Why I Believe: Evidence Eight: Joseph's Simple Faith To Believe The Scriptures

101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was A Prophet

Evidence Eight:   

Joseph’s Simple Faith To Believe The Scriptures© 

The First Vision did not come out of a vacuum.  Nearly everyone knows that one of the catalysts which led to it was a passage of scripture–James 1:5.  What is not as well known is the degree of faith which Joseph Smith placed in what he read in the Bible and that other passages reinforced the message of James.  Joseph possessed the simple faith to believe the scriptures and he had it from a very young age.  His belief in what the scriptures say also played a role in his second great spiritual experience, the coming of Moroni.  Many other examples of his trust in scripture punctuate his life.(1) Today lets explore what we know about the influence of the scriptures in bringing about the First Vision.

Unlike many of Joseph’s other visions, there were no witnesses or fellow observes of the First Vison.  So it seems almost divinely ironical, that as historian Richard Anderson has pointed out:

His account of that sacred experience is not only his best-documented vision of Deity, but there are few spiritual experiences in world history that rival the First Vision in rich detail and full reporting.(2)

Most readers are aware that there are a number of renditions of the First Vision.  Since the late 1960s when knowledge of these accounts came to the attention of the Church and outsiders, they have been the center of a great deal of study and controversy.  However, when we take one simple question to our reading of these chronicles we come away from the endeavor with an important insight into the heart and mind of Joseph Smith and with a new appreciation for why he was called to be the Prophet of the Restoration of the Gospel.  That question?  “What can we learn from the recitals of the First Vision about the role which the Holy Scriptures played in influencing him to pray?”

Evidence of his involvement and belief in the scriptures

The oldest of the reports left by Joseph Smith of his early spiritual experiences was produced in 1832.  In many ways it is the simplest and most unsophisticated portrayal which lends a certain innocence and purity to this memoir that appeals to me.  More importantly, it contains several important statements relative to our subject.  In them Joseph refers to the Bible as a “sacred depository,” a clue to his esteem for the Bible. As he tells the story we see that he learned some important concepts from the scriptures which bolstered his faith in God.  The italicized portions of the following quotations highlight these points.

Excerpt 1: “...about the age of twelve years my mind became serously imprest with regard to the all important concerns for the welfare of my immortal soul which led me to searching the scriptures believing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God.  Thus applying them and my intimate acquaintance with those of different denominations led me to marvel excedingly for I discovered that they did not adorn their profession by a holy walk and Godly conversation agreeable to what I found contained in that sacred depository....”

Excerpt 2: “Thus from the age of twelve to fifteen I pondered many things in my heart concerning the situation of the world of mankind....  My mind became exceedingly distressed for I become convicted of my sins and by searching the Scriptures I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord...”

Excerpt 3:  “...I felt to mourn for my own sins and for the sins of the world for I learned in the scriptures that God was the same yesterday to day and forever that he was no respecter to persons for he was God....”(3)

In these excerpts we see several important ways which the scriptures were interwoven into his quest.  First, is the rather remarkable fact that Joseph Smith had been reading and thinking about the scriptures for a long period in his early youth–from age 12-15!  Second, they demonstrate that he had a soberness of mind similar to young Mormon in the Book of Mormon.  (Mor. 1:15)  Even at that age he was cognizant of his own inner state and observant of the religious conditions of the time.  This maturity is unusual for a boy of this age, but it is an important ingredient in possessing firm faith. Thirdly, during this period the scriptures were a major element of Joseph’s thinking about the universe, the present religious situation, and his personal status with God.

As he continued the narrative he tells us of other important principles he learned, the most important of which we can now see from hindsight were about God himself.  These expressions were all paraphrases of or allusions to scripture.  The list of what he said he understood includes:

• God is unchanging.  He answers prayers.  (Heb. 13:8)

• Anyone may approach God, since he is no respecter of persons.  (Acts. 10:34)

• Those who worship him should do so in spirit and in truth.  (Jn. 4:23-24 )(4)

James 1:5

The 1832 history does not mention the now famous James 1:5 passage, however, the 1838 report is the most important of the seven of the nine contemporary accounts which name this passage as decisive for Joseph Smith. This emphasis highlights the great importance of this passage which profoundly influenced his actions and thereby changed the world.

Here Joseph once again refers to his youthful emotional reaction to religious excitements in his area of New York.  (See JS-H 1:8-9.)  He goes on to say that one day while reading the epistle of James he encountered verse 5 of the first chapter.  It deeply affected him and his description suggests the power and influence of the Holy Ghost came upon the lad.

Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man that this did at this time to mine.  It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart.  I reflected on it again and again.... At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs....  I at length came to the determination to "ask of God," concluding that if he gave wisdom to them that lacked wisdom, and would give liberally, and not upbraid, I might venture.  So, in accordance with this, my determination to ask of God, I retired to the woods to make the attempt.(5)

What did Joseph Smith learn from James 1:5-6 that would have increased his faith because he believed what he was reading?  This passage further enlightened young Joseph with three things about God in addition to what he had learned from the scriptures listed above.  First, if a man lacks wisdom, and he felt he did, he should ask God.  Second, God gives liberally to all men who ask.  Third, God does not upbraid those who ask.(6)

He now possessed six important truths about God, several of which overlapped each other conceptually, but because he believed them they greatly shaped the course of events to follow. This is exactly as it should have been for him, and should be for us.  After all this is one of the major purposes of Holy Writ.  It is to cause us to act not just emote.  God reveals himself and his will so we know what to do not just what to believe. Reflection upon these ideas spotlighted in his study and thinking prior to going into the grove to pray all lead to one conclusion– Joseph should trust God; he hears and answers prayers.

Twice in the above quotation Joseph refers to the conclusion to which his reflections upon James 1:5 led him.  If he had been reticent or fearful, or both, now believing that God liberally gives wisdom to those who lack it and he will not chastize the supplicant, Joseph concluded that he “might venture” to pray.  In an 1842 letter to Chicago editor John Wentworth, Joseph confirmed that he not only believed the passage but it hiked his confidence:  “Believing the word of God, I had confidence in the declaration of James–....”(7)   The record indicates in clear language that encouraged by these ideas he decided to act.

The provision of James 1:6-7 should also be considered

Verses six and seven of James chapter one must also be considered in any serious discussion of the role the scriptures played in Joseph’s life leading to the First Vision.  They contain a proviso that we do not often discuss in relationship to Joseph Smith, but which speak directly to his case.

“But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.  For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.  For let not that man think he shall receive anything of the Lord.”  (Emphasis added.)

In light of this demanding standard it is readily apparent that Joseph received the correct message from the scriptures; a message that bolstered his natural faith in the word of the Lord. The scriptures moved him from enlightenment and understanding to action. Moreover, if we accept his account of the result of his prayer–the First Vision–then it follows that he must have met the qualifications of these latter verses. But, we are not left without further evidence to substantiate this conclusion.

The depth of his commitment to get an answer

It is significant that twice in the 1838 statement Joseph mentions his “determination to ask.”  However, he did not come to the decision in haste.  He reflected upon the passage over and over again.  Doubtless the other passage he referred to in his 1832 statement were included in those reflections.  Two statements, both from 1835, speak to the depth of Joseph’s commitment to get an answer to his prayer. In 1835 Oliver Cowdery, the Church’s first historian, wrote several letters about early church history to W. W. Phelps, then editor of the Church’s newspaper The Messenger and Advocate. Recalling events leading to the First Vision he wrote:

“...our brother was urged forward and strengthened in the determination to know for himself in the certainty and reality of pure and holy religion.  And it is only necessary for me to say, that while this excitement continued, he continued to call upon the Lord in secret for a full manifestation of divine approbation, and for, to him, the all important information, if a Supreme being did exist, to have an assurance that he was accepted of him."(8)

The second is found in Joseph's 9 November 1835 Journal.  He said, “...information was what I most desired at this time, and with a fixed determination to obtain it, I called upon the Lord...”(9)  Not only had the scriptures brought him to the “conclusion” that he must take his questions to God in prayer, they also strengthened his “determination” to do so.

"Believing," "confidence," and "determination" are strong active words which tell us something important about the mental attitude and quality of faith which Joseph took with him into the "Sacred Grove" in the Spring of 1820.  What wonderful things the Scriptures can produce in the heart and mind of a fourteen-year-old!

The insights gained from the various retellings of the First Vision story which play up Joseph’s belief in the scriptures and the workings of the Lord in guiding him to passages which would bolster that faith and focus it to a greater degree in believing that God hears and answers prayer, strengthen’s my own faith that he was a Prophet of God.  Vance Havner, one of my favorite Baptist ministers unwittingly left a statement which wonderfully summarizes the point of this essay.  He wrote:

“After all, the Word of God yields its deepest secrets not to scholarly analysis but to simple faith that dares to “let God be true, but every man a liar.”  After the wise and prudent, even among the orthodox, have argued at length over this verse and that, God raises up some nonentity who dares to believe God’s bold, brave words, and puts all the rest of us to shame.  Few of us ever stand with all our weight on the Word of God.  We pretend to, but in a crisis we usually make some concession to human weakness, and the Word does not profit us as it might, being mixed with unbelief in us who hear it.”(10)

Thank God for Joseph Smith.  Lets think together again, soon.

Notes:

1 One example: Young William Taylor once asked Joseph if he got frightened “when all those hounding wolves are after you?”  Joseph said, “No, I am not afraid; the Lord said he would protect me, and I have full confidence in his word.” William Taylor, Young Woman's Journal, 17 (December 1906), pp. 547-548.

2  Richard L. Anderson, "Joseph Smith's Testimony of The First Vision," Ensign, April 1996, 10.

3 Dean C. Jessee, ed., The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1984), 4-6.  I have not corrected the spelling.

4 Jessee, Personal Writings, 5-6.

5 JS-H 1:12-14.

6 Very similar precepts are taught in Luke 11:9-13.

7 HC, 4:536.

8  Oliver Cowdery, "Letter IV, to W. W. Phelps, Esq.," Messenger and Advocate, 1 (February 1835), 78, emphasis added.

9 Dean C. Jessee, The Papers of Joseph Smith: Volume 2, Journal, 1832-1842, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book,1992), 69, entry for 9 November 1835, emphasis added.

10  Vance Havner, The Secret of Christian Joy, (New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1938), p. 23, bold emphasis added. Havner said this in an essay or sermon on how modern “believers” privately interpret, misinterpret, and take the life out of scripture. Five decades after Havner’s statement, Mormon scholar Stephen Robinson wrote a best-selling book in Mormonism titled Believing Christ: The Parable of the Bicycle and Other Good News, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1992).  It’s focus was not just believing in Christ, but believing what he says.

John Stuart Mill's Astonishing Reading From Age Eight To Twelve

[I said Thursday I would add this information about Mill. It appears that few are interested in it, but since I promised it, here it is.]

"In the same year in which I began Latin [age 8], I made my first commencement in the Greek poets with the Iliad.  After I had made some progress in this, my father put Pope’s translation into my hands.  It was the first English verse I had cared to read, and it became one of the books in which for many years I most delighted: I think I must have read it from twenty to thirty times through.  I should not have thought it worth while to mention a taste apparently so natural to boyhood, if I had not, as I think, observed that the keen enjoyment of this brilliant specimen of narrative and versification is not so universal with boys, as I should have expected both a priori and from my individual experience.  Soon after this time I commenced Euclid....

From my eighth to my twelfth year the Latin books which I remember reading were, the Bucolics of Virgil, and the first six books of the Aeneid; all Horace except the Epodes; the fables of Phaedrus; the first five books of Livy (to which from my love of the subject I voluntarily added, in my hours of leisure, the remainder of the first decad); all Sallust; a considerable part of Ovid’s Metamorphoses; some plays of Terence; two or three books of Lucretius; several of the Orations of  Cicero, and of his writings on oratory; also his letters to Atticus, my father taking the trouble to translate to me from the french the historical explanations in Mongault’s notes.  In Greek I read the Iliad and Odyssey through; one or two plays of Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes, though by these I profited little; all Thucydides; the Hellenics of Xenophon; a great part of Demosthenes, Aeschines, and Lysias; Theocritus; Anacreon; part of the Anthology; a little of Dionysisus; several books of Polybius; and lastly, Aristotle’s Rhetoric, which, as the first expressly scientific treatise on any moral or psychological subject which I had read, and containing many of the best observations of the ancients on human nature and life, my father made me study with peculiar care, and throw the matter of it into synoptic tables. ...

As to my private reading, I can only speak of what I remember.  History continued to be my strongest predilection, and most of all ancient history.  Mitford’s Greece I read continually.   My father had put me on my guard against the Tory prejudices of this writer, and his perversions of facts for the whitewashing of despots, and blackening of popular institutions. These points he discoursed on, exemplifying them from the Greek orators and historians, with such effect that in reading Mitford, my sympathies were always on the contrary side to those of the author, and I could, to some extent, have argued the point against him: yet this did not diminish the ever new pleasure with which I read the book. Roman history, both in my old favorite, Hooke, and in Ferguson, continued to delight me.  A book which, in spite of what is called the dryness of its stile, I took great pleasure in, was the Ancient Universal History: through the incessant reading of which, I had my head full of historical details concerning the obscurest ancient people, while about modern history, except detached passages such as the Dutch war of independence, I knew and cared comparatively little.

... I had read, up to this time, very little English poetry.  Shakespeare my father had put into my hands, chiefly for the sake of the historical plays, from which however I went on to the others.   My father never was a great admirer of Shakespeare, the English idolatry of whom he used to attack with some severity.  He cared little for any English poetry except Milton (for whom he had the highest admiration), Goldsmith, Burns, and Gray’s Bard, which he preferred to his Elegy: perhaps I may add Cowper and Beattie.  He had some value for Spenser, and I remember his reading to me (unlike his usual practice of making me read to him) the first book of the Fairie Queene; but I took little pleasure in it.  The poetry of the present century he saw scarcely any merit in, and I hardly became acquainted with any of it till I was grown up to manhood, except the metrical romances of Walter Scott, which I read at his recommendation and was intensely delighted with; as I always was with animated narrative.  Dryden’s Poems were among my father’s books, and many of these he made me read, but I never cared for any of them except Alexander’s Feast, which, as well as many of the sons in Walter Scott, I used to sing internally, to a music of my own: to some of the latter indeed I went so far as to compose airs, which I still remember.  Cowper’s short poems I read with some pleasure, but never got far into the longer ones; and nothing in the two volumes interested me like the prose account of his three hares.  In my thirteenth year I met with Campbell’s Poems, among which Lochiel, Hohenlinden, the Exile of Erin, and some others, gave me sensations I had never before experienced from poetry.  Here, too, I made nothing of the longer poems, except the striking opening of Gertrude of Wyoming, which long kept its place in my feelings as the perfection of pathos."

Let's think together again, soon.

John Stuart Mill, Autobiography, edited by Jack Stillinger, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969), pp.  8-12.

John Stuart Mill's Astonishing Reading From Age Three To Eight

I believe in being circumspect about the use of superlatives.  For example, I rarely use the word “astonishing.”  But this morning’s reading astonished me.  Sydney Harris in one of his essays which I finished reading the past week or so suggested there were very few really good autobiographies.  He mentioned two, one was by John Stuart Mill.  On Harris's recommendation, I located a used copy available online and ordered it.  It arrived yesterday, so I started reading it last night and again when I was up at an early hour. Mill says he wrote the story of his life primarily because the education he received at the hand of his father shows what can be done with children when done properly and he thought his example could benefit the world.

I was astonished at several things, such as the fact that he began learning the Greek language when he was three years of age!  (Incidentally, Mill was an exact contemporary of Joseph Smith, being born in London in May of 1806.)  He began the study of Latin at age 8! But what really astonished me was his recital of all that he read as a young boy.  I was so astonished that I read it to my wife at our morning breakfast, and then decided to share it with you.  Today’s blog will reproduce only what he said about his reading from age 3 to 8. Tomorrow I will give you his reading from age 8 to 12.

Ponder two things as you read: First, was Mill able to do all of this because of his extraordinary intellect, or did he have an extraordinary intellect because of all that he did in those early years?  Second, consider what a wonderful gift his father gave to the world by the effort he put forth to educate his son.  I confess, when I consider this compared to my own paltry efforts to assist with my children’s education I am ashamed at the low standard I set for myself and for them.

****

“I have no remembrance of the time when I began to learn Greek.  I have been told that it was when I was three years old.   ... I faintly remember going through Aesop’s Fables, the first Greek book which I read. The Anabasis [of Xenophon], which I remember better, was the second. I learnt no Latin until my eighth year.  At that time I had read, under my father’s tuition, a number of Greek prose authors, among whom I remember the whole of Herodotus, and of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia and Memorials of Socrates; some of the lives of the philosophers by Diogenes Laertius; part of Lucian, and Isocrates ad Demonicum and ad Nicolem.  I also read, in 1813 [at age 7!], the first six dialogues (in the common arrangement) of Plato, from the Euthyphron to the Theaetetus inclusive: which last dialogue, I venture to think, would have been better omitted, as it was totally impossible I should understand it.  But my father, in all his teaching, demanded of me not only the utmost that Icould do, but much that I could by no possibility have done.  What he was himself willing to undergo for the sake of my instruction, may be judged from the fact, that I went through the whole process of preparing my Greek lessons in the same room and at the same table at which he was writing: and as in those days Greek and English Lexicons were not, and I could make no more use of a Greek and Latin Lexicon than could be made without having yet begun to learn Latin, I was forced to have recourse to him for the meaning of every word which I did not know.  This incessant interruption he, one of the most impatient of men, submitted to, and wrote under that interruption several volumes of his History and all else that he had to write during those years.

...  But the lessons [in arithmetic] were only a part of the daily instruction I received.  Much of it consisted in the books I read by myself, and my father’s discourses to me, chiefly during our walks.  From 1810 to the end of 1813 we were living in Newington Green, then an almost rustic neighbourhood.  My father’s health required considerable and constant exercise, and he walked habitually before breakfast, generally in the green lanes towards Hornsey.   In these walks I always accompanied him, and with my earliest recollections of green fields and wild flowers, is mingled that of the account I gave him daily of what I had read the day before.  To the best of my remembrance, this was a voluntary rather than a prescribed exercise.   I made notes on slips of paper while reading, and from these, in the morning walks, I told the story to him; for the books were chiefly histories, of which I read in this manner a great number: Robertson’s histories, Hume, Gibbon; but my greatest delight, then and for long afterwards, was Watson’s Philip the Second and Third.  The heroic defense of the Knights of Malta against the Turks, and of the revolted provinces of the Netherlands against Spain, excited in me an intense and lasting interest.  Next to Watson, my favorite historical reading was Hooke’s History of Rome.   Of Greece I had seen at that time no regular history, except school abridgments and the last two or three volumes of a translation of Rollin’s Ancient History, beginning with Philip of Macedon.  But I read with great delight Langhorne’s translation of Plutarch.  In English history, beyond the time at which Hume leaves off, I remember reading Burnet’s History of his Own Time, though I cared little for anything in it except the wars and battles; and the historical part of the Annual Register, from the beginning to about 1788, where the volumes my father borrowed for me from Mr. Bentham left off.  I felt a lively interest in Frederic of Prussia during his difficulties, and in Paoli, the Corsican patriot; but when I came to the American war, I took my part, like a child as I was (until set right by my father) on the wrong side, because it was called the English side.  In these frequent talks about the book I read, he used, as opportunity offered, to give me explanations and ideas respecting civilizations, government, morality, mental cultivation, which he required me afterwards to restate to him in my own words.  He also made me read, and give him account of, many books which would not have interested me sufficiently to induce me to read them of myself: among others, Millar’s Historical View of the English Government, a book of great merit for its time, and which he highly valued; Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History, McCrie’s Life of John Knox, and even Sewell’s and rutty’s Histories of the Quakers.  He was fond of putting into my hands books which exhibited men of energy and resource in unusual circumstances, struggling against difficulties and overcoming them: of such works I remember Beaver’s African Memoranda, and Collins’s account of the first settlement of New South wales.  Two books which I never wearied of reading were Anson’s Voyage, so delightful to most young persons, and a Collection (Hawkesworth’s, I believe) of Voyages round the World, in four volumes, beginning with Drake and ending with Cook and Bougainville.  Of children’s books, any more than of playthings, I had scarcely any, except an occasional gift from the relation or acquaintance: among those I had, Robinson Crusoe was preeminent, and continued to delight me through all my boyhood.  It was no part however of my father’s system to exclude books of amusement, though he allowed them very sparingly.  Of such books he possessed at that time next to none, but he borrowed several for me; those which I remember are, the Arabian Nights, Cazotte’s Arabian Tales, Don Quixote, Miss Edgeworth’s “Popular Tales,” and a book of some reputation in its day, Brooke’s Fool of Quality.”

John Stuart Mill, Autobiography, edited by Jack Stillinger, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1969), pp. 5-8.

Lets think together again, soon. [Tomorrow’s blog–Mill’s Reading from age 8 to 12.]

The Importance of Principles In The Life Of A Mature Person

[Today's column is given over to one of my favorite, but now defunct publications--The Royal Bank Letter--for a few thoughts about the importance of "principles."  Enjoy!]

The mature person need not be a confirmed conformist. He may be a rugged individualist, but he will be as rugged in his adherence to basic principles as he is in self-reliance. He will recognize, but he will not be afraid of, the fact that there are three great questions in life which he must answer over and over again: is it right or wrong? is it true or false? is it beautiful or ugly?

In answering these questions a man will find principles of far more value to him than a library of books, or a den decorated with diplomas. The principles contribute to his maturity by enlarging his thinking, by helping him to avoid confusion, by rescuing him from prolonged debate. They give him a base for decision and action. They are like the north star, the compass and the lighthouse to a sailor: they keep him on his course despite winds and current and weather.

Some people confuse principles with rules. A principle is something inside one; a rule is an outward restriction. To obey a principle you have to use your mental and moral powers; to obey a rule you have only to do what the rule says. Dr. Frank Crane pointed the difference neatly: "A rule supports us by the arm-pits over life's mountain passes; a principle makes us surefooted."

“On Being a Mature Person,” Royal Bank Letter, 37, no. 12 (December 1956), p. 3.

Why I Believe: Evidence Seven: The Book Of Mormon And Baptism As A Covenant

101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was A Prophet

Evidence Seven:   

The Book of Mormon And Baptism As A Covenant© 

Today’s evidence brings together separate items from ancient scripture and modern scholarship to yield another insight reinforcing my contention that Joseph Smith was God’s prophet.  Stephen Ricks, professor of Hebrew and cognate languages at BYU recently published an extension of his work first appearing in print in1996-97, about ancient religious cleansing practices among Jews, Essenes (Qumran community), and Christians.*  The Jews at the time of Christ and before immersed people in font-like basins called miqveh or miqvaot. The people of Qumran did something similar. The purposes of these immersions was generally for ritual cleansing or purification of the physical body which had become polluted in some way. Christians of course, practiced baptism, which was to cleanse the soul from sin, with the added purposes of it being an initiatory ritual and according to Paul for the complete transformation of the individual.  

According to professor Ricks, the Book of Mormon is unique in two respects regarding baptism. First, it is a record which “provides a continuity of the rite over a thousand-year period.” (p. 166.)  Most importantly, the Book of Mormon is apparently the only ancient Israelite, Essene, or Christian document that characterizes baptism as a covenant between God and man. (See pp. 165, 166.)  Mosiah 18:10,13 which come from about a century and a half before Christ reads:

10) Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you? 

13) And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body.... 

To modern Mormons this only makes good sense; it is something we have grown up with. But it is especially important to realize that the available records of the ancient Israelites, the Qumran covenanters who were probably the Essenes, and the earliest Christian scriptures do not portray baptism as a covenant.

Why is this important?  It just so happens that this information dovetails nicely with two other passages in the Book of Mormon.  Four hundred and fifty years earlier than Alma at the Waters of Mormon, Nephi was taught by an angel about the future of his people.  He saw a book would come among them which “contains the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel” (1 Ne. 13:23), but it would pass through the hands of a great and abominable church.  One of the things that made that “church”  worthy of that characterization was that “they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.   (1 Ne. 13:26)

Even more remarkably, many centuries before all of this, Joseph who was sold into Egypt was permitted to see down through the history of his people.  He saw a “choice seer” come among them.  We know today he was speaking of Joseph Smith.  The ancient Joseph spoke of the modern Joseph’s mission.  In part he said:

Thus saith the Lord unto me: A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins.  And unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren, which shall be of great worth unto them, even to the bringing them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers.  (2 Ne. 3:7, emphasis added.)

This turned out to be one of Joseph's most important contributions to our religion. He did indeed bring us knowledge of the covenants of the Lord.  It started with the translation of the Book of Mormon and the fact that baptism was a divinely given covenant.  This is consistent with the book’s title page which states that one of its purposes is that the House of Israel “may know the covenants of the Lord....”  Thus, the missions of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith become as one on the matter of restoring a knowledge  of the covenants of the Lord.

The seemingly minor detail unearthed by brother Ricks that the Book of Mormon is apparently the only ancient text that characterizes baptism as a covenant takes on great significance in light of these additional facts.  But, it was only the beginning of the knowledge Joseph would bring to the world about God’s sacred covenants, of which we will have occasion to speak more in the future.

I frequently shake my head at the marvelous way in which these disparate facts coalesce together to provide luminating insight.  My wife calls such “coincidences” “celestial mechanics.”  You gotta love celestial mechanics like this!

Thank God for Joseph Smith.  Lets think together again, soon.

*Stephen D. Ricks, “The Doctrine of Baptism: Immersions at Qumran and the Baptisms of John, the Earliest Christians, and Book of Mormon Peoples.”  In By Our Rites of Worship: Latter-day Saint Views on Ritual in Scripture, History, and Practice, edited by Daniel L. Belnap, 153-172.  Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2013.

Matthew McConaughey: Giving A Man The Benefit Of A Doubt

Matthew McConaughey has taken it on the chin quite a bit since his Oscar acceptance speech a couple of nights ago.  Some did not like his reference to God.  Some were offended that he might have even implied that man is a god. Some did not like his reference to himself as a hero.  They thought he was arrogant.  Some were put off because he didn’t give due deference to the AIDS victim he portrayed whose story made possible his opportunity. For them it should have been a speech promoting one of the darling causes of Hollywood, similar to the first one we heard that night. Some thought the speech was practiced and insincere. Yet others thought it was just another expression of his selfish self-centeredness. All made their cases by reference to various things he said in his brief remarks.

In an attempt to give the man the benefit of a doubt I located a transcript of what he said. A close reading, if accepted at face value, meets most of the criticisms.  Which would suggest to me that his critics had their own agendas to promote, or they just don’t know how to read very well. Many are so busy reading “between the lines” they forget to read the lines too.  

First, it should be noted that he was giving the audience a small insight into what is important and what motivates him in life.  He said, “There’s a few things--about three things to my account--that I need each day. One of them is something to look up to, another is something to look forward to, and another is someone to chase.”  Those may not be my motivations, they may not be your motivations, or those of his critics, but he acknowledged they are his.  When you think about them, they aren’t bad.  He looks up to God, he looks forward to his family, and he chases his dream of what he could be in the future.  The problem is that in some ways these identify him as a step-child of Hollywood.  They separate him in a couple of important ways.  Few among his audience or his critics look up to God. Many of them have rejected the traditional notion of marriage and family for a more “enlightened” and “liberated” view of sex as recreational, marriage commitment as inhibiting their individuality or the pursuit of their own version of “the dream,” and children as burdens.  

He said two important things about God, which few in the “artistic community,” “the beautiful  people,” the avaunt guard of society who were his audience in the hall the other evening wanted to hear.  He acknowledged that God had given him his opportunities and that God responds to our gratitude.  One might quibble with the way he worded his sentiments, but what exactly do people find troubling about the sentiments themselves? Well, for non-believers it goes against the grain to think that they didn’t get to the top on the basis of their own talent; therefore, gratitude to some unseen super power is not important to them.  In fact, gratitude to many may be passe.

The third thing he said about God was cryptic and I don’t pretend to know his mind as to how he meant it.  I leave it to the critics to wrangle over.  Perhaps McConaughey will explain further some day.  Based on the first two things he said, I’m willing to give him the benefit of a doubt.  I doubt that he had some sinister subliminal message.

What’s the big deal about thanking his family?  I heard nearly every recipient that night thank some portion of their family.  He thanked his mother for demanding that he and his brothers respect themselves, and thereby he learned to better respect others.  Some of his critics could have used that lesson from their own parents. His wife and children were praised and thanked because of the courage they gave him to go out each day to his work and to do it well. Is not that what families are supposed to do? Why criticize the man because he loved and missed his deceased red-necked dad?

I suppose the most strident critiques came in reference to his hero–the one he chases.  He said that he dreams of being a hero someday down the road ten years and he chases that dream.  But, when he gets there he hasn’t succeeded because his hero is still out ahead of him ten years. “Well,” huff the critics, “the man just said he is his own hero.  What an arrogant &@#!”  I have yet to see, hear, or read where any of these thought police have quoted what he said at the end of that little story: “ I’m never gonna be my hero. I’m not gonna attain that. I know I’m not, and that’s just fine with me because that keeps me with somebody to keep on chasing.”  

In this imaginative way McConaughey captured two things that have been part of the “American Dream” that has been at the heart of Hollywood since its beginning, but which in their now elitist-liberal-agenda driven and insular world, they have forgotten or abandoned. First, that is the “American Dream”–to continue to chase it, to not be satisfied with one’s present achievements and victories.  Second, the fundamental idea of competing against yourself–of continually striving to become better and better at what you do.  But because he cast that in the rhetoric of “hero” he is lambasted because heroes are supposed to be somebody else we admire.  He admires only himself, they shout to us.  But in making a man an offender for a word, they missed his point entirely.  

I’m for giving Matthew McConaughey the benefit of a doubt, and wish him every success in the future, if Hollywood will only be broad minded enough to let him have one after so grievously offending them.

Lets think together again, soon.

Why I Believe--Evidence Six: The Range Of Joseph's Teachings And The Inherent Wisdom And Power Of His Ideas

101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was A Prophet

Evidence Six:   The Range Of Joseph's Teachings And The Inherent Wisdom And Power Of His Ideas© 

As you will see many times over, my testimony of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith has been bolstered by the research and ideas of others.  This is particularly true of those who have spent the necessary time and effort to come to understand and appreciate the Prophet. Those who have studied his life and thought and have learned to love him often have great insights that can bless the rest of us.  Let me give you an example today from the work of two BYU professors, Larry Dahl and Don Cannon.  Some years ago they prepared a new version of the teachings of Joseph Smith.  The result of their work appeared in 1997 under the title The Teachings of Joseph Smith [It is now titled Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith’s Teachings.] 

A decade ago Don Cannon wrote an article about some of the things he learned and the feelings he experienced while researching and preparing this book.*  In many ways, his experience parallels my own, as I spent many years teaching a class on “The Life and Thought of Joseph Smith.”  Preparing for that class has kept me studying Joseph Smith to this very day.  So, when I read Cannon’s article I frequently found myself saying, “Amen.” 

Cannon begins by discussing the sources they researched and the topics that were most prevalent in those sources.  He asserts that the best source for Joseph’s teachings is still History of the Church (7 vols.)  Most of Joseph’s teachings which ended up in their book came from 370 Sabbath addresses, 136 editorials in the Times and Seasons and 110 conference addresses.  Of course there were many other sources but these three dominated. What interested me and I want to pass on to you is a surprise about which subjects he discussed most frequently in his teachings.  Number five on the list is the “Devil.” (p. 80) That interests me because I believe that one of his missions was to testify of the reality of Satan, his power and influence. Associated with that mission he also received from God and his messengers the keys to know how to detect old Scratch when he tries to deceive people. That will be the subject of another of these blogs in the future.

Cannon’s essay is undoubtedly not comprehensive about the things he learned, but here are the highlights. [A heads up to readers.  I intend to address many, if not all of these subjects one way or another in future blog posts.]

• “I found it especially fascinating that the Prophet Joseph taught most about the subject of revelation.  Since the work of the Restoration is centered on the concept of revelation, this is entirely fitting and appropriate.”  (p. 81) 

• “The Prophet Joseph Smith had a marvelous understanding of the principle of obedience.” (p. 81)

• “...Joseph had a sense of humor.  He employed humor in his teaching because he understood that humor is helpful in reaching one’s audience.”  (p. 81)

• “...Joseph tried to incorporate colorful expressions that people could relate to and understand.  He wanted to talk their language to help them comprehend his message.” (p. 82)  [I would add that he also tried to elevate them and as frequently spoke in lofty, uplifting language.]

• “...it became evident that he was a patriot in the best sense of the word.  He frequently expressed his loyalty to the United States of America and often praised the government and especially the Constitution.”  (p. 82) 

• “Joseph Smith believed that women had an important contribution to make to the building of the kingdom.”  (p. 83)

• “Feelings of charity came easily and naturally to Joseph Smith.”  (p. 83)

• “Joseph Smith sincerely believed that he had a special mandate to set things right in matters of religion.  He had an overwhelming desire to correct false doctrine and proclaim the truths that God had revealed to him.  This was his mission and his purpose as a prophet of God–a theme that runs through much of his teaching.  In fact, there are at least thirty separate settings in which the Prophet discussed his mission as a proclaimer of precious truth to a world that had lost it.”  (pp. 83-84, emphasis added.)

Cannon concludes with this testimony, a part of which I highlight as being the point of this recital:

“This encounter with Joseph’s ideas has deepened my understanding and strengthened my testimony of him. ... Engaging in this project has reinforced my own personal conviction that Joseph Smith was indeed a true prophet.  He was actually what he so boldly proclaimed.  The range of his teachings and the inherent wisdom and power of his ideas testify of his divine calling.”  (p. 84)

My most hearty “Amen,” while reading this article was evoked by the last sentence. That has been my thinking also. I am greatly interested in probing the depth of meaning hidden away in a generalization such as, “The greatest temporal and spiritual blessings which always come from faithfulness and concerted effort, never attended individual exertion or enterprise.”  (TPJS, p. 183.) There are scores and scores of such gems on as many substantive issues, which tell us much about the mind and heart of the Prophet.   In such a study, it seems impossible to miss Joseph’s incomparable ability to interpret and give insight into scriptures in his teachings. The examples seem almost inexhaustible. Add to this the numerous religious and spiritual questions he resolved, his teaching about the character and nature of God and Jesus Christ, and as Brigham Young said, that “he took heaven, figuratively speaking, and brought it down to earth; and he took the earth, brought it up, and opened up, in plainness and simplicity, the things of God; and that is the beauty of his mission.”  My own work opened my eyes to his ability as a teacher, the depth of his spirituality, and his humility.

These, and two dozen more like them, are among the things that have repeatedly impressed me over the last 50 years and which I intend to address here.  I hope the Lord will grant me the time, energy, wisdom, judgment, and skill to be able to continue this project that I may add my witness to you that the range of Joseph’s teachings “and the inherent wisdom and power of his ideas testify of his divine calling.”

Thank God for Joseph Smith.  Lets think together again, soon.

*Donald Q. Cannon, “Insights into the Mind and Personality of the Prophet Joseph Smith.”  Religious Educator 4, no 1 (2003): 79-86.