in the scale of existence.

From Asa Shinn, On the Benevolence and Rectitude of the Supreme Being, 129:

Is it not a plain contradiction to say that a man is at liberty, at the same time that his will is bound to one certain course of action? And besides, for aught we know, freedom of will is essential to intelligent existence; so that the existence of a creature with mental endowments, and destitute of all agency, is as impossible as for matter to exist without occupying space.

So how does Shinn's use of "agency" compare to that found in the LDS tradition? And does Shinn present a good case for the reality and importance of both divine and human agency?

------------------

EDIT: I've decided to introduce a few brief quotations from an author other than Asa Shinn: Methodist bishop and theologian Randolph Sinks Foster. The following comes from R. S. Foster, Objections to Calvinism as It Is, in a Series of Letters Addressed to Rev. N. L. Rice, D.D. (Cincinnati, OH: Hitchcock and Walden, 1849), 36, 46-47, 51:

I object to the doctrine of decrees, as held by Calvinists, in the second place, because it is inconsistent with, and destructive to the free agency of man. [...] Thus we prove upon the system both that it makes God the author of sin, and destroys the free agency of man. [...] Freedom and liberty, I believe all admit, are essential to accountability; and hence the well-grounded apprehension of our Calvinistic brethren, at the imputation, that their doctrine is destructive to freedom of agency. [...] By destroying the agency and accountability of man, I charge the system further, with destroying the moral character of human acts and volitions - with rendering the terms, vice and virtue, good and bad, as conveying the idea of moral quality - not predicable of man. If the system be true, man is no more a moral being. Do what he may, he is not vicious - he is incapable to be virtuous. He never sins - he cannot; nor the opposite. [...] Morality supposes agency - the system, by inevitable deduction, denies it; and the two fall together.

I note that, between these volumes and some additional works quoted therein, "agency" seems to have been roughly synonymous with will and liberty (indeed, Shinn glossed it with "freedom of will" as a synonym), and denoted the power to choose to act; it could be qualified as "free" or "moral", though it could also appear without such additional qualifiers; and it could be ascribed to both God and humans.

Daniel Tyler on Baptism for the Dead

2011-11-30T13:27:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Baptism for the Dead", Juvenile Instructor 13/13 (1 July 1878): 154-155.

Heretofore we have said but little about the dead. Not because they are of less importance than the living, but because our duties to ourselves when once understood include our duties to the dead. On this subject the whole world, outside of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are in darkness, although the ancient as well as modern scriptures are very plain.

The prophet Isaiah, in the 61st chapter and 1st verse, among other things, said of the mission of Christ, one portion of His labors would be "to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound."

To find the fulfillment of this prediction we must, of course, go to the New Testament, which gives His biography. Neither of the four writers of His life and travels tell us of His visiting a single prison to proclaim liberty to a single captive. But on the other hand they all tell us that He was Himself captivated, held a prisoner and put to death. But Peter, the presiding Apostle, unravels the mystery. In the 3rd chapter of his first epistle, commencing with the eighteenth verse, he says: "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit: by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

The theory of some portion of the Christian world is that all who die in their sins must go to purgatory - a lake of fire and brimstone, to remain throughout all eternity. Peter tells us that those wicked antediluvians, after being shut up in prison a few hundred years to atone for their rebellion, have another chance offered them. He also tells us, in the 4th chapter and sixth verse of his first epistle, that the reason the gospel was preached to the dead was that they might be judged according to men in the flesh. Men in the flesh hear the gospel when it is on the earth, and the judgment where with they are judged is, if they receive and obey it they shall be saved, and if they reject it they shall be damned. So, then, the dead shall have the same chance. Our good fathers and mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles, aunts, and, in fact, all who have died without the gospel shall have the same chance as those who heard it in the flesh, that they may be judged the same as those who have their agency to receive or reject it, just as they please. But, says one, Jesus said they must be baptized as well as believe if they would be saved. Yes, and He said again, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

A man means any man. Now, if no man can enter God's kingdom without baptism, how can the dead who receive the gospel be saved, as they cannot be baptized? Paul answers this question by asking another. In the first Corinthians, 15th chapter, 29th and 30th verses, he says: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?"

This solves the mystery. Those who were not baptized because they did not hear the gospel, in fact all who have not committed the unpardonable sin, may at some period of God's mercy have the work done by proxy, and receive their resurrected bodies.

Baptism is of itself a sacrament, and reminds us that as Jesus died for us, and was buried and resurrected, so, also, shall we, through Him, come forth out of our graves, in like manner as we come out of the water. It is then an emblem, not only of His, but our own resurrection, through Him.

One Year

2011-11-27T20:13:00.002-05:00

Earlier today, I was making some additions to my Welcome and Introduction post here at Study and Faith. And as I looked at the date it was posted and the date I marked as 'last edited', I had the stunning realization that today is the one-year anniversary of Study and Faith! I can hardly believe that it's been an entire year... In one sense it seems like merely a few weeks or months, but in another sense, I suppose it feels like an eternity. It boggles the mind to think that this blog has been a part of the most recent 4% or so of my life thus far. I think this blog has done and hopefully accomplished a lot in the past year - and may there be many more to come!

I considered doing a review of the contents of this year's-worth of posts, but I'll reserve that sort of thing for the end of the calendar year. Instead, I'd just like to thank everyone who's commented here in the past year, everyone who's ever helped to promote this blog or any of its posts, everyone who's ever linked to it, everyone who inspired some of the ideas that have made the last year possible. Through blogging and life, I've found wonderful relationships with friends of all sorts of backgrounds, whether LDS or Evangelical or Orthodox or non-theist, and I'm so grateful for it all. I suppose one could say I unknowingly celebrated the anniversary by attending an LDS sacrament meeting this morning for the first time since before I started Study and Faith. I'll hopefully have more posts derived from that in the weeks to come.

So thank you, everyone. (...And hopefully I'll be able to find time to reply to comments again soon!)

Logic and Faith: A Convert's Testimony and Some Pushback

2011-11-27T14:34:00.000-05:00

Last week, I was reading through the blogs of some currently serving online LDS missionaries, and I came across the written testimony of a recent convert named Rachel. There were some statements there that struck me oddly:

I have a small testimony, but a strong one. Speaking to the missionaries and studying religion and the Scriptures left me with three main questions.
What is God?
Why does the Holy Spirit lead different people to different things?
And is the Holy Spirit leading me to join this church?
And I in my arrogance and foolishness felt that I could figure out the answers to these questions logically. This led to months of confusion. Then about a week before Easter, I felt that I had figured it out. I had the answers to all but a small question on where the Holy Spirit was leading me that I was sure I could figure out. I gave my answers to the missionaries who told me that I was being too logical and that I needed to be much more prayerful. This turned out to be very true. [...] I began my journey trying to understand everything logically. Finally I came to the point where I ceased relying on my own mind for the truth and relied on faith and prayer. [...] Logic brings with it a feeling of safety, but there is a deep beauty that can only be found in faith.

Notice the strong contrast between 'logic' and 'faith' here - the same antithesis that has for such a long time been endorsed by detractors of all religion as well as by many believers who wanted to protect their beliefs from challenge or themselves from mental effort. (I'm not accusing Rachel of that, of course.) I don't think Rachel is right about this. I am not at all convinced that there is such a thing as "being too logical". No, not at all. There is such a thing as being insufficiently prayerful. There is such a thing as being insufficiently attentive to the non-rational dimensions of the human experience. There is such a thing as failing to trust God's actual promises, or failing to value God as God. But to say there is such a thing as "being too logical", as the missionaries said to Rachel, seems to me to be saying that it's possible to love God with all your mind too much. I don't think I can buy that.

God wants us to be logical, he rejoices in our ardent and faithful use of the precious gift of reason that he gave as a crown of glory to the human creature. 'Logical' is not the only thing God wants us to be, that's true, but nor does he want us to shrink back from pursuing logical rigor and consistency in our beliefs or from putting all things to rightful tests. Rationality can and ought to be pursued in the full with respect to its proper domain - which includes coming to an awareness of the truth and scrutinizing claims of truth and falsehood. That doesn't mean that nothing but abstract reason has any rightful or realistic bearing on that task, of course; by all means, prayer for God's enlightenment ought to be a critical element in the quest for religious truth. But let us abandon any fear of being "too logical" - for God wants us to approach him with study and faith (or, perhaps here I might paraphrase, logic and faith) held in both hands clasped together.

Daniel Tyler on the Gathering Dispensation

2011-11-26T13:09:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Gathering Dispensation", Juvenile Instructor 13/12 (15 June 1878): 136.

There never was but one dispensation that was not a gathering dispensation. In the commencement of the Christian era those who embraced the gospel did not gather together. This was because they could not. They made an effort to live as a united body, under the direction of the Apostles in Jerusalem, but after the death of Ananias and Sapphira this order of things was broken up, and no one sought a temporal union after. They were content on the one hand to look after their own varied interests; and, on the other hand, the persecutions without and discords within were such that it was not possible for them to live in large bodies together. Yet the Apostles looked forward to a period when there should be a "dispensation of the fullness of times." In that dispensation all things that were "in Christ" were to be gathered in one.

The great dispensation which was to exceed all others, is referred to in the Lord's prayer as the kingdom of God, wherein His will is to "be done on earth, as it is in heaven."

In the 21st chapter of Luke, Jesus speaks of this same kingdom as one of the signs of His second coming. From the 5th to the 24th verse He speaks mainly of the signs which were to precede the destruction of Jerusalem. From the 25th to the 36th He speaks of His second coming, and says that all the signs, including the setting up of the kingdom of God, which shows that the church must be gathered to form a kingdom, should all take place in the generation in which He would come; that is, the generation who should then be living would not all pass away until all should be fulfilled. By this we may perhaps infer that the most of those living when the signs began to show themselves would pass away, but a few would remain until all was fulfilled. It needs no argument to prove to us that the signs spoken of here have been showing themselves for more than forty years, and that they are every year more visible. In this generation, then, we must look for the kingdom of God. When we find it, as was shown in a former article, we must find Apostles at the head and all other grades of priesthood, the same as delineated in the 4th chapter of the Ephesians, 12th chapter of 1st Corinthians, and other places in the scriptures.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only church in all the world that has all the offices and gifts in it. It is the kingdom spoken of.

John the Revelator, in the 14th chapter and 6th and 7th verses of his prophecy, shows that this new and last dispensation should be ushered in, in the midst of the signs spoken of, by the administration of a holy angel. This was fulfilled when the angel Moroni delivered the plates, from which the Book of Mormon was translated, to Joseph Smith, and when he exhibited them to the witnesses, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris. The kingdom spoken of is the same as that figuratively represented by a little stone, in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, mentioned in the 2nd chapter of Daniel. The little stone, represents the rock of revelation, upon which Christ said He would build His church - by which the prophecies will be fulfilled, and the dispensation of the fullness of times accomplished; when "the knowledge of God shall cover the earth as the waters cover the great deep."

John says, in the 18th chapter of the Revelations, "I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." The whole burden of scripture, ancient and modern, shows the last dispensation to be one of gathering the righteous to escape the calamities which are to befall the wicked and to learn the ways of the Lord in His house (see Micah, 4th chapter and 2nd verse, also Isaiah, 2nd chapter and 3rd verse).

Materialism and a Finite God

2011-11-23T23:29:00.001-05:00

Recently, BYU mathematics professor William V. Smith posted at the By Common Consent blog an interesting analysis, "Toward a Theology of the Material", in which he explores the implications of saying that all things (both 'physical' and 'spiritual') are in fact composed of matter, including God himself. It's a fascinating exercise, and Smith concludes that God could perhaps travel at about 90% of the speed of light and would have to position himself close to our planet during "potential communication episodes"; that God would have to govern the universe through an "established administrative network"; and that all things, including God, are ultimately mortal, even post-resurrection. Thus, our future and God's future are only "functionally infinite". God is not all-powerful, of course, and nor can he be 'omniscient' even in a relatively limited sense, since the speed of light sets limits upon the rate at which he could receive information. (Note: Smith himself, noting the drastic cost of these limitations, consequently does not take this level of materialist theology to heart. I don't happen to know what Smith substitutes for it or how he relates his own theological positions to LDS historical precedents.)

In light of Smith's case, must any modern LDS theology that remains true to its thoroughly materialist roots indeed accept all of these limitations upon God and ourselves?

Daniel Tyler on the Duties of Church Membership

2011-11-23T13:31:00.002-05:00

The following appeared as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Priesthood", Juvenile Instructor 13/11 (1 June 1878): 130.

A number of the foregoing chapters have been devoted to the different grades of priesthood. I will now say something about the duties of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Several of these duties are mentioned in what has already been said on the duties of the Lesser Priesthood - such as partaking of the sacrament, praying vocally and in secret, meeting together, etc. It is also implied that they must not hold any hard feelings towards one another, that they must not speak evil of one another, and that they must not tell lies or backbite one another. As we have already shown, it is the duty of teachers to see that none of these evils exist. Of course, then, it is the duty of members not to indulge in what the teachers must suppress when found among the Saints. The importance of being worthy to partake of the sacrament must be apparent to all who understand the gospel. Jesus said, "Except ye eat of my flesh and drink of my blood you have no life in you." This does not mean, as the Catholics hold, that the bread is transformed into the very body of Christ and the cup into His blood; but as He said in another place, "As oft as ye do this, do it in remembrance of me." And as St. Paul said, "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." The substance of all that is revealed on this subject is that it brings to mind not only what sufferings Jesus endured for us and all mankind, but the consummation of the great plan of redemption laid "from before the foundation of the world," "the only name under heaven whereby man can be saved" and the Godlike love and union which should dwell with all Saints. Without this redemption Adam and Eve and all their posterity would have been eternally lost. No one from the beginning to the end of the world could have been resurrected to return to God, from Whom all our spirits came. Take away the atonement made by our great Redeemer and all our hopes of heaven, happiness and exhaltation would be lost - eternally and hopelessly lost. But through Him all may come to God and be saved.

The Saints should make the labors of the teachers easy by observing every known duty. Otherwise, the only benefit resulting from their labors will be that they have cleared their own skirts.

Through the faithfulness and obedience of the Saints, the teachers or presiding officers will not have any occasion to govern them. Joseph Smith once said to a stranger who enquired how he governed so great a people of so many nationalities and conflicting traditions, "I do not govern them. I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves." This is all that should be expected of teachers, or any other grade of priesthood.

One duty of vital importance is the building of temples, in which to perform ordinances for the living and the dead. Could those who feel indifferent to this duty once have the vision of their minds opened to the anxiety of those prisoners of hope on the other side of the vail, and be as anxious for the dead as many of the dead are for themselves through the living, the temples now in progress would soon be completed and filled and others going up. There are many little everyday duties to attend to. Our daily labors - feeding the hungry, if any be in our midst, clothing the destitute, visiting the sick, binding up the broken hearted, comforting those who mourn, encouraging the meek, uniting in our temporal as well as spiritual labors, being self-sustaining and independent of Babylon, and finally, keeping all the commandments of God.

Modern Mormonism: Just Another Protestant Sect?

2011-11-21T13:55:00.003-05:00

I found the following quotation from Yale professor Harold Bloom in an opinion piece he wrote the other week for the New York Times:

I recall prophesying in 1992 that by 2020 Mormonism could become the dominant religion of the western United States. But we are not going to see that large a transformation. I went wrong because the last two decades have witnessed the deliberate dwindling of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into just one more Protestant sect.

What do you people out there think? Note: Bloom does go on to charge that Mormonism is "not even monotheistic" and includes "other secrets also, not tellable by the Mormon Church to those it calls 'Gentiles,' oddly including Jews"; he adds that "the Mormon God is not a creator", and he raises concerns about the fitness of any devout LDS politician for office (while also taking some rather mean-spirited cracks at the "anti-intellectual and semi-literate Southern Baptist Convention"). Is Bloom's assessment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints here accurate and fair?

As you contemplate an answer to that question, worth reading is this reaction to Bloom's piece: "Harold Bloom, Mormons and spleen-venting".

EDIT: More recently, also see James Olson's Times and Seasons post "Why Bloom, et al are wrong" - though with regard to Olson's early endorsement as "succinct and accurate" of Bloom's claim that most mainstream American denominations deviate as strongly from historical Christianity as do both Mormonism and Islam, I must call this not simply wrong but bafflingly wrong.

Daniel Tyler on Priesthood - Part IV

2011-11-20T13:46:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Priesthood", Juvenile Instructor 13/10 (15 May 1878): 112-113.

In tracing the history of the patriarchal priesthood, we find much difficulty. There is no doubt that it commenced with Adam. Moses says that God blessed Adam and Eve. In the 3rd chapter of Luke, 38th verse, it says Adam was the son of God, hence we find the first patriarchal blessing on record in the first chapter of Genesis, which is given jointly to Adam and Eve.

This blessing does not differ materially from those of later date, only in this, that Adam being the first man of whom we have any record, is placed at the head and given dominion over all the earth, including the beasts of the field, the fowls of the air and every living creature, as well as the fruits of the earth. Whereas, the blessings of his descendants divide the earth and all things pertaining thereunto among his faithful offspring. For instance, Abraham was promised the land of Palestine and all the surrounding countries, which would probably include the entire eastern hemisphere. Jacob appears to have had North and South America added, and transferred it to the branches of Joseph, as shown in a former article on the Book of Mormon.

It may be asked, if the earth is to be divided and given to the offspring of Abraham, what will become of those nations of different lineage if they obey the gospel? It would look hard and unjust to debar them of an everlasting inheritance, to which these blessings referred; especially since the gospel is to be preached to every creature.

Before explaining this matter, I will say that all the nations of the earth sprang from the three sons of Noah - Shem, Ham and Japheth. The Israelites sprang from Shem, the Negroes from Ham and the Gentiles from Japheth. Yet none but the descendants of Shem were promised land enough to pitch a tent upon - in allusion to the ancient mode of living in tents, instead of houses as we do now. Canaan, the oldest son of Ham, was to be a servant of servants to the descendants of Shem and Japheth, and as such he would need no landed property. Japheth was to dwell in the tents of Shem, or, as we would now say, live on Shem's homestead, farm or inheritance. You will find this statement verified by reading the 25th, 26th and 27th verses of the 9th chapter of Genesis. To the ignorant this would look hard; but St. Paul, who was the Apostle to the Gentiles, tells them how they became heirs to the promises. He says, in substance, if not in word, that as many as were baptized into Christ became Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Scripture shows that the Jews were broken off because of unbelief and the Gentiles were grafted in.

The ancients esteemed their patriarchal blessings very highly, and well they might when we consider, as already shown, the extent of their magnitude. Even Esau, the brother of Jacob, who, so far as we have any account, never labored to accumulate anything, but depended solely upon hunting for a living, wept bitterly when he heard that his brother Jacob, who had always been faithful and had taken care of his father's property, had, through the stratagem of his mother, obtained the first blessing of his father, which he supposed belonged to him by birthright. And, when his father, Isaac, told him he could not recall what he had done, although he had given his brother the blessing, in the agony of his soul, Esau exclaimed, "Hast thou but one blessing, my father? bless me, even me also, O my father."

This story, which is a true one, should teach a moral to all Latter-day Saints, both old and young - it shows that those who are more worthy and less assuming will have their rights. We all get just what we live for, and no more.

Of the office of patriarch, as we understand that important position in the priesthood, we know but little that occurred in the days of the ancient apostles. There is no doubt the records of their blessings and most of their other gospel writings were destroyed during the apostasy and persecution of the church.

Bowman on Joseph Smith, Theosis, and Daniel Peterson

2011-11-18T16:15:00.000-05:00

A while ago (early August 2011), BYU professor and LDS apologist Daniel C. Peterson authored a somewhat popular-level article for Deseret News, "Joseph Smith's restoration of 'theosis' was miracle, not scandal", in defense of the claim that the LDS conception of 'exaltation' was original to apostolic Christianity. In the course of this brief defense, Peterson appeals to a variety of ancient Jewish and Christian writings.

More recently, however, Christian apologist Robert M. Bowman Jr. has replied to Peterson's arguments in a five-post series titled "Did Joseph Smith Restore Theosis?", hosted at the Parchment and Pen blog. I've found Bowman's critique to be quite worthwhile reading, and I'd invite any of my readers to seriously consider making their way through it entirely:

I for one really hope that someday Bowman expands this critique in some more suitable venue to also interact with the best LDS scholarship in detail. What he's done here, I think, is quite good; an in-depth critique of the academic treatments of exaltation by Peterson and others, however, would have the potential to be utterly magnificent in pushing the dialogue forward.

Daniel Tyler on Priesthood - Part III

2011-11-17T11:27:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Priesthood", The Juvenile Instructor 13/08 (15 April 1878): 86-87.

The fact that there was anciently a quorum of Twelve Apostles did not necessarily imply that there should be no more than that number, any more than the fact that there were at least two quorums of Seventies implied that there should be no more of that grade of priesthood. This will be clearly seen by reference to one example. Although Matthias had been called to fill the vacancy caused by the fall of Judas Iscariot, Paul was afterwards called to the Apostleship, when the quorum was full. There was also a full quorum on this continent, while there were at least thirteen Apostles in the old world. In fact, there must have been more even in the old world; for, as already quoted, when Jesus "ascended upon high * * * * he gave some apostles," with other authorities. The quorum was full long before his ascension, except the place of Judas, and that one vacancy was filled soon after. Those that he gave when he ascended were not numbered with the Twelve, Matthias being chosen afterwards.
These remarks are to show our young readers that the statement of religious teachers in the world, (with whom many of them may have to cope in a few years) that there were but twelve, and never to be any more, is incorrect and unscriptural. What we have quoted from the fourth chapter of the Ephesians shows plainly that wherever the Church of Christ is, there must be Apostles to aid in uniting and perfecting the Saints.

What is true with regard to the continuance of Apostles is equally so with regard to all grades of priesthood named in the Old and New Testaments. They are not all named in the above chapter. Those not named directly are given under the general head of helps and governments, and mentioned in other places. In the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th chapters of Hebrews we have a pretty fair explanation of the priesthoods of Melchisedek and Aaron.

Many religious persons in these days take upon themselves to preach. In fact, all the hundreds of different denominations, except the Latter-day Saints, are men-made churches, and have nearly all broken off from the Catholic Church or the Church of England, and, as they deny revelation, have no right to preach, and, in fact, do preach but very little of Christ's gospel. Paul says, while speaking of being called to the above priesthoods, "No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." By reading the 4th chapter of Exodus, 14th, 15th and 16th verses, you will learn how Aaron was called. It was by revelation through an inspired man; and that is also according to the pattern given to Joseph Smith. Not only were Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon and others called in this way, but the Lord, in giving His plan for ordaining men to different offices in the Church, says they shall be ordained according to the gift and calling of God in the one who ordains them. The manner of calling men to preach, we see, is precisely the same as in the days of Moses and of Christ. In fact, it was always the same whenever God had a people on the earth, and always will be.

The patriarchal priesthood, although equal in importance with the other grades, is not so much written about. It seems to have been more of a family than a general church government, although the President of the church held this as well as all other grades of priesthood. Thus, Adam governed the righteous portion of his posterity by this priesthood as long as he lived: and several of his descendents did the same thing.

If children who have good, faithful Latter-day Saints for their parents understood this principle they would never wish to get beyond their control in time nor in eternity. The law of celestial marriage is connected with this priesthood. Not only are men and women sealed for time and all eternity, but the results or offspring of that marriage are just as eternal as the covenant itself. I will say further that it was no more designed in the economy of heaven that children should break off and be independent of their parents than it was that the woman should forsake and be independent of her husband after having been sealed for time and all eternity. It not only places the man at the head of the woman, but constitutes him a father or patriarch to his posterity forever. Of course, he is expected to prove himself worthy to retain his wife or wives and children.

This does not take any blessing from the children, although at first sight it may so seem. It is, in fact, a great blessing to them to have a lather to look up to; not only for the short space of eighteen or twenty-one years, but to all eternity. The children, when they become men and women, and have families, will stand at their head the same as their parents stand to them.

Now, children, is not this lovely? Who would want a better heaven than this? Suppose all the inhabitants of the earth from Adam had observed this law, would not this have been a happy world? If you think it would, I will ask few other questions. Suppose all of you who have good Latter-day Saints for parents, always take their counsel, no matter how old you are. Then suppose they are adopted or sealed to great and good men, and they to others until all the righteous, both the living and the dead, are united in one great family, with Adam and Eve at the head as they would have been if people had remained righteous. Then, suppose Satan should be bound and the wicked destroyed, and Jesus, our elder brother, should come and reign over and with us for a thousand years. Would we not have a happy millennium? Let us try it and see.

On Mormonism and the 'Cult' Issue

2011-11-15T12:26:00.004-05:00

Lately I've been wanting to take a moment to address a few of the most major questions one is likely to deal with in dialogue between Latter-day Saints and representatives of traditional strains of Christianity. It seems that the first one of those has to be the matter of the pejorative term "cult", which is frequently used in Evangelical parlance as a classification of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It was in the news a while back with the comments made by Rev. Robert Jeffress, who wished to politically favor Rick Perry over Mitt Romney by casting Perry as a member of an acceptable religious community and Romney as a member of a fringe, deviant "cult". For a qualified audio defense of the practice of designating the LDS faith as a 'cult', see this episode (17 October 2011) of Mormonism Research Ministry's Viewpoint on Mormonism podcast. For just one recent LDS reaction to the use of the word 'cult' to describe the LDS faith (but not a direct response to the MRM podcast episode), see Kevin Barney's post "Cynical Use of the Word 'Cult'" at the By Common Consent blog. While I disagree cordially with some of Kevin's statements (and those of a few of the commentators), I agree with much of the spirit of his post and recommend reading it.

These days, Evangelicals and others who want to classify Mormonism as a 'cult' will typically recognize that attempts to actually use the standard sense of 'cult' are pretty unsuccessful. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is too large, allows for too much ideological diversity within its ranks, and is generally no more guilty of most of the standard 'secular' criteria for culthood than any of the mainstream Christian denominations. Because of this, representatives of Evangelical 'countercult' ministries typically distinguish between the "sociological definition of a 'cult'" and the "theological definition of a 'cult'". Jeffress did the same, clarifying that he considers the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be a "theological cult".

The latter is generally defined (more or less) as any group of comparatively recent coinage that, while staking some manner of claim to normative Christian identity (or, sometimes, not), nevertheless exhibits sufficiently high degrees of doctrinal aberration on major Christian tenets as to render that claim problematic as stands; sometimes it is added that a cult will generally focus on one particular leader's (or tradition of leaders') interpretations of Christian scripture, or includes novel scripture foreign to the historic Christian tradition, and that the 'cult' will attempt to restrict its members' access to any criticisms of its teachings. In the podcast episode I linked above, Bill McKeever, drawing on Alan Gomes, defined a cult - in this 'theological sense' - as "a group that claims to be Christian while at the same time either denies or distorts the basic teachings of the Christian faith". McKeever added:

...I think we need to get this across, that if that word is to be used - and we have often said, that's not a word that we like to use a lot, I think it should be more descriptive rather than accusatory. I would certainly never go up to a Latter-day Saint and just say, "Oh, you're a cultist." I mean, that would certainly not allow for a very good conversation, and I should not be surprised if a Mormon would not want to talk to me if I acted like that, probably any more than they should expect me to want to talk to them after they come up and say, "Oh, you're a part of the Great Apostasy." [...] But if that's what they want to believe about us, I have no problem with that. I don't lose sleep at night knowing that my Latter-day Saint acquaintances or neighbors think that I'm a part of the Great Apostasy. I just don't. But I find it odd that the Mormons tend to really wring their hands over this notion that we in Evangelical Christianity don't embrace them as a part of the Christian faith. They really get upset about that.

Now, with regard to the thorny 'Are Latter-day Saints Christians?' question, I'm choosing to defer that to another post; it's a big issue and deserves more time, effort, and space than I can give it right here and now. I'll also be upfront and say that - rejecting the above 'theological definition' as offered by Gomes, McKeever, Jeffress, and others - I would not classify the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a "cult", and at any rate do not think it is wise or charitable to call it such (for reasons partly overlapping with McKeever's stated rationale for using the term sparingly, even on his definition).

During the past several weeks as I've been thinking through this subject, and particularly the modern form of the claim as represented by modern countercult ministries, I thought I had a fairly firm idea of why I have a problem with the statement. I was going to write that I find the notion of a "theological definition of a 'cult'" to be a wholly spurious attempt to piggyback onto the cult hysteria of the late twentieth century, thereby allowing for the same sort of equivocation and dishonest play on the public perception of a common term that countercult apologists frequently accuse 'cultists' of. More recently, though, I've been doing a cursory historical examination, and I'm not sure that most of those charges will quite fly anymore.

The word 'cult' was once a fairly value-neutral term derived from the Latin word cultus, generally denoting any system of (somewhat ritualized) worship devoted to some entity - thus, one might talk of the "cult of Poseidon" in ancient Greece, or of the "Jewish temple cult" in the early first century. Eventually, however, other uses of the term began to crop up. In 1898, a church rector from Wisconsin named Arthur H. Barrington published a book called Anti-Christian Cults: An Attempt to Show That Spiritualism, Theosophy and Christian Science are Devoid of Supernatural Powers and are Contrary to the Christian Religion. The 'cults' of the title were any seemingly novel spiritual/theological counterfeits that simply revived old heresies; in a commendatory prefixed to the book, Barrington's bishop Isaac Nicholson calls them "old ghosts of old-time heresies", with each presenting itself as one of "the latest fashions, the last mental 'cult,' the newest and freshest 'religion'" (4). Barrington himself, very early in the text, goes on to write:

Too many (if there were but two or three, it were too many) - too many are being deceived, and blinded, and led astray to-day, by the false hopes, and promises, and claims of certain religious yet anti-Christian cults which in vain would undermine the truth as it is in Jesus. Undoubtedly, like other fads which sprung up in the night of darkness rather than in the light of eternal truth, these shadows of good shall come to nought, as they are unquestionably of men; but, in the meantime, the effect upon the adherents of such substitute religions cannot but be disastrous. (12-13)

Barrington later continues to refer to such groups as "these anti-Christian cults, which are making inroads into the Household of Faith" (23). In his conclusion, he again classifies them as "modern substitutes for the Gospel or anti-Christian cults" (158). Noteworthy, perhaps, is that Barrington was here focused on what we might call the 'occultic' and/or 'mind science' variety of then-new religious movements; noteworthy also is that the early Latter Day Saints also engaged in harsh polemics against many of the same movements, particularly spiritualism. In this book, Barrington never identifies the LDS faith as a 'cult', though it would be difficult to argue that he wouldn't have seen it in that light, and the general sort of rhetoric he uses against his 'cults' bears a great deal of resemblance to that used in many nineteenth-century anti-LDS polemics.

That was in 1898. It was only in 1932, so far as I know, that the word 'cult' in a non-cultus sense came to be used by sociologists, and that was with Howard Becker's modification of Ernest Troelsch's church-sect typology. For Becker, a 'cult' was a small and somewhat disorganized religious group that originates, not (like a 'sect') by way of schism from a previous religious body, but rather by way of crystallizing around some new leader or thesis. Later sociologists refined this sense.

From what I can gather, it was mostly after Becker's work that the word 'cult' came to be more widely used by Evangelical apologists to designate theologically deviant movements; up until the late 1930s and early 1940s, where the Evangelical countercult movement really began to take off, the words 'heresy' and 'sect' still enjoyed much greater currency. Jan Karel van Baalen's 1938 book The Chaos of Cults was probably an early milestone, though in those early days, the term '-isms' was also quite common (as even in the subtitle of van Baalen's book). The countercult legacy was expanded by Walter Martin's 1955 book The Rise of the Cults, where he defined a cult as a group centered on "any major deviation from orthodox Christianity relative to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith" (12). Of course, it was his 1965 book The Kingdom of the Cults that really became influential. In the 1970s and 1980s, of course, a secular 'anti-cult movement' arose in connection with the 'cult scares' of groups like the Peoples Temple (Jim Jones), the Branch Davidians (David Koresh), and so forth.

Somewhat contrary to my initial expectations, then, the Evangelical 'theological' use of the word 'cult' actually has a lengthy ancestry, one that predates even the 'sociological' use of the term. Historically speaking, at least a soft division can be made, though any given 'countercult' author in later years may have used the word 'cult' with some mixture of 'theological' and 'sociological' elements in mind. So there's a sense in which the Evangelical use of the term 'cult' in general is valid. Furthermore, if all of the above is accepted, then in that limited sense, the common Evangelical application of the term 'cult' (as so defined) to the LDS Church also has a sort of validity, from an Evangelical standpoint.

However, it also seems to me that most people today have a certain sense of the word 'cult', a sense inculcated in large part by the cult scares of the late twentieth century. The word conjures up images of followers devoted to a single charismatic leader, willing to kill themselves to attain enlightenment if required, or residing on a compound awaiting the leader's cue to engage in apocalyptic combat with the 'forces of darkness' residing in the outside world. There is certainly a theological element to this common sense, but it can't be reduced to just 'weird beliefs', let alone 'a supposedly Christian but doctrinally deviant group of people with some weird beliefs and practices'. Modern-day Mormonism simply does not fit the ominous popular picture of what a 'cult' is, at least not in most of the relevant aspects.

In light of this overwhelming popular notion of what a 'cult' is, it seems that Evangelicals should probably abandon the special use that prevails in our subculture, no matter how old its precedents are. Let's face it: we don't need it. Either we want to communicate precisely and only what our 'theological definition' (and preferably a more nuanced formulation of it, at that) states, or we actually desire the extra baggage of the word's popular connotations. If the latter is the case, I consider that to be rather shameful. If that's what we want, then - all our rhetoric about truth and clarity aside - we really just want to tar the LDS reputation by guilt-by-association with far more nefarious and dangerous groups. (Or, perhaps we really do believe that the LDS Church is a 'cult' in that popular way, right down to 'brainwashing'. In that case, there's no dishonest dealing here, just a need for a reality check.)

Alternatively, perhaps we really are being sincere in using just the venerable and time-tested 'theological definition' for the word 'cult'. Maybe we really do wish that people would understand the distinction, and our goal is to be "descriptive" rather than "pejorative". In the podcast episode linked at the top of this post, Eric Johnson reads a passage from Alan Gomes in which Gomes appeals to the long pre-secular usage of the word 'cult' in just this fashion as a reason to continue doing so now, since - the implication runs - we therefore have a greater implicit 'ownership' of the word than the secular/sociological uses; Gomes also finds it fitting for reasons ill-explained. (They also point out that some mainstream LDS leaders have had no qualms about using the word 'cult' in reference to, e.g., alternative claimants to the LDS legacy.) But we have to realize that we're setting up wholly unnecessary obstacles for communication with anyone outside our subculture. I don't see a need for that. We can retrain ourselves to be comfortable with words like 'heresy'; won't that do? That certainly has a far more august pedigree in Christian polemical use than the word 'cult' does. As Timothy Dalrymple writes on the subject:

If we want to communicate with the world in a way that brings both clarity and charity, then we have to deal with words according to their current meaning. It profits us nothing to call Mormonism a cult. It makes us appear paranoid, self-righteous and cruel, and it slanders the good people who believe they are following Jesus Christ in the LDS Church. According to the popular definition of that term, we are accusing Mormons of being on a level with David Koresh and Jim Jones. This is inaccurate, unloving, and unChristian.

The use of the word 'cult' is an obstacle to dialogue to a greatly unnecessary degree. Even for those Evangelicals who sincerely wish to invoke only the 'theological definition' of the term and to do so in an air of gentle love and respect, the very offensiveness of the word due to its widespread current connotations will belie that message. It is the very example of needless offense and poor communication. Now, perhaps most of our alternative evaluative terms (e.g., 'heresy') could also be offensive, and we may have to live with that, just as Latter-day Saints must learn to live with the extreme offense that their narrative of apostasy and restoration represents for all mainstream Christians. But forsaking the word 'cult' is a worthwhile gesture, since more understandable evaluative terms remain that denote the same as our cherished "theological definition of a 'cult'".

For that reason, I try to avoid using the word 'cult' whenever possible in general, and particularly in reference to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Under virtually all but the now-most-trivialized sense of the word, it's simply inaccurate. Even under that sense of the word, it communicates poorly and causes offense. And better options are available. I love and respect Latter-day Saints, and so I don't want to cause any offense that isn't necessitated by any accurate articulation of my honestly-held views. I also don't want to perpetuate inaccurate impressions of the LDS people or their faith. As best as I can, I want to speak the truth in love, and I don't believe I could effectively do that while routinely using the term 'cult' in reference to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Given the history and momentum of Evangelical use of the term, I doubt there's much hope of it dying out any time soon, but to me it's worth protesting.

Daniel Tyler on Priesthood - Part II

2011-11-14T11:20:00.000-05:00

The following appeared as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: The Priesthood", The Juvenile Instructor 13/07 (1 April 1878): 77.

Although the New Testament informs us what officers were in the Church, it says but little as to their duties or callings. Paul does say, in the 4th chapter of the Ephesians, that, from the Apostles down, they were "for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry," etc., "till we all come in the unity of the faith;" but what the special duty of each was is left for modern revelation to determine, so far as we are concerned. The ancient disciples were, of course, posted in all these matters, but they never committed them to writing, or, if so, their manuscripts were either lost or destroyed through persecution of the church.
The book of Doctrine and Covenants, commencing on page 115, new edition, says, "An apostle is an elder, and it is his calling to baptize and to ordain other elders, priests, teachers, and deacons, and to administer bread and wine – the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ – and to confirm those who are baptized into the church, by the laying on of hands for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures; and to teach, expound, exhort, baptize, and watch over the church; and to confirm the church by the laying on of hands, and the giving of the Holy Ghost, and to take the lead of all meetings. The elders are to conduct the meetings as they are led by the Holy Ghost, according to the commandments and revelations of God.

"The priest's duty is to preach, teach, expound, exhort, and baptize, and administer the sacrament, and visit the house of each member, and exhort them to pray vocally and in secret, and attend to all family duties; and he may also ordain other priests, teachers, and deacons. And he is to take the lead of meetings when there is no elder present; but when there is an elder present, he is only to preach, teach, expound, exhort, and baptize, and visit the house of each member, exhorting them to pray vocally and in secret, and attend to all family duties. In all these duties the priest is to assist the elder if occasion requires."

Next in order is the duty of the teachers, who are standing ministers in the Church. The office of a teacher, although in the grade of priesthood reckoned as one of the lesser, is, nevertheless, one of the most important callings in the Church; and, above all men, those who hold this office should be exemplary. On the other hand, if there is any preference to be shown, I think the teachers should have it as they visit among the Saints. Their duties are so important to the general welfare. I trust our aged and venerable Presiding Bishop, Brother Edward Hunter, will pardon me for quoting a few words which I once heard fall from his lips in a Bishops' meeting, in Salt Lake City, on this subject. After telling the Bishops to instruct the Saints to set their houses in order when the teachers came to visit them, he said, "The teachers are the only men who can preside in my house when I am at home. I call my house to order and give the presidency to them during their visit."

Those words fell upon my heart like "apples of gold in pictures of silver," and, although thirty years have passed, they are as fresh in my mind as when first spoken. I can recommend them to all Latter-day Saints, not only as falling from the lips of a great and good man, but for their intrinsic value.

Of course the offices are all of vital importance to the Saints. The will of God cannot "be done on earth as it is in heaven" unless they are all in the Church and all magnified. And without them all it would not be the "kingdom of God."

Jesus said of John the Baptist, "Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." Hence we see that John, although a great prophet, holding only the lesser priesthood, could not establish the kingdom. But after the Savior had ordained twelve to the higher priesthood, he said to them, "the kingdom of heaven is within you." That is as much as to say that they held all the authority necessary to build up the kingdom of God on the earth.

We will now come to the duties of teachers, and and you will see I have not attached too much importance to the calling. We will quote from page 116 in the book of Doctrine and Covenants:

"The teacher's duty is to watch over the church always, and be with and strengthen them, and see that there is no iniquity in the church – neither hardness with each other – neither lying, back-biting, nor evil speaking; and see that the church meet together often, and also see that all the members do their duty, and he is to take the lead of meetings in the absence of the elder or priest – and is to be assisted always, in all his duties in the church, by the deacons, if occasion requires; but neither teachers nor deacons have authority to baptize, administer the sacrament, or lay on hands: they are, however, to warn, expound, exhort, and teach and invite all to come unto Christ. Every elder, priest, teacher, or deacon, is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him; and he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordains him."

Daniel Tyler on Priesthood

2011-11-11T10:39:00.000-05:00

The following is taken from Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Priesthood", The Juvenile Instructor 13/06 (15 March 1878): 71.

We have seen the importance of faith, repentance, baptism for the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, and the spiritual gifts. We will next proceed to examine the authority by which the gospel was preached, and how the Christian church was organized.

While Jesus was on the earth, all will admit, He was the President of the Church He had organized; and after His death His Apostles took the lead in all matters pertaining to the Church. As that was not a gathering dispensation, it is probable there was not any local first presidency organized. The Twelve Apostles, with Peter, James and John as the foremost, took the lead, Peter being the President. The highest office in the Church was that of an Apostle. Jesus, the Redeemer of the world, was an Apostle. Paul, in his epistle to the Hebrews, says, "Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus."

We read that Melchisedek is called a great High Priest, and it is probable that Paul alludes to Jesus as the great High Priest after the order of Melchisedek. Melchisedek lived contemporary with, or at the same time as, Abraham, and was probably Shem, the oldest son of Noah, who lived until one hundred and fifty years after Abraham was born, being almost a second Adam. He was the oldest living man, and, from the blessing given him by his father, must have been the greatest and best of his sons. Being the oldest, he also held the birthright over all others. Canaan (or the descendants of his brother Ham) was to be his servant, and Japheth, the other brother, was to dwell in his tents. Or, in other words, be a renter or sojourner, having only a temporary residence, while the eternal and permanent inheritance was that of Shem. He would naturally be the "righteous king," or "king of righteousness," which the name Melchisedek signifies, and would be the most proper Patriarch to bless Abraham, whose father forfeited that right by being a worshiper of idols. If this conclusion be correct you can readily see how this man could be such a great High Priest, having the presidency over all the earth.

As to the equality of authority among the Apostles, Paul said he was least of all the Apostles; yet there was nothing Peter could do but what he could do so far as priesthood went.

I said that the Apostleship was the highest grade of priesthood. Paul, the Apostle, says: "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."

This same Apostle understood that wherever the Church of Christ was this same Apostleship should take the lead until the Church should all be united and become perfect. He says, speaking of Christ: "And he gave some, apostles; and some prophets; and some, evangelists; and some pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive."

How plain this is! Not only is the Apostleship the first office in the Church, but must remain until all Saints are united and perfected. In fact, it continues forever, and presides in the eternal world, Jesus being in His glorified condition the "great Apostle and High Priest of our profession."

Jesus also said, "You twelve shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Again, John saw the names of the Twelve Apostles written on the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem during the millennium, thus showing that next to Jesus they presided over the holy city.

It was quite proper, then, that when Joseph Smith ordained the first Apostles in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he should reprove Elders who took him to task for not first ordaining them High Priests. He supposed that "Elders in Israel" ought to understand so plain a proposition of scripture as that the Apostleship embraced every other authority of the Church.

Daniel Tyler on Signs

2011-11-08T10:18:00.001-05:00

I found the following as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Signs", The Juvenile Instructor 13/05 (1 March 1878): 53.

After baptism for the remission of sins and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, there were certain signs followed the believers. This was in fulfillment of the promise Jesus made to His Apostles, saying, "These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover."

You will observe that the gifts here spoken of were to follow those who believed and obeyed the preaching of the gospel. Now, if Jesus had been an impostor it would have been easy to prove Him such, for, in that case, the signs would not have followed, and the deception would soon have ended. But it seems they did actually follow, the same as they follow the preaching of the gospel now.

The same chapter informs us that "they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following."

The signs must have been the same as promised or they would not have confirmed the word, or promise. Those same promises were renewed to Joseph Smith, and follow the believers now as much as then. The writer has witnessed them in scores of instances. So have thousands of others.

It appears to be almost needless to prove these things, and would be entirely so were it not that the present generation of so-called Christians have gone so far into infidelity as to deny them, though still claiming to believe in the Bible. They pretend to believe that they were only given to the Apostles to establish the gospel. But we have proved that the promise was to all those who believed, and were to all whom the Lord should call to repentance in every age until the earth shall be full of the knowledge of God.

I do not wish my young readers to think that spiritual or miraculous gifts are a sure sign or infallible proof of the truth of the gospel. They were never designed to convince unbelievers. You will find, by reading the 16th chapter of St. Mark, that there is not the slightest hint that any one should receive them until they believed. They were to be the result of faith; to confirm and strengthen those who already believed. Jesus told the people plainly that there should be but one sign given to the generation in which He lived. When the Jews asked Him for a sign, He replied: "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of the prophet Jonas. For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

We may infer from the sayings of Jesus that He would be taken by wicked hands and slain, and that His body would lie three days in the tomb, at the end of which time He would arise from the dead. We know that Jesus was crucified and lay three days in the grave. The fulfillment of the part of the prophecy which was given as the only sign to that generation none disputed. They saw Him nailed to the cross; they saw Him hanging there after He was dead. They saw Him taken down a lifeless corpse; they witnessed Him laid in the new sepulchre, or tomb; they saw an army of soldiers placed around the tomb as a guard to keep His followers, as they said, from stealing away His body. To double the assurance they saw a great stone rolled against the door. All of this was done because they remembered the sign Jesus had given them. He told them they might take that as a sign. This being given as a test, they were determined there should be no fraud. They would see that He did not get out of the grave on the third day. But, after all of their caution, lo! an angel rolled the stone away; the guards fell to the earth like dead men; the Redeemer of the world arose and walked out of the tomb, and those unbelievers never saw Him after. The sign had its fulfillment then, but He never appeared to those sign-seekers; not even to contradict the falsehood circulated by the soldiers who guarded the sepulchre – that His disciples stole His body while they were asleep. Yet He was in and out with His Saints for forty days, notwithstanding which, many years afterwards, when the New Testament was written, the Jews kept to the old fabrication that His followers stole His body. That one sign proved a curse instead of a blessing, for it condemned them, as they remained in unbelief.

It was the same then as it is now. The Lord told Joseph Smith that those who seek signs shall have signs, but not unto salvation.

Daniel Tyler on the Gift of the Holy Ghost

2011-11-05T10:50:00.000-04:00

I found the following as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles", The Juvenile Instructor 13/04 (15 February 1878): 45.

In our last we casually referred to Peter's preaching the doctrine of repentance and baptism for the remission of sins. He not only told them that if they would be baptized their sins should be forgiven, but promised them the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Our devout Christian friends tell us that this was only promised to the Apostles, or, at most, to believers in that age of the world. Now when they say that, they contradict Peter, for he said, "the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." They had just passed the meridian of time, hence, the "last days" had commenced; and he told them that what they had witnessed was what the prophet Joel predicted should come to pass in the last days – that God would pour out His "spirit upon all flesh." He did not tell them that was the end of Joel's prophecy, but a mere beginning, to be continued to them and their children, and to those afar off, and finally to all whom the Lord should call. Call to what? Why, to the same that they were called to. To believe in the Lord Jesus Christ; repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins, by those having the same authority; and they should have the same Holy Ghost, or Spirit of God, which Joel said should, during the period which should follow the meridian of time, called the last days, be poured out upon all flesh. Or, as Isaiah expresses it, "until the knowledge of God shall cover the earth as the waters cover the great deep."

You will see, by reading the second chapter of Acts, that it was the different denominations of religious people of that day, who assembled on the day of Pentecost, whom Peter commanded to repent and be baptized, and promised the gift of the Holy Ghost. Yes, they were "devout men out of every nation under heaven," yet they had to come in by the same door as the publicans and other sinners, or they could not get this Holy Ghost. Just the same as ministers at the present time and their flocks must come in by the same door, or they cannot get this heavenly gift; neither can they otherwise enter the kingdom of God, set up for the last time.

This gift comes by the laying on of hands. Hence, when Paul found some who supposed they had been baptized unto John's baptism, but had never heard the doctrine that John taught about the Holy Ghost, he re-baptized and laid hands on them and they received that heavenly comforter, and spoke with tongues and prophesied. By reading the 8th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, you will find that Philip went to Samaria and baptized all the Samaritans. When the brethren at Jerusalem heard of it, Peter and John were sent down, who, when they came, prayed that they might receive the Holy Ghost, which none of them had received, although the ordinance of baptism had been attended to. Whether this Philip was the Apostle by that name, and, through so many applications for baptism, had not had time to confirm them, or whether he was a priest after the order of Aaron, and therefore unauthorized to administer in spiritual things, does not appear from the reading. I believe the latter, however, is the more generally received opinion. After prayer, Peter and John confirmed, or laid hands on, them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

There is an instance mentioned in the 10th chapter of the Acts where one devout man – a religious Gentile – received the Holy Ghost before being baptized. This chapter, however, explains itself. It shows the reason to be that, although Jesus had told the Apostles to preach the gospel to every creature, they had, nevertheless, supposed the Gentiles to be unworthy of it. Hence the Lord gave Peter a vision, wherein he was told to kill and eat animals which were called unclean, and forbidden by the law of Moses, which he (Peter) objected to, on the ground that he had never done the like, and did not think it right. This vision, which was repeated three times, was to show him that all the nations of the earth were entitled to salvation if they performed the works required. Still, he could not fully understand it until he saw the Holy Ghost given to that Gentile, even as to himself and others on the day of Pentecost. Then, and not until then, did he say, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him." The Jews thought the command only meant all nations who were of the seed of Abraham, but Jesus meant just what he said – "all nations."

No sooner was the great Apostle convinced that the Gentiles were entitled to salvation, that he commanded Cornelius and his household to be baptized, although they had received the Holy Ghost.

I trust you will read the whole of the 10th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. It makes the subject very plain, and shows how Peter, on his return, had to argue and explain before his Jewish brethren would be satisfied with his baptizing, and associating with, the Gentiles. After explaining everything to them, he closed with these emphatic words: "What was I, that I could withstand God?"

An appeal to the great Jehovah settled the question, and the Christian Jews gave it up. All were now satisfied that it was right to baptize believing Gentiles, and this is why they received the Holy Ghost before baptism – that the Jews might know that it was right to baptize them into the Church.

A Godly People Bless the Earth

2011-11-03T20:43:00.000-04:00

The following poem by John A. Lant, titled "A Godly People Bless the Earth" and dedicated to "the brethren of the Central States Mission", appeared in The Improvement Era 10/3 (January 1907): 198. I hope I have the second and third stanzas in the proper order. Compare to an earlier poem by John Lant, courtesy of Ardis E. Parshall at her Keepapitchinin blog.

A godly people bless the earth,
By kindly deeds and saintly worth;
America! thou grand and free!
To gospel glories bend the knee,
In humble thankfulness and prayer,
For these are gaining everywhere;

From revelation's reop'd fount,
These glorious latter days they count,
When men from strife and wrong shall flee,
And earth - a paradise to be -
Receive the lessons hidden long
In joy sublime and gladsome song.

Let menace to all evil come,
With good disproving slander's tongue.
Ope thy heart, each soul who bore
False witness, thoughtless, o'er and o'er;
Thou art forgiven; canst thou forgive,
And "Mormon" precepts strive to live?

These Latter-days mean peace for all -
These Saints in gladness meekly call
To share the joys bequeathed from heaven
For them, for thee, the precious leaven -
That all God's children born to earth
May merit life divine from birth.

Daniel Tyler on Baptism

2011-11-02T10:21:00.000-04:00

I found the following as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Baptism", The Juvenile Instructor 13/03 (1 February 1878): 34.

Next in order to repentance we find baptism. Perhaps our young readers will be surprised to learn that a variety of opinions exist among the so-called Christians of our day, not only as to the mode, but as to the object, or intent, of baptism.

Some hold that it is a mere outward sign of inward grace, and may be administered by any one who thinks, from some impression of the mind, that he is called to preach, no matter whether he is ordained by proper authority or not.

There are but few, except the Latter-day Saints, who will admit that it has anything to do with people's salvation. There are many who have no other baptism than sprinkling a little water in the candidates' faces, which is generally when they are infants. There are different churches who do this. Another mode is for the candidates to kneel down in the water, or in a meeting house, and have water poured on their heads. Some believe in being immersed once with their faces upwards, others three times, face downwards, while others discard all baptism except that of the Holy Ghost. Some do not believe that baptism or any other outward ordinance is essential to salvation. In fact, I believe all, or nearly so, except the Campbellites, or Christian Baptists, look upon baptism and all other outward forms as having nothing to do with salvation.

The Book of Mormon tells us that those who baptize infants are in the gall of bitterness and the bonds of iniquity, and have cause to repent; because such little children are in a state of salvation already, and need no baptism. It also tells us that baptism is for the remission, or forgiveness, of sins; and that little children have no sins to be baptized for.

The Lord, in a revelation to Joseph Smith, said that all of the spirits that took bodies in this world were innocent and pure before Him until they became old enough to know right from wrong, or good from evil. Then, if they sinned, knowingly, they were guilty before Him; but not until then.

When some little children went up to Jesus, our great Redeemer, upon one occasion, His disciples thought a great man like He was would not like to be troubled with them; but He said "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Again He said, "Except ye become as a little child, ye can in no wise enter the kingdom of heaven." Hence, you see, it is plain that they have no sins to be forgiven, and need no baptism.

Jesus taught very differently from what most religious people, except Latter-day Saints, teach in these days. A devout man, a religious ruler of the Jews, once came to Jesus by night, to find out what he should do to be saved. Jesus told him he must be born again, or he could not see the kingdom of God. He thought it very strange, and asked Jesus to explain what He meant. Then He said "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

I understand the birth first spoken of to mean a change of heart, which usually follows the preaching of the gospel, before repentance or baptism. For instance, your parents will tell you that when they conversed with the Elders, or heard them preach, the gospel appeared plain; and when they read the Bible then they could understand it as they never understood it before. They could see the beauty of the organization of the Church, with apostles, prophets, helps, gifts, etc. Receiving this reflection of life, I understand, is being "born again," in the sense implied by the Savior. It is seeing the kingdom and the way to enter it, which, as we have already shown, is by being born of water and of the spirit, or, in other words, by being immersed in water and receiving the Holy Ghost.

If there was no other scripture to prove that immersion was right, this would be sufficient, as a person could not be born of water, unless he were first buried in it.

Before Jesus was crucified, He chose and ordained twelve apostles, some quorums of seventies, etc. He told His apostles to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; that those who believed and were baptized should be saved, while those who did not believe should be damned. Hence you see it was just as necessary that they should be baptized as it was to believe; for they must do both if they would be saved. They were also promised certain gifts and powers if they would believe and obey the gospel. But we will talk more about these gifts hereafter. The apostle Paul tells the former-day Saints that they were buried with Christ in baptism. This is very plain; they were buried with water, like burying a corpse in the grave. In fact, he compares it to Christ being covered up in the tomb, where He was completely shut in, and coming out after the angel rolled the great stone from the door.

Baptism follows repentance, and is for the remission of sins. Peter taught this doctrine on the day of Pentecost.

Daniel Tyler on Repentance

2011-10-30T11:05:00.001-04:00

Continuing this series of reprints, I found the following as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles: Repentance", The Juvenile Instructor 13/02 (15 January 1878): 23.

In my last article I wrote a few things about faith; merely telling my readers what it was and some of its effects. I hope they will read the lectures on faith in the fore part of the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, where it is explained at greater length than I have space to write.

The second gospel principle is repentance. There are many views among the religious denominations on this subject; but I can see but one sensible explanation of it; that is to first cease to do wrong, and then, if we have injured anybody, to do our best to make it right, and be sorry enough not to repeat the same wrong or any other, so far as our weak natures will allow us to refrain.

It is not expected that we will become perfect all at once. All good men except Jesus have done some wrongs, but it is expected of all Latter-day Saints that they will continually strive to do less evil and more good. This is the fruit of repentance.

The Savior told Joseph Smith how he might know when people repented. He said they would confess their sins and forsake them. Now if we confess our sins or wrong doings, and do not forsake or quit them and strive to do better, that is an evidence that we have not repented.

I have heard sectarian ministers preach that repentance was to be sorry for sin; but if that doctrine were true we might say that everybody had repented, for all are sorry at times for their wrong doing. But there is no repentance unless they reform their lives. In fact, I think the word reform fills the place of the word repent, and would be as applicable as repentance. I think it means the same thing; and it makes no difference whether it be applied to persons in or out of the Church.

When John the Baptist preached the "gospel of repentance" to the Jews, he told them to bring forth fruit meet for repentance. That was to show by their good works that they really had intended to reform, or do better than they had been doing. They came to him by thousands and asked baptism at his hands, while they continued their wicked practices; but he said to them, "O generations of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: and think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."

He meant by this that, although great promises had been made to the seed of that great and good man, they could obtain them only on conditions of faithfulness and obedience; and as they were like many professed religious people now-a-days – very wicked – they must do better or it was needless for them to think of being baptized. And John might just as well have said, "If you do not attend to these things I would just as soon baptize a serpent as you, for all the good it would do you."

'Plan of Salvation' - Earliest Usage?

2011-10-28T14:50:00.000-04:00

A question of historical interest comes to my mind. What is the earliest recorded usage of the phrase "plan of salvation", apart from the putative historical setting of the Book of Mormon (see Moses 6:62; Jarom 1:2; Alma 24:14, 42:5)? Although this is currently quite popular among Latter-day Saints, I know for certain that the phrase predates the founding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To cite the earliest example of which I was aware when I started writing this post, it appears in the title of Methodist minister Asa Shinn's 1813 An Essay on the Plan of Salvation: In Which the Several Sources of Evidence are Examined, and Applied to the Interesting Doctrine of Redemption, in Its Relation to the Government and Moral Attributes of the Deity. Now I've found it in a 1768 sermon ("The Law Not Made Void Through Faith") by Jonathan Edwards. I doubt very much that this should happen to be its first use, either. Where might the phrase first have turned up?

Daniel Tyler on the Gospel Principles

2011-10-27T11:25:00.001-04:00

Today I'm going to begin the process of reprinting a series of brief articles that appeared in the LDS youth periodical The Juvenile Instructor in 1878. These were written by Daniel Tyler, who became LDS in 1833, served as a sergeant in the Mormon Battalion, and was a mission president for Italy and Switzerland. He died in 1906. The initial installment here, I found as Daniel Tyler, "The Gospel Principles", The Juvenile Instructor 13/01 (1 January 1878): 4-5:

Some months since I wrote several articles on the Book of Mormon for the benefit of young readers of the Instructor, which I hope were read and understood by them. I tried to write in plain and simple language, so as to convey my full meaning. If the children read and understood those articles I think they will also be able to comprehend what I now write on the principles of the gospel. To understand them properly they should carefully read them all.

First among these principles is faith. I suppose my readers will naturally ask, "What is faith?"

St. Paul, the greatest Apostle to the Gentiles, says it is "the substance (or assurance) of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." It is not a belief in a mere statement that carries no weight of truth with it; but it is the evidence of something you have heard or read of (or it may be impressed upon your minds by the Holy Spirit) which you never saw. Evidence means a strong conviction of truth. Testimony which is not convincing to the mind is not evidence.

To illustrate I will say that but few who read this article ever saw the prophet Joseph Smith, yet you have, perhaps, read his history, and been told by your parents and others that they have seen and conversed with him; hence you have it firmly fixed in your minds that such a man as Joseph Smith really lived. You have no doubt of it. This conviction of truth is faith. You have read the revelations which were given through him to the Elders and to the Church. You have an inward conviction of their truth. Everything goes to prove to your minds that they are the words of the great Redeemer. That strong impression of truth is faith.

You have read and heard that there is a God who created all things that exist, both in heaven and on the earth. You have seen thousands of living creatures. You know they could not have created themselves. When you behold them you ask how the first ones came, and you are told that God made them, and that He made the world and all other worlds. Then you ask who is God, and what is He like.

Your parents, being Latter-day Saints, tell you that He is a pure, holy being; that He is immortal, that is, not subject to death, and has all power to do whatever He pleases for the good of His children, of whom we form a portion. They also tell you that we were created in His image and likeness, or form, and that He is our Father in Heaven; that is, the father of our spirits.

This looks reasonable to you. You think a great deal about it, and it is firmly settled in your minds that it is as they have told you. You believe it with all your hearts. This belief is faith.

You are also told by your parents and by the Elders that Jesus, the son of God, will come in a few years, to reign on the earth a thousand years; and that all the faithful Saints, whether they are now living or dead, will reign with Him. You have no doubt about it – you mean to be numbered with them. That strong evidence is faith.

You sow or plant grain. You are confident if you attend it well you will have a good crop. That assurance in your minds is faith.

Faith is the prompter, or moving cause, of all our actions, both spiritual and temporal. By faith the sick are and were healed, the dead were and will be raised to life. By faith God made the worlds and keeps them in their proper order and places. By faith He does and always will exist. By faith and obedience to His laws we may dwell eternally with Him in the heavens.

Book of Mormon Geography: A Perspective from 1878

2011-10-25T13:52:00.000-04:00

While glancing through an issue of The Juvenile Instructor, I found a little lesson for children, presented in Q&A format, dealing in part with Book of Mormon geography. I doubt very much that the author ever imagined that a time would come when his or her answers would be viewed as controversial within LDS circles! The following is taken from "Questions and Answers on the Book of Mormon: Lesson XXXIV", The Juvenile Instructor 13/02 (15 January 1878): 16.

Q. What three colonies does the Book of Mormon mention, as having settled on this American continent?
A. That led by Jared and his brother from the Tower of Babel, that led by Lehi and Nephi, and that led by Mulek, the son of King Zedekiah.
Q. By what names were they known?
A. The first was called Jaredites, the second Nephites and Lamanites, and the third the people of Zarahemla.
Q. What part of the continent did the Jaredites principally occupy?
A. North America, though it is probable that they spread over all the land.
Q. Were the other colonies confined to any particular place of North or South America?
A. No; they spread over all the land.
Q. In the beginning where did they principally live?
A. The Nephites and Lamanites first lived in South America, afterwards in Central America and then in North America.
Q. Where was the Jaredite nation destroyed?
A. At the hill Ramah.
Q. Where was the Nephite nation destroyed?
A. At the hill Cumorah.
Q. Are these two names for the same hill?
A. Yes; it was called Ramah by the Jaredites, and Cumorah by the Nephites.
Q. In what part of the land is this hill?
A. Between Palmyra and Manchester, Oneida County, in the State of New York.
Q. Do you know where Joseph Smith the prophet found the records of the Book of Mormon?
A. He found them in the hill Cumorah.

Orson Whitney's "Home"

2011-10-24T09:27:00.001-04:00

I'm dedicating this post to Kirk and Kari, and also to any of my readers who might happen to actually live in Utah, or simply love the place. I hope very much to go one day - though in the meantime, as I think would also please the author of this piece, I'm striving to simply appreciate the beauty of my own native home while I still can. I here present Orson F. Whitney's poem "Home", found in The Poetical Works of Orson F. Whitney (Salt Lake City, UT: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1889), 106-108.

Ye who would brave the bounding billow,
To view the wonders of the world,
And magnify with vain devotion,
The scenes in foreign climes unfurled!

Have ye ne'er dreamed of nearer splendors,
Than beautify an alien strand -
The glorious legacies of nature
Bequeathed unto your native land?

Hast never thought, whilst rapt admiring
The distant starlight overhead,
There may be flowers of beauty blushing
Neglected 'neath thy careless tread?

Ne'er has it been my lot to wander
O'er Orient sands or Alpine snows,
To linger in the vine-clad valleys
Where Rhine's clear, winding water flows;

I ne'er have watched the sun declining
Along the classic Grecian hills,
Nor pressed the plains of Palestina,
Nor mused beside Olympian rills.

But I have stood amidst the thunders,
When shook the towering granite height,
And trembled where the vivid lightnings
Blazed on the angry brow of night.

I've seen the headlong torrent leaping
From crag to cloven gulf beneath,
And caught the snow-slide's whelming terrors
Descending on the wings of death.

Oh, tell me not that grander tempests
Reverberate with louder roar,
On Switzerland's historic summits,
Than on the Rocky Mountains hoar;

That fiercer rolls lauwine, thundering,
Than the snow-slide's fatal thrall,
Or lovelier the Alpine cascade
Than the Wasatch waterfall.

Say not the shores of limpid Leman
Their cultured charms unrivalled hold;
When lakes that lie in yonder mountains
Are rife with beauty unextolled.

Nor praise the skies of soft Italia,
Where suns in glory rise and set,
Till thou hast seen them bathe with brightness
The matchless hills of Deseret.

Sing not of Erin's famed Killarney,
Laud not the wave of Galilee,
For I have sailed the buoyant waters
Of Utah's wondrous saline sea.

I've climbed her everduring mountains,
I've rested in her peaceful vales,
I've quaffed her pure and sparkling streamlets,
I've breathed her life-renewing gales.

I love the land that gave me being;
Her features aye shall seem to me,
More beautiful than boasted marvels
Of all the realms beyond the sea.

The Nature of the Beast: A Guest Post on Ministry in Utah

2011-10-23T01:39:00.001-04:00

A fellow-seminarian and close friend of mine, Kirk, of the blog Kuriakos, has spent a significant amount of time working with Evangelical churches in Utah over the past two summers. In exchange for driving him to the airport, I managed to ~~extort~~ convince him to write a guest post reflecting his experiences there. (Supplement the following with this post he wrote as he prepared to depart Utah again this past August.) What follows is, I repeat, a guest post by my friend Kirk. Without further ado....

"If you want to be ignored by more people than you ever thought possible, come pastor a church in Utah."

- A pastor in Utah

When I first went to Utah two summers ago to join Westlake Community Church for a summer as an intern, my knowledge of Mormon culture probably would not have filled one page of paper. I spent my first summer in Utah County staring out the windows of our car in amazement as we drove past countless wards and stake centers and seminary buildings. I couldn't get over the feeling that I was in some parallel American reality, where everything was exactly the same with one exception: all the churches had disappeared and been replaced by wards. For a kid who grew up in the church, who attended church two or three times a week his whole life, who went to a Christian university in the center of the Bible Belt in Oklahoma, the absence of churches on every street corner was very disconcerting for a while. But by the end of my first summer the shock had worn off. And when I returned this summer for a more serious and intensive internship in the church, I came with a new understanding of what ministry in Utah meant for churches in the Utah Valley like Westlake Community Church: survival.

Except for the few rare large churches in Salt Lake City, pretty much every church in Utah is just trying to survive. I suspect that the vast majority of these churches are operating on the edge of failure - all it would take would be one bad month of finances or the loss of two or three key members and the whole church might collapse. This leads to some high tensions between Christian churches in the Valley. The pastors at my church have reached out to the pastors at other churches in the area to partner with them in ministry, but any connections are coming together very slowly. Even in my church, other new church plants are looked at with some trepidation, because if this other new church really takes off, then how will we survive? I think most Christian churches operate under a "this country ain't big enough for the both of us" mentality, and so divisions remain as we try to reach a culture that prides itself on unity and has always been critical of the divisions in the Christian church. But, that's the nature of the beast, as my pastor always says when we talk about the challenge of ministry in Utah. It can be extremely frustrating sometimes, as it was the day my pastor said the quote at the beginning of this post. But in spite of the hard times, I have come to love ministry in Utah. I love living and working in the midst of the Mormon people, and I love the greater feeling of brotherhood with the Church universal that I have felt as I have been able to identify with what it is like to be a Christian outside the U.S. even though I haven't left its soil.

Westlake Community Church does not specifically target Mormons. (If we just did that, we probably would have closed a year ago.) No, we strive to be a Christ-centered, Bible-believing church that is a light to the whole community in Utah County. We exist to help our congregation grow in Christ and to share Christ with the whole city. It just happens that 95% of the people in the city are Mormon, so we can't help but be impacted by their presence. We just want to make sure they are impacted by ours as well. The amazing thing is that our church has brought in a vast spectrum of people, from people who have been in Christian churches their whole life to people who have never been religious at all, from people who left the LDS Church years ago to people who still call themselves Mormon. It is exciting to see everyone come together and worship on Sundays. We have days when we serve the community and days when we evangelize, but we are grateful to welcome whomever God gives to us. My pastor says we are good at doing two things: preaching the word and loving people. We try to keep our focus on doing these things well in the grace of God, and we trust he will continue to bless us and keep us standing.

I really have come to have a tender spot in my heart for the Mormon people. For one thing, they aren't all that different from me. It's not like I've learned to identify with a completely different culture and language that I met while on some foreign mission field. No, I'm ministering among people who are mostly white, conservative Americans just like me. I don't smoke or drink, so I fit in really well in Utah. I don't even drink coffee, and I rarely drink soda, so I wouldn't even have to make any big adjustments in life if I wanted to join the LDS Church. I see that they work hard to ensure that their families are provided for at the same kinds of jobs that Americans all across the country hold, at places like the Harley Davidson plant, car dealerships, universities, law offices, and fast food restaurants. They also work hard at ensuring their salvation, and they have to because their religion requires it. That's just the nature of their beast, I suppose. Temple requirements, mission trips, good standing in one's ward - all these things are required of a good Mormon, especially if they want to make their way into the Celestial Kingdom and life everlasting with Heavenly Father. (Sometimes Christian churches can load just as many rules and demands on their members' backs. I believe Jesus was protesting this type of religion in Matthew 23 when he scolded the Pharisees.) But I have seen how the Mormon people work so hard to make themselves perfect, to appear as if they have it all under control, to "endure to the end". I have watched how LDS teens are rebelling against traditional Mormon beliefs, chafing under the strict rules and becoming disillusioned by the extensive information available that casts doubt on their past and scriptures. And all these things break my heart.

It breaks my heart to see people so close to the truth and yet so far away from understanding what it means. It breaks my heart to see people proclaim salvation by grace through faith in Jesus who are unable to accept that free grace because their other scriptures tell them that part of their salvation is still up to them. It breaks my heart when I share with Mormons about the free grace I have found in Christ, how he has done for me everything I could have never done and left nothing for me to do, and they nod their heads in agreement while completely missing the point. (I sometimes question if it is a point that needs to be debated, but I am convinced that our dependence on Christ alone as our salvation is central to the Gospel message.) It really all comes down to Christ. Who he is and what he did cannot be devalued by making him like one of us.

These days I'm asking myself if I'm meant to have a long ministry in Utah. The answer: I don't know. I do know that my heart is strangely drawn to Utah and that I want to share the Gospel with the people and see Christ accepted by them for who he really is. I think I will be going back again, maybe for a summer or a year or a couple years. Maybe I will leave after a few years, or maybe I will stay there for good, but one thing I do know is that Utah needs Christians. It needs Christians who will go and stay, who will love the people and stand undaunted by the rejection. It needs pastors who will not seek large numbers or lots of money, but who will be satisfied with trusting God to provide for them every month because he has called them to be there. Utah needs Christians who will lay aside differences and egos and who will help each other succeed. I just want to be a part of it.

I'm Back

2011-10-22T18:27:00.003-04:00

Hello, friends. I've been quite busy lately, and so unfortunately I've had to take a hiatus from blogging here. My apologies. I know I've missed out on quite a bit of activity in the world of Mormonism, from General Conference to the Jeffress controversy and so forth. There are a few things I've wanted to post, so perhaps now I'll have a chance to start working through some of that again.

In the meantime: before things got busy, I contributed a guest post to the blog The Door Swings Both Ways, run by ex-LDS blogger Greg Rockwell. In my guest post, I articulate 'briefly' and 'simply' (to the extent that I really grasp what those words mean to most people, at least) a kalam cosmological argument for God's existence. Greg was kind enough to host my piece and offer some very kind words about my blogging here. I hope soon, now that I've given responses to a number of folks on Facebook who offered various critiques when Greg linked to my blog, to also compose a reply to my interlocutor Gale, whose critical appraisal has also appeared at Greg's blog.

Four Kinds of Salvation

2011-09-29T13:33:00.001-04:00

The following LDS article about salvation, written by Parley P. Pratt, first appeared in The Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star 2/2 (June 1841): 21-22. It later appeared in the 8 March 1845 issue of the LDS periodical The Prophet, as well as in Orson Pratt's The Prophetic Almanac, for 1846: Being the Second After Bissextile or Leap Year (New York: New York Messenger Office, 1846), 15-16, this latter being the copy from which it is here reprinted. Afterwards, it was also reprinted in The Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star 38/40 (2 October 1876): 627-629, and again in Liahona The Elders' Journal 6/47 (8 May 1909): 1125-1126.

Salvation, as proposed to man in the Scripture, is of four kinds, viz: -
First, Salvation from original sin and its effects.
Secondly, Salvation from actual sin, or individual transgression.
Thirdly, Temporal Salvation.
Fourthly, Eternal Salvation.
We shall now proceed to set forth the nature of each of these salvations, and the conditions on which they are enjoyed by man.

Original sin and its effects came by the transgression of Adam and Eve, in the Garden of Eden. So "sin entered into the world, and death by sin."

This sin and death effected the whole family of man in a twofold point of view, banishment from the presence of the Lord, and the death of the body. And unless some means of salvation had been provided, the bodies of men must have slept in eternal silence, and their spirits dwelt in eternal banishment.

But says the Apostle, "AS in Adam ALL DIE, even SO in Christ shall ALL be made ALIVE."

Jesus Christ, then has paid the debt which Adam contracted, and through his death and resurrection has redeemed ALL men from the fall, and from death, and from every thing which Adam's transgression entailed upon them.

This salvation is UNIVERSAL, that is, it applies to all the race of Adam, without any regard to the deeds done in the body. The death and condemnation came by one (Adam), and passed upon all men without any act or agency of their own.

So the redemption comes by one man (Jesus Christ) and will be effectually applied to all men, without any conditions whatever on their part.

It is free grace alone, without works, which redeems man from the fall, and from the death which came by reason of the fall. The most hardened sinner, who sinks to endless woe, will go there as free from Adam's fall as if it had never been.

Hence Christ said, "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

All little children (being redeemed by Jesus Christ) are saved and counted holy, without any faith, repentance, baptism, or any thing else.

Hence the doctrine of little children being "desperately wicked, deceitful, depraved, &c., and that they must be born again, changed, be converted, experience religion, be regenerated, &c.," is a doctrine of devils, or of foolish and inconsiderate man.

We come now to speak of the second salvation, viz.: salvation from personal transgression. This salvation is the gospel which was to be preached to sinners, "It is not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

This salvation is promised on conditions made known in the gospel, "He that believes and is baptised shall be SAVED." "Repent and be baptised every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

"SAVE yourselves from this untoward generation." "Arise and be baptised, and wash away your sins." "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth now SAVE US."

"Ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you; being then made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness." The foregoing texts all go to show that sinners experience a present salvation from sin on condition of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance towards God, and baptism for remission of sins. They were saved then and there; - they were saved that very hour, that is justified, forgiven, and free from sin.

This gospel salvation pertains to sinners only. Little children could have no part in it.

We next proceed to the third salvation, viz.: temporal salvation.

This varies in different ages and under different circumstances. In the days of Noah it was salvation from the flood, and the ark was the means.

In the days of Lot, it was salvation from fire, and fleeing from Sodom to Zoar was the means.

In the days of Jacob it was salvation from famine, and revelation to lay up corn was the means. In the days of Moses it was salvation from Egyptian bondage. In the days of Esther it was salvation from the decree of Haman. In the days of Ezra it was salvation from seventy years' captivity in Babylon, by a restoration to Jerusalem. In case of Paul's shipwreck, it was salvation from the watery grave, by the soldiers and sailors abiding in the ship according to Paul's directions. But in the days of Josephus it was salvation from the sword, famine, and pestilence, which befel the Jews. This salvation was accomplished by fleeing to the mountains, according as the Saviour forewarned his disciples, "When ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then let him who is in Judea, flee to the mountains."

So in these last days, salvation is needed from famine, earthquake, war, pestilence, and flame of devouring fire, which must overtake the wicked world and all that remain among them. "But in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, shall be deliverance, and in the remnant whom the Lord our God shall call." So in fulfillment of this, the Lord has provided the western wilds of America and the land of Palestine, places of deliverance for his own peculiar people. And will gather his sheep out of all countries where the false shepherds have preyed upon them, and will "cause them to dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods." - (See Ezekiel, 34.) This temporal salvation comes by revelation in these last days, as in days of old, and therefore can only come to those who are governed and led by revelation, viz.: the Latter Day Saints.

We must now speak of the fourth state of salvation, viz.: eternal salvation. This can only be enjoyed in the immortal state, after the resurrection of the body, and its re-union with the soul.

All those who are redeemed from Adam's fall will enjoy this eternal salvation, if they die before they come to years of accountability, so as to be capable of committing sin.

All sinners will enjoy eternal life and salvation, on conditions of faith, repentance, and baptism, and endurance to the end.

Hence, a man may be saved from Adam's fall by free grace, and from his own sins by belief and baptism, and also, partake of temporal salvation, by obeying the warnings which God sends by revelation; and being saved in this threefold sense, he may neglect to endure to the end in keep the requirements of Jesus Christ; and so at last be damned.

Here then is a condition to be fulfilled by the creature, in order to the enjoyment of eternal salvation, which is not absolutely necessary to either of the salvations, viz.: endurance to the end. - That is, a person must continue in well-doing and keep the commandments of Jesus, from the time he is baptised into Christ till the end of this life of probation.

Having now shown clearly and distinctly the nature of salvation as revealed and proposed by the Heavenly Father to his children in different ages, we leave the subject, with a sincere hope that all those who love the truth may be led to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling.

1845 LDS Article on Heaven

2011-09-26T16:42:00.006-04:00

The following article, "Heaven", is taken from Orson Pratt, The Prophetic Almanac, for 1846: Being the Second After Bissextile or Leap Year (New York: New York Messenger Office, 1846), 3-5. It earlier appeared in The Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star 6/6 (1 September 1845): 85-86. I presume that one of the Pratt brothers is the author, probably Parley Pratt.

A planetary system where there is no death, sickness, pain, want, misery, oppression, ignorance, error, doubt, fear, sin or sorrow; where the inhabitants enjoy eternal life, and live in love and union with each other. Where each bosom is a mirror, where eternal truth is reflected, and from which emanates the purest affections, without any mixture of falsehood, hatred, selfishness, jealousy, pride or envy.

Where is such a planet located?

At present, no doubt, there are many such worlds among those shining orbs on high; for instance the planet where Jesus has gone to dwell; and where Enoch, Elijah, and all those who have been translated or raised from the dead have their present home.

But our earth is destined eventually to be redeemed from death, sin, and the curse, and to be regenerated, melted, purified, by fire, and renewed in such a manner as to constitute a celestial kingdom, or in other words a heaven of immortal felicity. When this comes to pass, there will be no more death, no more pain, or sorrow. Man will then live on this earth for ever. And even those who are gone from it for a season, will then return and dwell here forever in the flesh.

Job will then see his Redeemer in the flesh, and dwell with him on the earth.

Adam and Eve will then hold the dominion committed to them at the first.

Abraham will then come into his everlasting inheritance in the land of Canaan, and will dwell there with Isaac and Jacob, and all their children, and thus the promises will be fulfilled, which have been spoken by all the holy prophets since the world began, in relation to the promised inheritance to the chosen seed.

Then the inhabitants of the earth will be governed by apostles and prophets, instead of their pretended successors, under the name of popes, bishops and clergy. And instead of contentions about the succession to the 'Chair of Peter', Peter will be here to fill his own chair, as it is written, 'Ye that have followed me, shall, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall come in his glory, sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

When death, sickness, pain and sorrow are banished from the earth; when sin and all its cursed effects have ceased to operate; when darkness, ignorance and error shall pass away; when Jesus Christ shall be King, and the patriarchs, prophets and Apostles of old become kings, governors, magistrates, judges, and civil rulers; when the mountains are thrown down, and the valleys exalted; when the crooked places become straight and the rough places smooth; when cities are built, and houses and temples reared and furnished in the most durable and elegant manner, with a word; when gold is used for paving streets; when men walk in pure white linen, and eat and drink of the fruits of the earth only, instead of flesh; when flowers bloom in eternal spring, and fruits ripen in profuse succession every month of the year; when children are born without pain, and reared without sin; when Rebecca lives again on the earth, and becomes the mother of thousands of millions according to the blessings and good wishes of her friends, when she went to become the wife of Isaac. When life and law eternal reigns, and God and his tabernacle are with man on the earth forever. Then will earth be heaven and heaven be earth. And then shall man know and understand that nothing was made in vain, but that all things were created for the glory and pleasure of God, and the enjoyment of his creatures.

Phelps on Stars and Planets

2011-09-21T14:08:00.004-04:00

The following mini-article, "A World Burnt", comes from William W. Phelps, Deseret Almanac, for the Year of Our Lord, 1852: Being Leap Year, and After the 6th of April, the 23rd Year of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; and the Second Year of the Last Half Century of This Dispensation (Great Salt Lake City, UT: Willard Richards, [1852]), 21:

About 280 years ago, commencing in Nov. 1572, a very bright star, not far from the north star, 5 degrees N. N. E. of Caph, in the constellation of Cassiopeia, was seen to change its light from whitish till it appeared like a world on fire, surpassing the brilliance and splendor of a planet. It was visible at noon-day, but finally began to diminish in brightness, until, in 1573, it disappeared, leaving a void, which to man remains a mystery.

Much speculation, at the time, occupied the learned, and the christian clergy: - the heathen said nothing, because they knew nothing. So the matter rests. One may imagine that it was a space-boat burnt up with its own gas; and another declare that it was a great meteor which had been collecting ever since lightning lived, and a few suppose it might be a world called to judgment. All ignorant.

O faithless generation! it was a world called to pass away! Thus all have to be changed and resurrected! Ours next, while the moon turns to blood! (as it were) The clouds of light taken from the sun, then he will be darkened, and finally all resurrected, and all re-lighted by a light as much above the sun, as the sun is above a candle!

And again, "Philosophy of the Heavens" on page 37 of the same document, wherein Phelps throws a fit over all this gravity 'nonsense':

In presenting the solar system table, we wish to consider three things as doubtful, and unworthy of the confidence of saints:

First. The influence of signs, stars, &c., according to the wisdom of the world.

Second. The conjectures of the Christian world upon the heavens above and the regions "beyond the bounds of time and space."

Third. The philosophy of attraction and repulsion; attraction and gravitation, or empty space.

For the grand reason, that the earth and every planet or system in the heavens, is governed by law, and controlled by the power of God, or Gods; from whom proceeds 'light to fill the immensity of space;' for there is no space without a kingdom.

That every world, or system, is a living animal, whose life giving, or life moving power, is in itself, as much as the same powers are in man, animals, trees: - even all created - "whose seed is in itself."

Talk not to me of universal laws, and attraction and repulsion, to govern the bodies above, or below! What a confusion of worlds there would have been, in such a case, when Joshua commanded the "sun and moon" to stand still, and the earth ceased to roll for at least a day!

Again, what becomes of philosophical nonsense, when the earth is suddenly jogged back "ten degrees," as in the instance of Hezekiah? Only forty minutes slow o'clock, at one instant's sudden back action!

No more matter on the earth at one time than another! O fools! and slow of understanding! Did Enoch's city and people weigh nothing? They left this earth. After the resurrection, Jesus took his body and went to his Father. That body was a part of this world, but it is gone!

No universal law, of man's seeking, governs the works of God. Every world "rolls on its wings," and is controlled by a God, whose laws are executed by the angels: - as guardian angels; as "angels holding the winds;" as angels holding the "vials of wrath;" as angels having the "everlasting gospel to preach," - and, as quick as sight or thought, a look, a sign, or a hint to God in Kolob, Tamen, or any glorified kingdom, brings assistance, that earth and hell cannot demonstrate.

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit after the rudiments of the world, and not after the doctrine of Christ."

Well may it be said, "man was created upright," but he has sought out many foolish theories, aided by Lucifer; whose perigration from one world to another, furnish astronomers, philosophers, doctors and priests, with an ocean of words and hypotheis, which, like the spider's web, entangles flies, but the fowls of heaven fly through unimpeded!

Then, the following statement comes from William W. Phelps, Deseret Almanac, for the Year of Our Lord 1853: Being the First After Leap Year, and After the Sixth of April, the Twenty-Fourth Year of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; and the Third of the Last Half Century of This Dispensation (Grand Salt Lake City, UT: Willard Richards, [1853]), 5:

The stars are worlds of people.

Finally, the following statements come from William W. Phelps, Deseret Almanac, for the Year of Our Lord 1854: Being the Second After Leap Year, and After the Sixth of April, the Twenty-Fifth Year of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; and the Third of the Last Half Century of This Dispensation (Great Salt Lake City, UT: Willard Richards, [1854]), 5.

The fixed stars are worlds celestial.
The planets are worlds in probation.

Otterson on Mormonism and Traditional Christianity - Part II

2011-09-17T14:06:00.004-04:00

At the beginning of the month, I provided some commentary on the first installment of Michael Otterson's Washington Post column series about the differences between Mormonism and traditional Christianity. Otterson has now released a second installment, "From the Bible to the Book of Mormon: How do Latter-day Saints interpret Scripture?", which unfortunately says rather little about how Latter-day Saints interpret Scripture. Instead, the article - which has received coverage by the Deseret News and a positive mention at the official LDS Newsroom site - covers two main topics: what the Book of Mormon is, and how Latter-day Saints view the Bible.

Otterson states that the Book of Mormon is "not an allegory", which is clearly true, though I imagine that some at the fringe edge of 'liberal Mormonism' might like to claim that the text is an allegory, just as some at the fringe edge of 'liberal Christianity' attempt all sorts of utterly irresponsible things where the Bible is concerned. Otterson also, however, states that the Book of Mormon is not "primarily a history", which is a curious statement. Most books in the Book of Mormon, to my recollection, are written as though in historical genres. Otterson clearly believes that the Book of Mormon narrative is principally a historical one, which - while I of course disagree with the stance - seems to me to be the only truly faithful position for Latter-day Saints to take. All of Otterson's references to the main figures of the Book of Mormon are written in a way that implies their historical existence, and his reference to the visit of the risen Christ to the New World is to a "literal" event.

Furthermore, early Latter-day Saints clearly thought of the Book of Mormon as a history. Benjamin Winchester wrote in 1843 that the Book of Mormon "contains a history of a people that were Israelites of the tribe of Joseph, who emigrated from Jerusalem to this continent about six hundred years before Christ" (History of the Priesthood, p. 130). In comparison to the Bible, Winchester remarks that the Book of Mormon is "a history of a different nation or branch of the house of Israel" (ibid., 132). Joseph Smith, in his 1842 Wentworth Letter, said that the Book of Mormon narrated "the history of ancient America". The previous year, LDS apologist Charles B. Thompson described the Book of Mormon as "a History of a branch of the tribe of Joseph" (Evidences in Proof of the Book of Mormon, p. 28), a "history of their nation, together with the word of God revealed unto them" (ibid., p. 56), a "book or record containing the history of a branch or remnant of the tribe of Joseph, together with the great things of God's Law written to Ephraim which is truth" (ibid., p. 138). The year before that, Orson Pratt had - like Joseph Smith later - described the Book of Mormon as "the history of ancient America" (Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions, p. 14), and said that Moroni "continued the history until the four hundred and twentieth year of the Christian era" (ibid., p. 22). Earlier still, Orson Pratt's brother Parley described the Book of Mormon as a "history of the ancient inhabitants of America, who were a branch of the house of Israel, of the tribe of Joseph; of whom the Indians are still a remnant" (Voice of Warning, p. 129). Jumping ahead in time to after Joseph Smith's death, Orson Spencer stated in his 28 August 1847 letter to William Crowell that the Book of Mormon "reveals at once the history of the American continent". It seems fairly clear that the Book of Mormon was most definitely understood - and is still understood, for that matter - to be a purported (sacred) history of Israelite groups in the New World. Why Otterson remarks that the Book of Mormon is not "primarily a history", then, baffles me. It may be a sacred history that includes some texts of non-historiographical genre here and there, but it is surely primarily a history in any case.

What I find most interesting about Otterson's discussion of the Book of Mormon, however, is that absolutely nothing is said of how it came to be published. Otterson says absolutely nothing about the angel Moroni, nothing about the golden plates, nothing about the Urim and Thummim, nothing about the seerstone in the hat, nothing about the 116 lost pages. Otterson's professed purpose, however, is to explain "key elements of the faith", to "explain simply and factually some of the basics of the Latter-day Saint perspective for those outside the faith who know little about Mormon beliefs and want to know what makes us tick". Despite this, he says that the alloted length of his column is too short to "describe its [the Book of Mormon's] content and origin in any detail". Of course, Otterson offers no discussion of the book's origin at all, and discusses its content only very cursorily. Perhaps if Otterson had excised a bit of the fluff in his column, he would have had room to share this information with the public. That may be a bit harsh on Otterson, but he is the one, after all, who specifically intends to address "those outside the faith who know little about Mormon beliefs", and I hardly think it unreasonable to suppose that at least an outline of the basic, 'faith-promoting' rendition might be included on that basis.

Otterson also discusses, to some extent, the relationship of the Bible and the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon, he says, is not a replacement for the Bible. He seems to imply that the Bible and the Book of Mormon are equal in standing, rather than the Bible being subordinate to the Book of Mormon. Otterson stresses the emphasis that Latter-day Saints place on reading the Bible as sacred Scripture. The Book of Mormon, as Otterson presents it, is a third testament equal to the Old Testament and New Testament. Otterson does not, however, address the rather persistent claims heard in some LDS circles that the Bible is incomprehensible without the Book of Mormon, or that the biblical canon is completely faulty, or that the Bible is so corrupt as to be filled to the brim with contradictions, thus rendering it useless save where guided by modern revelation.

Otterson states that the LDS approach to the Bible is less than fully literal; he and other Latter-day Saints, he says, "don't take every word of the Bible literally". Now, strictly speaking, this is not only true, but also proper. Neither do Evangelicals. Informed Evangelicals believe in reading each statement of the Bible within the proper boundaries of the form and genre within which it appears, as informed by the sociohistorical context of the text. It is a common caricature to say that Evangelicals read the Bible with a wooden literalism - though unfortunately a caricature that Evangelicals frequently perpetuate ourselves, out of a desire to reaffirm our seriousness in approaching Scripture as a historical record.

The Evangelical concern is not so much whether Latter-day Saints interpret biblical passages "literally", but rather whether Latter-day Saints accept biblical authority in such a way as to commit themselves to taking biblical passages seriously as they stand. A principal thrust of many Evangelical critiques of LDS views on the Bible is that the attempts to dismiss the biblical text as hopelessly corrupt or incomprehensible apart from modern revelation are in fact nothing more than a baseless denigration of biblical authority, with the result (so the critique might run) that Latter-day Saints do not take key biblical passages seriously as they stand, but instead (1) charge the text with corruption, regardless of textual evidence; (2) insist upon imposing 'modern revelation' upon the text, regardless of whether or not this meaning is compatible with what the text could have meant in its original context; or (3) simply refuse to care about what the Bible says at all. I happen to think that this critique has some merit where at least some Latter-day Saints are concerned. It should be noted that even in its strong form, the critique is likely not meant to say that any of these three, or even their disjunction, is the case with the majority of biblical passages. And, of course, it must be admitted that Evangelicals are often guilty of abusing the text in ways that oughta be banned under international law.

Otterson himself states that his view of the Bible allows for "human errors of translation or omission, or indeed of interpretation". Of course, no one denies that the Bible may be misinterpreted; it is incumbent upon us to strive to interpret faithfully, and while not all disagreements can be resolved, a responsible approach to the text can assist in this. Nor does anyone deny that the Bible may be translated incorrectly. The King James Version includes some noteworthy but innocent examples of this, whereas the New World Translation used by Jehovah's Witness includes far more egregious (and also quite blameworthy) examples. However, this may always be checked against the Hebrew and Greek texts, and most modern translations are fairly faithful, within the limits of the modern English language. Where early Latter-day Saints could get away with a wide variety of 'creative' new translations from Hebrew and Greek, this is no longer the case. (What strikes me as curious is that Latter-day Saints have a supposed 'restoration' of the Bible as God meant it to be, the Joseph Smith Translation, yet refuse to rely chiefly upon it. Pragmatic issues aside, the status of the JST in LDS thought and praxis has always been somewhat of an enigma to me.) That leaves the matter of omission, and here Evangelicals simply have to request evidence for these sorts of sweeping claims. Otterson does not mention other sorts of supposed alterations to the biblical text, such as additions or errors in wording, but I have heard such (baseless) claims frequently as a knee-jerk reaction when it comes to biblical passages that some Latter-day Saints have difficulty reconciling with their own beliefs.

What's more, it should be noted that many early Latter-day Saints - unlike Otterson's brand of Latter-day Saint - prided themselves on being strict 'literalists'! Parley Pratt notoriously said in 1837 that the Christian world had gone astray when they "departed from its [the Bible's] literal meaning" (Voice of Warning, p. 15), and he ridiculed 'non-literal' approaches to biblical interpretation (ibid., pp. 19, 22, etc.). Those were praised who "never once thought of any other interpretation, but the most literal" (ibid., p. 22). See also statements to similar effect on the first page of the April 1834 issue of the Evening and Morning Star. In 1844, William Appleby wrote that we must take "the scriptures in their most literal sense", heeding "the most literal meaning of words and sentences" (Dissertation on Nebuchadnezzar's Dream, p. 3). In that same year, G. J. Adams said regarding the Bible that "the inspired men who wrote those pages, meant truly and literally what they said" (Lecture on the Authenticity and Scriptural Character of the Book of Mormon, p. 3). The same tenor appears in other authors, as is borne out by an examination of how frequently the word "literal" and its cognates appear in early LDS literature. Benjamin Winchester offered a somewhat more nuanced version of 'biblical literalism' that matches up more closely with the more literalist end of the Evangelical spectrum.

To conclude, however, on a positive note, I commend Michael Otterson for his relatively positive appraisal of the Bible as both literature and as sacred scripture; and I also commend him and join him in his appreciation for those who sacrificed so dearly to ensure that the Bible would survive and be available to as many people as possible, for in it are words of life. To his concluding quotation from Elder Christofferson's May 2010 Ensign article (though not to the whole article itself), I can only say, "Amen."