Many have attempted to disprove the First Vision; the reason being that the validity of our church depends fully on that event being true. If Joseph Smith did not see Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, then The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints contains no truth. Two of the most common arguments I have heard are these: first that Joseph Smith made the whole thing up, and second that it was Satan who appeared to him in the grove, and not God. I would like to examine both of these statements.

            Was Joseph Smith a liar? I have been told time and time again that he was. Not an ordinary liar, but a deceiver, and a charlatan, a person who was very persuasive; and able to get many to follow him and to obey his every whim. Despite all this, I hold fast to my belief that he was an honest man, even a man of God. In his own words he once said, “It caused me serious reflection then, and often has since, how very strange it was that an obscure boy, of a little over fourteen years of age, and one, too, who was doomed to the necessity of obtaining a scanty maintenance by his daily labor, should be thought a character of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the great ones of the most popular sects of the day, and in a manner to create in them a spirit of the most bitter persecution and reviling. But strange or not, so it was, and it was often the cause of much sorrow to myself.
            However, it was nevertheless a fact that I had beheld a vision. I have thought since, that I felt much like Paul, when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light, and heard a voice; but still there were but few who believed him; some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad; and he was ridiculed and reviled. But all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew, and would know to his latest breath, that he had both seen a light and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise.
            So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.”
            As utterly cunning as some have made Joseph Smith out to be, the biggest assurance I have is that he was martyred for his cause. It is easy to claim that Brother Joseph wanted to be a prophet for power and wealth; but why would anyone die for such things?
            Following the martyrdom John Taylor wrote, ‘Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it… He lived great, and he died great in the eyes of God and his people; and like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood; and so has his brother Hyrum. In life they were not divided, and in death they were not separated! …They lived for glory; they died for glory; and glory is their eternal reward (Doctrine and Covenants 135:3, 6).
            It is clear to me that Joseph Smith himself believed what he had seen. He believed it, and I believe it.

            The second, somewhat shocking attempt against the Church was that Joseph Smith did not see God the Father and Jesus Christ, but Satan in disguise. If this were the case it could still make sense that Joseph Smith was also ‘deceived’.
            Let us take a closer look at what Joseph Smith said happened to him that day in 1812. A vital hint is given which answers this subject.
            Joseph Smith-History 1:15-17 After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself destruction- not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being- just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.

It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy, which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other- This is my Beloved Son. Hear Him!

Some powerful, dark force assailed Joseph Smith as he prayed. But that force was cast away like an abominable branch as two glorious personages appeared. So why is that important? Jesus gave the answer to the Pharisees.

Matthew 12:24-28 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

The significant thing about the First Vision is that Joseph was attacked by a dark force, which was cast away by a force of light. As Jesus said, Satan cannot cast out Satan. The two Personages could not have been evil. They were indeed the Father and the Son!

The question I would like to present now is this: what justification do others give for attacking the First Vision or the church in general? Here is the most common reason I have heard (this example is taken from an actual site about ‘Mormonism’).

A Christian’s response to the claims of the Mormon Church, is not a mean spirited attack on their faith, it is a response to Joseph Smith’s attack on Christianity.

How could anyone say such things? When did Joseph Smith ever attack the Christian Church? Please allow me to show you where people are getting this idea.
Joseph Smith History 1:19 I was answered (by the Savior) that I must join none of them (the Christian sects), for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
I would like to conclude by refuting the statement made by so many Christians today. Joseph Smith did not say those things about the Christian church. God did. The simple fact of the matter is that the early church fell apostate and needed to be brought back. Mormons do not hate Christianity; we only want all men to know the truth. And the truth is that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. The true church is again on the earth, and we are not ashamed of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Amen.

What Do You Think of Joseph Smith? 100 Evangelical Christians Interviewed

By: Lynn Ridenhour

“…the Joseph Smith of the popular imagination is no more a reality than Santa Claus or Uncle Sam.” --John Henry Evans
I asked 100 people three questions: 1) What do you know about Joseph Smith? 2) What do you think of Joseph Smith? And, 3) Have you read the Book of Mormon? And here’s what I found out… First, you need to know—these 100 people were all “non-restorationists.” That is, none were Mormons (LDS or RLDS). All were evangelical Christians; what we would consider to be “mainstream” Protestants. Specifically, 10 evangelical pastors, 10 Protestant university professors, 10 Baptists, 10 Methodists, 10 Lutherans, 10 Charismatics/Pentecostals, 10 unchurched, 10 at random, 10 media personalities (i.e., radio talk show hosts, tv news announcers), and 10 Youth For Christ teenagers—were asked the three questions. As said, here’s what I discovered… None were favorable toward the man. Most believed Joseph Smith was deceived rather than a deceiver. (They did give him that much.) Out of the 100, none had read the Book of Mormon through. A few had read portions of it or heard quotes from it. Most of the pastors interviewed had taken courses while in college or seminary on “The Kingdom of the Cults,” a major fundamentalist textbook written by Walter Martin, of which Joseph Smith was included as one of the founders of a cult. Of the 100, all of them considered Joseph Smith to be either—an imposter, egoist, plagiarist, or fanatic. I would say, generally speaking, those are my conclusions summarized. I have a different set of conclusions.
1) None of the 100 had studied the life of Joseph Smith using primary sources. And there are plenty of primary sources available. That is, all had come to their conclusions by second-handed information (secondary sources): i.e., pastor’s opinions, books on cults, parents’ opinions, college courses, or by what they had heard from the evangelical community, particularly their pastor. 2) All were convinced the Book of Mormon was “not of God” without having read it. Again, conclusions were based upon second-handed sources. I find their conclusions terribly inadequate. I didn’t say their conclusions were wrong; I said they were inadequate. For one thing… ALL TRUTH IS FIRST-HAND All 100 had come to their conclusions by believing what they had been taught from second-handed sources. Brothers and sisters, that’s not good enough especially when it comes to discerning spiritual matters. A Christian is one who gets to the source! The 100 had not gotten to the source. John the Beloved said, “…That which we have seen and heard we declare unto you…” --I John 1:3 Declared information for early Christians meant declaring first-hand information. Nothing less. Truth was manifested unto them. They had seen it and handled it. No second-handed information was passed on. They wouldn’t have accepted it then. And I suggest—nor should we now. I have discovered, most Protestant/Pentecostal Christians have come to certain conclusions about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon based upon second-handed information. That’s unacceptable. Then what should be our approach to truth and error? There are… TWO MODELS …regarding truth and error. There are two points of view about what I’ve done: 1) the counterfeit point of view, and 2) the military point of view. Two distinct models for discovering truth and avoiding error. One is of God; one is man-made. For example, when asked whether or not they had read the Book of Mormon, more than a few of the 100 responded, “…No, and I see no need to. I’ve never had a desire to study Joseph Smith’s writings. I mostly stick to reading the Word of God…” In other words, the best way to detect a counterfeit is to spend your time studying the real thing. Bankers teach us that. It’s the counterfeit-model approach to truth. Sounds real spiritual, doesn’t it? But it’s not. The military model concerning truth and error is what the Bible teaches. We’re soldiers, all of us (II Timothy 2:3), and a good soldier is not to be ignorant of his enemy’s devices or strategies (2 Cor.2:11). The enemy is lying—if you leave the devil alone he’ll leave you alone. Not so. The devil doesn’t play fair. Leave him alone and he’ll destroy you. We’re in a war! And we’ve invaded behind the enemy’s lines. Can you imagine being in a war and telling your enemy, “…now, we’ve decided to leave you alone. You leave us alone…” Paul told Timothy, “…therefore endure…as a good soldier of Jesus Christ…” (II Tim.2:3), and warned the Church at Corinth, “…we are not [to be] ignorant of his devices…” “…lest Satan should get an advantage of us…” (2 Cor.2:11). Soldiers must understand their enemy’s tactics. It’s basic strategy to winning the war. As Christians we’re to have the advantage. Not our enemy. And you can’t have the advantage if you don’t have proper information. Not having false information is basic to sound military strategy. It bears repeating—second-handed information will not do when it comes to ascertaining spiritual matters. The biblical approach to truth and error is the military model. We must know our enemy! First-hand. The “counterfeit model” regarding truth and error is a man-made model. It’s what bankers use. Yes, the approach sounds spiritual but it’s human wisdom at work. Most all the 100 believers I interviewed had applied their human wisdom to arrive at conclusions concerning Joseph Smith. They weren’t led by the Spirit. They used the counterfeit approach—“…I see no need to read the writings of Joseph Smith. I stick to reading the Bible…” That’s not the military approach to truth. It’s not the biblical approach. Then how do we research out a matter? For starters, there is… FAIR AND UNFAIR RESEARCH An investigation can be fair or unfair. It can be “rigged” from the start. Josh McDowell, contemporary evangelical apologist, in his excellent book Evidence That Demands A Verdict, speaks of two kinds of research (p.9). One is valid, one is not. One kind of research starts with a set of preconceived notions and adjusts conclusions to its own liking. Another kind reproduces the best evidence it can and lets the evidence speak for itself. The latter is fair research, the former is not. It is “rigged” from the get-go. It’s my prayer, concerning Joseph Smith, the restoration movement, and the Book of Mormon, that we participate in “fair” research. That we let the evidence speak for itself. I heard an old Baptist preacher say once, “…too many of us read the Bible with our glasses on. We approach it through our Baptist eyes.” He went on to say, “…we need to take our denominational glasses off and come to the Word of God like a child.” I agree. SPECIFIC RESPONSES Certain comments—more than others—kept surfacing as I interviewed non-restoration believers. For instance… “…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word…” “…Well, I believe Joseph Smith plagiarized the book [of Mormon]. He even copied the King James style…” “…I just can’t accept any writings that contradict the Bible. The Book of Mormon contradicts the teachings of the Bible…” “…You know, don’t you, that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by divination…” “…Well, I don’t care what you say. The main thing I look for in a man is his fruit…” Let’s address each comment. “…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word…” We have addressed the above comment and concluded—though the statement sounds spiritual, it’s really based upon a non-biblical model: the counterfeit approach to truth. The biblical approach to truth is the military model. “…Well, I believe Joseph Smith plagiarized the book [of Mormon]. He even copied the King James style…” This comment seemed to echo back and forth. Let’s address the matter of… PLAGIARISM Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the Book of Mormon? Let’s see. But first, would you permit me the privilege of indulgence for a moment? While reading the Book of Mormon through for the first time, the matter of plagiarism was especially important to me since my background is in literature. I kept looking for “clues” of plagiarism as I read. I have a Ph.D in literature with a specialty degree in composition theory from the University of Iowa. I have taught composition theory, and writing classes off and on in universities, both secular and Christian. Besides, it’s safe to say—I’ve seen hundreds of plagiarized student papers. I believe I have some sense of “literary feel” for the real and for the fake. I understand—there are definite internal and external evidences that point to a text’s own authenticity. For years I have studied the Bible as literature as well as feasting upon it as the precious Word of God. Example: Did you know, the Bible has an amazing literary structure? Let me illustrate. May I give you an assignment? Here it is… Assignment I want you to take 40 different writers over a period of 1,500 years. Put them on three different continents and select men from all walks of life-—doctors, shepherds, kings, fishermen, herdsmen, military generals, cupbearers, prime ministers, tax collectors, and a rabbi. Pick them from miles and generations apart. Give them little or no opportunity to communicate. Have some of them to write in the wilderness, some in a dungeon, on a hillside, some in a palace. Some while traveling, others while in the middle of a war. Separate most of them from the church organizations of their day. Ask them to write on religion, poetry, health, ethics, science, morality, and philosophy. Ask them to make predictions of future events, on the meaning of life, the mystery of existence, and man’s final purpose. And ask them to write in the following literary styles: story of origins, heroic narrative, epic, parody, tragedy, lyric and lamentation, epithalamion, encomium, wisdom literature, proverb, parable, pastoral, prophecy, gospel, epistle, oratory, and apocalypse. O, one last thing—ask them to write in three different languages. That’s your assignment. Now go to it. And collect all the writings. You be the editor. Condense and couch what you’ve collected into the common language of the people. Divide it into books, chapters, and verses and put it into a single book. Then bind it. What do you have? I’ll tell you what you have. Literature hash! No man on earth could make unified sense out of such a mess of outdated ideas, wild speculations and hopeless contradictions. Yet that’s exactly how the Bible was written! Praise His name. What a marvelous book, what a Divine book we have. And miraculously, from Genesis to Revelation the Bible’s message is one amazing whole—united in theme, consistent in concept, logical in development and agreed in doctrine. In “real life” situations, parable and prophecy, the Bible is a love story of history—God seeking rebellious man. Yes, what a miraculous book—written over 1,500 years. Written over 40 generations. Written by over 40 authors. Written with one united them in mind. It bears repeating—the Bible possesses definite internal and external textual evidences that point to its own authenticity. Or, to put it in laymen’s terms—the Bible is reliable. Here’s my point. Like a detective pouring over the evidence, those same internal/external textual confirmations was what I was looking for (inspirational “clues”) while reading the Book of Mormon. And you know, I found them. In fact, let’s turn our attention to the Book of Mormon. We’ve had one assignment—collect writings from over 1,500 years, written over 40 generations by 40 authors, on 3 continents in 3 languages. Let me give you another assignment. I want you to write another book. That is, again be the editor. This assignment is a bit different. Second Assignment This time I want you to find a male lad between the ages of 23 and 24. He cannot be a college graduate. In fact, he can possess only three years of formal schooling. He must write a history of an ancient country (such as Tibet), covering a period from 600 BC to 421 AD. Put the history into a book with 102 chapters—25 of them about war, 10 about history, 21 about prophecy, 32 about doctrines, 5 about missionaries, and 9 about the mission of Christ. The lad must include in his writings the history of two distinct and separate nations, along with histories of different contemporary nations or groups of people. His writings must describe the religious, economic, social and political cultures and institutions of these two nations. He must weave into his history the gospel of Jesus Christ and the pattern for Christian living. The lad’s history must be approximately 522 pages with over 500 words per page. He must add 180 proper nouns to the English language; more than William Shakespeare added (30). When the lad has finished, he must announce that his “literary narrative” is not fiction, but true! It is actual history! In fact, his heroic narrative must fulfill Bible prophecies—even in the exact manner in which they shall come forth, including to whom given. Also, when the 23 year-old lad has finished, he must not make any changes in the text. Not one. No editing allowed! The first edition must stand “forever more.” After pauses for sleep and food, if dictating to a stenographer, he must never ask to have the last paragraph or sentence read back to him. Another thing, the lad must not be allowed to research any of the subjects he’s writing upon. One last thing—how long does he have to finish the project? It must be completed within 80 Days! You say, “…that’s an impossible assignment. It can’t be done.” Yes, it can. It was done. The Book of Mormon was written exactly under those circumstances! Let me be bold—plagiarism is impossible under the above circumstances. Let me also say, while reading the book, I discovered… Similar Literary Styles That Are Found in the Bible. Styles such as: …quotations from other Jewish scriptures, especially Isaiah. …testimonies: Ammon’s review (Alma 14:79). …hymns and poems: Nephi’s psalm (II Nephi 3:30-66) …narratives of dramatic happenings: Nephi, the ship builder (I Nephi 5) …letters: exchange between Captain Moroni and Governor Pahorun (Alma 27:14) …sermons: Jesus Christ to the Nephites (Alma 7) …patriarchal blessings: Alma to his three sons (Alma 17-19) …theological discourses (II Nephi 6) …battle accounts and military marches. …sections on social collapse and on Zionic community lift. All of the above hint of internal evidences of a text’s authenticity. Perhaps, however, one of the more convincing indications of inspiration was the re-occurrences of Hebrew literary evidences. That is, evidences peculiar to Hebrew literature. For example, the Bible is full of ”Herbaisms,” parallelisms peculiar to Hebrew poetry, or more specifically, the “chaismus.” So is the Book of Mormon! That says “volumes” concerning “clues of inspiration.” Here is what I’m talking about. Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon A “Hebraism” is the literal translation into English of Hebrew words, parts of speech, and language peculiarities, such as: “ and,” “and it came to pass,” “behold.” Take the word “and.” “And” starts sentences, and is repeated before each noun in a series. It’s a common Hebrew literary device. Old Testament And the Lord hath blessed my master greatly and he is become great; And he hath given him flocks, and herds, and silver and gold, and men servants and maid servants… --Gen.24:35 Book of Mormon And it came to pass that the people of Nephi did till the land, And raise all manner of grain, and fruit, and flocks of herds, And flocks of all manner of cattle of every kind, And goats, and wild goats, and also many horses. --Enos 1:34 Biblical Hebrew Poetry in the Book of Mormon Parallelism is the basic poetic technique of Hebrew poetry, especially throughout the Psalms. Praise, adoration, awe, joy, sorrow, depression—these are the emotional subjects that recur throughout the Psalms. The same subjects are recurrent throughout the Book of Mormon. Parallelism occurs when two or more lines correspond to each other in both meaning and structure. Synonymous Parallelism—Second line repeats first. Old Testament O magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt his name together. --Psalm 34:3 Book of Mormon For his soul did rejoice, and his whole heart was filled. --I Nephi 1:14 Antithetic Parallelism—Second line opposes first. Old Testament For the Lord watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked shall perish. --Psalm 1:6 Book of Mormon Ye are swift to do iniquity, But slow to remember the Lord your God. --I Nephi 5:144 Staircase or Climatic Parallelism—Repetition to climax. Old Testament Ascribe to the Lord, O mighty ones, Ascribe to the Lord, glory and strength. Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name; Worship the Lord in the splendor of his holiness. --Psalm 29:1 Book of Mormon Believe in God; Believe that he is, and that he created all things, both in heaven and earth; Believe that he has all wisdom, and all power, Both in heaven and earth; Believe that man doth not comprehend all things which the Lord can comprehend, and again; Believe that ye must repent of your sins and forsake them, and humble yourselves before God; and ask in sincerity of heart that he would forgive you; And now, if you believe all these things, see that ye do them. --Mosiah 2:13-17 Inverted Parallelism Or Chiasmus—Second part inverted against first. Old Testament He shall open and no one will shut, He shall shut, and no one will open. --Isaiah 22:22 The soul shall be restored to the body, and the body to the soul. --Alma 19:58 (Zarahemla Research Foundation) Let me ask a direct question: Do you think a 23 year-old man with a third grade education could plagiarize sophisticated Hebraisms, synonymous, antithetic, and staircase parallelisms? Do you think a young man with a third grade education could plagiarize the inverted parallelism or Hebrew chiasmus? And do it consistently? Sustain the form for over 500 pages? Do you think such a lad was familiar with Hebrew poetry? I rest my case. We need to address another question before we move on… “…then why the King James English throughout the Book of Mormon? Surely this points to plagiarism.” No it doesn’t. Two reasons: 1) we must remember, the Book of Mormon is a translation, and 2) the King James English was the accepted vernacular style of the English language used in churches in 1830, the time of translation. It makes sense, the Lord would translate reformed Egyptian into the "church language of the day.” In other words, the King James style was the “Living Bible” style of their day. To give an analogy, today there are various “updated” versions of the Bible; i.e., American Standard Version, the New King James Version, New International Version, The Living Bible, etc. Remember, the King James English was the “updated” version during the 1830s. Put another way, Hebrew literary evidences are found in the Book of Mormon as well as the Bible. It appears the translation of the Book of Mormon into English has been quite literal. It also appears the King James translators were also quite literal in transferring Hebrew idioms into the King James English. This is a mark of its authenticity and antiquity (Criticisms of the Book of Mormon Answered, p.21). The fact that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon into his everyday church vernacular (King James English) authenticates the work, not discredits it. One other matter concerning literary style—the genre of…. Heroic Narrative The Bible is primarily a story. Even a casual reading demonstrates—a large amount of the Bible consists of stories: the story of Adam and Eve, the story of Abraham, the story of Jacob, the story of Joseph, the story of David, of Solomon, of Gideon and Daniel, of Ruth and Boaz, the story of Esther, the story of the Savior, the story of the early church. The Bible seems to yell at us, “…tell me a story!” So does the Book of Mormon. Book of Mormon characters are just as intriguing, just as likely to “jump off the page.” I’m thinking of Nephi, Jacob, Alma, Benjamin, Mosiah, Moroni, and Jared. There are others. All the ingredients of story are there—character development, protagonist, antagonist, plot, hero, villain, action, conflict, setting, and resolution. Both the Bible and the Book of Mormon tell a story in which God is depicted as the God who acts in story line, in history. Which points to a Hebrew pattern: the Hebrew mind thinks in concrete terms. The Greek mind thinks in general terms, abstractions. If the Book of Mormon is (as it professes to be) a translation of the Lehites who were Hebrews from Jerusalem, then “concreteness of style” is to be expected. The reader is not disappointed—another internal evidence of the text’s authenticity. Let’s move on. We’ve discussed the Book of Mormon’s literary style; now let’s briefly look at its…. Thematic Structure Which brings up another issue raised by the 100 people interviewed. “….I just can’t accept any writings that contradict the Bible. The Book of Mormon contradicts the teachings of the Bible.” Does it? Let’s see. Here is what the Book of Mormon says about God and His universe: ….God is creator of all things (Mosiah 2:13,14). ….God continues in creation and communication (2 Nephi 12:63). ….God provides the earth for man’s habitation and good life (I Nephi 5:126,127). ….The way of God’s universe is the way of righteousness, which is the way of happiness (2 Nephi 1:90-92). ….God is the source of goodness; evil comes out of disharmony with God (Moroni 7:10,11). ….Righteousness achieves priority in the long range of history (I Nephi 7:35-37). ….God designated a chosen people for the accomplishment of his purposes (I Nephi 5:132). ….God uses the Gentiles for His purpose as the Jews fall short (I Nephi 7:17-19). ….God designed the Western land to be a land of promise (2 Nephi 1:6). ….Zion emerges as a core community in God’s purpose and program (I Nephi 3:187, 2 Nephi 10:54). ….The life and ministry of the Messiah is central in human history (preface statement). Having read the Book of Mormon as a Baptist minister, there is absolutely nothing in it that contradicts the Bible. For example, the book uplifts the blood of Christ (Mosiah 1:118), declares that salvation is only by God’s grace (2 Nephi 7:42), defends the grand theme of salvation (Mosiah 1:108), and proclaims that salvation comes only through faith on the Lord Jesus Christ (Mosiah 3:8,9). Other themes such as repentance, atonement by Christ’s blood, redemption, and forgiveness run like a scarlet thread through the book as well (Alma 3:86, Helaman 2:71, Alma 13:13, Mosiah 2:3,4). No, the Book of Mormon does not contradict the teachings of the Bible. On the contrary, the centrality of the person of Jesus Christ and His Lordship are lifted up. Let’s address another issue that came up while interviewing: “…You know, don’t you, that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by divination.” Which is really raising the issue… Joseph the Seer What in the world is a seer? We Baptists haven’t seen many seers lately. (And I don’t mean that facetiously.) I know, growing up in a small Baptist church in the middle of the Missouri Ozarks, I never heard one sermon on “a seer.” Were there seers in the Bible? Was Joseph Smith a seer? Are there seers today in the Body of Christ? Is it a legitimate office? And what’s the difference between a seer and a “psychic,” a person motivated by demonic power of divination (Deut.18:10)? Seers are mentioned 28 times in the Bible. King David had his personal seer; his name was Gad (II Sam.24:11). Kings often had personal seers. Heman was the King’s seer (I Chron.25:5). So was Jedu (II Chron.35:15). Amos was a seer (Amos 7:12). Asaph was a seer (II Chron.29:30). Iddo was a seer (II Chron.9:29). Seers were special to kings. All seers were prophets but not all prophets were seers. Seers were true visionaries. More so than prophets. They were the “God Squad.” It’s like God turned on the TV set inside of them. Kings, in dire need of immediate direction from the Lord, often times called upon their personal seer. The Lord often gave immediate counsel through His seers. Seers were known for their sayings (II Chron.33:19) and for speaking “…in the name of the Lord God of Israel” (II Chron.33:18). Seers saw visions (II Chron.9:29). As I said, they seemed to have had built-in television sets from God. Joseph Smith was a modern-day seer. Seers are mentioned 11 times in the Book of Mormon and 7 times in the Doctrine and Covenants. The Bible mentions them the most (28). Joseph Smith did not translate the Book of Mormon by the power of divination; he translated the book by a biblical instrument, the Urim and Thummim, an instrument worn upon the high priest’s breast when he went into the holy precincts of the temple (Lev.8:8). The Urim and Thummim was a well-known instrument used by God’s people in early biblical times. They used the instrument in order to ascertain God’s will. Some called the Urim and Thummim “…the interpreters of light and perfection.” The Urim and Thummim is mentioned 7 times in the Bible. (By the way, I have discovered—evangelical Christians are almost totally unaware of the instrument’s existence, though it’s mentioned 7 times in the Bible.) Aaron wore it (Ex.28:30). Eleazor the priest wore it, and asked counsel of the Lord “…after the judgment of Urim before the Lord” (Nu.27:21). Levi had one (Deut.33:8). Priests were even using the instrument during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah: “…there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim” (Ezra 2:63, Neh.7:65). What did the Urim and Thummim look like? Joseph Smith had one. He describes it: “…There were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim…and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book [of Mormon]. --Pearl of Great Price, p.52 An Old Testament commentary describes the same instrument: “…The Urim and Thummim were two small oracular images similar to the Teraphim personifying revelation and truth, which were placed in the cavity or pouch by the folds of the breastplate, and which uttered oracles by voice.” --Popular Bible Encyclopedia, p.1693 Our point is—the instrument was an instrument of God, not an instrument of divination. Not an instrument of the devil. The Bible is quite clear on the matter. There’s an interesting passage in I Samuel that emphasizes that very distinction: “…And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.” --I Sam.28:6 You say, of course the Lord wouldn’t answer by the Urim; it’s of the devil. Wait a minute. Are dreams of the devil? Are prophets of the devil? No. Here are three legitimate means of receiving directions from the Lord: 1) by dreams, 2) by Urim, and 3) by the prophets. The Urim was included. Saul, however, did not receive direction from the Lord, so what did he turn to? Verse seven reads: “…Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit…” Saul then turned to divination once the Urim did not give him direction from the Lord. That’s pretty plain. · Let me interject my personal feelings. We evangelical are so cautious; I believe we’re overly cautious. Anything out of the norm (whatever that may be) becomes suspect. We’re so “Word-centered” that sometimes we miss God. Any experience out of the ordinary becomes immediately questionable. I’m aware—receiving a God-given ability to translate ancient languages from a peculiar-looking apparatus used back in olden times is not exactly “orthodox.” I’m aware of that. But I’m also aware—our God is not orthodox! God told Isaiah to take off his clothes in public and preach (Isa.20:2). Not very orthodox. A man came to Jesus wanting to see. What did God do? He spit on the ground and threw mud in the man’s eye (Jn.9:6). Not very orthodox. See what I mean? Let’s get with it, saints! Let’s abandon ourselves to a faith that risks. God, at times, is a reckless God. His leadings often tend to make no sense—tend not to be very orthodox. “…Come Peter, you too can walk on water…” * Do you recall the first miracle of the church? The saints were gathered in Joseph Knight’s home, the father of Newel Knight. Our prophet called on the son to lead in prayer. You remember, Newel Knight was bashful to pray in public. Our prophet cast the devil out of him and then all the saints witnessed together the very first miracle of the church—the power of God had lifted Newel Knight up to the ceiling and was pressing his head against the ceiling beam when the son realized he was floating in the air. Not very orthodox! Back to seers. At least, concerning this matter of seers and the Urim and Thummim, grant the author the evangelical maxim—“…show it to me in the Word and I’ll believe it.” I’ve done that. Here’s a wonderful passage: “…Now Ammon said unto him, I can assuredly tell thee, O king, of a man that can translate the records: for he has wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of an ancient date; and it is a gift from God. And the things are called interpreters; and no man can look in them, except he be commanded…And Ammon said, that a seer is a revelator, and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have…a seer can know things which have past, and also of things which are to come…And by them shall all things be revealed, or rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known, shall be made known by them…” --Mosiah 5:72-79 What a passage. Joseph Smith said this, “…We again say, search the revelations of God; study the prophecies, and rejoice that God grants unto the world Seers and Prophets. They are they who saw the mysteries of godliness…” --Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.12 Yes, Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the power and gift of God. No, he did not use divination. Quite the contrary—he was seeing the mysteries of godliness. Moving on… Here was another key response: “…Well, I don’t care what you say, the main thing I look for is the fruit.” Which is another way of saying, “…I’m not so sure about this man’s character.” Which brings us to our last examination… JOSEPH SMITH, THE MAN The Man of God will make you mad or glad. It depends upon the soil of your heart—if it’s fertile or fallow. Joseph Smith made people mad or glad. To some he was a prophet; to others he was a plagiarist. To some he was humble; to others he was an egotist. Some knew him to be kind and generous; others said he was lazy and a gold digger. Two people looking at the same thing can, and often do, arrive at exact opposite views. One sees an angel; the other, a demon. (Ever watch Hannity & Colmes?) Worldly evidence is no substitute for personal revelation. For one thing, such evidence (archaeology, linguistics, botany, computer research, and ancient history) merely confirms what we already know in our hearts to be true. It can’t be the other way around. Archaeology, for instance, can never confirm Truth. Truth, however, can confirm archaeology. First the spiritual, then the natural. I like the way my old professor of theology used to put it. “…A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument…” Well said. Regarding our last topic—Joseph Smith, the Man—it is not my duty, nor intent, to impose my convictions upon you. And I share my bias up front. There is so much “anti-Mormon” material written about Joseph Smith that I’m being deliberately selective in my material. I simply want to swing the pendulum back to the center. Before we examine the man’s character, I want to say a word or two about the comment, “…the main thing I look for is the fruit…” There is a subtle sinister side to that statement. I must admit, I have heard Christians use that statement (or similar ones) in defense of their own arrogance. For example, the statement can mean, “…I don’t care what you say, my mind is made up…” “…I don’t care what you say, his teachings go outside my theological comfort zone…” “…I don’t care what you say, I was taught all my life he formed a cult…” I have heard Christians with unpliable spirits say, “…I can’t judge the brother, but I can sure be a fruit inspector…” God, spare us from such subtle hardness. As I said, there is a negative side to what we’re talking about. Let’s turn to the good side. What about Joseph Smith’s character? What do we know about the man? For one thing, there are plenty of good, first-hand sources available. I’m a great believer in using first-hand sources when possible. Joseph Smith kept a personal journal. It’s available to read. A great source. His mother also wrote an excellent book about her son. Perhaps the best source of all. We must keep in mind—by the Law of Letters, we’re not talking about a very long time ago. We’re tracing sources and documents back a mere 150 some years. That’s nothing compared to tracing historical documents back to the times of Christ! Those 2000-year old-sources are still quite reliable, and we Baptists trust them. Since 1985 I have diligently researched this matter—who was Joseph Smith? I have had essentially one rule: use primary sources when available. It’s safe to say—I have read hundreds of volumes, thousands of pages. I have dug into archives, visited sites, and spoken to “old timers.” And I claim no original scholarship. I merely want to find out all I can about this man, about his movement, and about how I may be directly affected during my life time. Could it be? I’m a Latter-day Israelite living in the land of Zion?! How blessed! Then who was Joseph Smith, Jr?… He was a man who believed that all of Israel would be saved; that is, all of the ten lost tribes would some day be regathered. He was a man who translated a book tracing the migration of one of those lost Hebrew tribes. (All the authors of the Book of Mormon were Hebrews, descendants from the tribe of Lehi who left Jerusalem in ac 600 BC.) He believed the earth would be restored, that this earth is not going to be eternally the pleasure ground of sin-cursed man. He believed that nothing short of a restoration of primitive Christianity would “get the job done.” Restoration, not reformation, was his theme. He believed the reformation of the 1500s didn’t go far enough. He despised sectarianism. He believed there are biblical principles of economics (the celestial law) that will one day allow a wealth transfer into the kingdom. The saints will inherit the wealth of the wicked someday, as well as the earth. He believed what the first Adam lost, the Last Adam restored. He believed that this earth will one day be returned to Paradise. In other words, he was a man much like you and me. Believing many of the same things as we. He was contemporary with Charles Finney, William Chalmers Burns, and Robert Murray McCheyne. The same Spirit rested upon them all. Joseph Smith, Jr. was martyred for his faith. He was a witness for his Lord (a potential martyr) in the truest sense of the word. Let’s return to the comment, “…the main thing I look for is the fruit…” We need to be precise here. Surely the gentleman who told me that means—we’re to look for the fruit of the Spirit evident in a man’s life (Gal.5:22-23). Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Did Joseph Smith demonstrate such qualities? Also, what is the fruit of the movement? Is Christ the center focus? Or do followers worship Joseph Smith? With the above concerns before us, let’s now turn our attention to the man, Joseph Smith. I could tell many stories about the man, but I limit myself to one. Because this particular story is so moving, I want Joseph to tell in his own words of the night he and Emma lost their adopted twin son. As I said, he kept a personal journal: “…On the 24th of March the twins, which had been sick of the measles for some time, caused us to be broken of our rest in taking care of them, especially my wife. In the evening I told her she had better retire to rest with one of the children, and I would watch with the sicker child. In the night she told me I had better lie down on the trundle-bed, and I do so. Soon after I was awakened by her screaming murder, and I found myself going out of the door in the hands of about a dozen men. Some of them had their hands in my hair, and some had hold of my shirt, drawers, and limbs. I made a desperate struggle, as I was forced out, to extricate myself, but only cleared one leg, with which I made a pass at one man, and he fell on the door steps. I was immediately overpowered again; and they swore by G____, they would kill me if I did not be still, which quieted me. They then seized me by the throat, and held on till I lost my breath. After I came to, as they passed along with me, about thirty rods from the house, I saw Elder Rigdon stretched out on the ground, whither they had dragged him by the heels. I supposed he was dead. I began to plead with them, saying, “You will have mercy and spare my life, I hope.” To which they replied, “G_d__ ye, call on yer God for help; we’ll show no mercy.” The people began to show themselves in every direction. One coming from the orchard had a plank, and I expected they would kill me, and carry me off on the plank. They had turned to the right, and went on about thirty rods where I saw Elder Rigdon, into the meadow, where they stopped. One said, “Simonds, Simonds, pull up his drawers, he’ll catch cold.” Another said, “Ain’t ye going to kill ‘im?” When a group of mobbers collected a little way off, one of them said, “Simonds, come here.” “Simonds” charged those who had hold of me to keep me from touching the ground (as they had done all the time), lest I should get a spring upon them. They held a council, and as I could occasionally overhear a word, I supposed it was to know whether or not it was best to kill me. They returned after a while, when I learned that they had concluded not to kill me, but to beat and scratch me well, to tear off my shirt and leave me naked. One cried, “Simonds, Simonds, where’s the tar bucket?” “I don’t know,” answered another, “where ‘tis Eli’s left it.” They ran back and fetched the bucket of tar, when one exclaimed with an oath, “Let’s tar up his mouth.” And they tried to force the tar-paddle into my mouth. I twisted my head around, so that they could not; and they cried out “G__d__ ye, hold up yer head and let us give ye some tar.” They tried to force a vial into my mouth, it broke against my teeth. All my clothes were torn off me, except my shirt collar. One man fell on me, and scratched my body with his nails like a mad cat, and muttered out, “G__d__ ye, that’s the way the Holy Ghost falls on folks.” Then they left me. I attempted to rise, but fell again. I pulled the tar away from my lips, so that I could breathe more freely. After a while I began to recover, and raised myself up. Whereupon I saw two lights. I made my way towards one of them, and found it to be Father Johnson’s. When I came to the door, I was naked, and the tar made me look as if I were covered with blood; and when my wife saw me, she thought I was crushed to pieces, and fainted. During the affray the sisters of the neighborhood had collected at my room. I called for a blanket; they threw me one, and shut the door; I wrapped it around me, and went in. My friends spent the night scraping and removing the tar, and washing and cleansing my body, so that by morning I was ready to be clothed. The next day being the Sabbath, the people assembled for meeting at the usual hour for worship. Among them came also some of the mobbers. With my flesh all scarified and defaced, I preached to the congregation as usual, and in the afternoon of the same day I baptized three individuals. The next morning I went to see Elder Rigdon, and found him crazy, and his head highly inflamed; for they had dragged him by the heels, and those, too, so high from the ground that he could not raise his head from the rough, frozen surface, which lacerated it exceedingly. During the mobbing one of the twins contracted a severe cold, continued to grow worse until Friday, and then died. The mobbers were composed of various religious parties, but mostly Campbellites, Methodists, and Baptists, who continued to molest and menace Father Johnson’s house for a long time. --Joseph Smith’s Personal Journal I am tempted not to comment. Some things are so convincing they stand on their own. Can you, can I, have our home raided in the middle of winter, be physically abused to the point of death, have our backs clawed, stripped naked, our mouths filled with tar—then preach the next morning with love in our hearts as our perpetrators sit in the congregation and listen? Can we preach to the murderers of our child with love in our heart?! Joseph did. Can we display the fruit of the Spirit under such circumstances? Can we still love our mobbers, especially if our mobbers were professing brethren in the faith? I know this much--phonies don’t let a mob murder one of their children and not lash out. To say it another way—hypocrites don’t die for their faith, and phonies don’t preach to the murderers of their children. Did Joseph Smith display qualities of the fruit of the Spirit in his life? I’ll let you answer. I might add—two things are usually, without fail, genuine spiritual barometers: 1) how we treat our enemies, and 2) what our children say about us. Joseph Smith exhibited an unusual amount of love and forbearance toward his enemies—and children loved the man, especially his own. I could tell story after story, but I won’t. SUMMARY While discussing Joseph Smith with 100 or more evangelical Christians, many questions were raised. More than a few comments were made. In our essay we have chosen to focus on key issues that seemed to surface over and over. Again, these issues were: · “…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word.” · “…I believe Joseph Smith plagiarized the Book of Mormon. You know he copied the King James style, don’t you? · “…You’re aware, aren’t you, Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by divination.” · “…I look for fruit.” I have tried to answer the above comments and concerns to the best of my ability—with fairness. With primary sources. And I might add—with Christian charity. I have one prayer: that having read this essay, you can put it down and know—that Christ had a prophet named Joseph Smith.

Could Joseph Smith See God?
By: Michael Flournoy

            In Exodus 33:20 God states, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me and live. It is believed by some that seeing God is impossible and there are no exceptions. Those who take this stance not only must be able to explain away the LDS concept of transfiguration, but must also stand against many Protestants who say God is a spirit and there is nothing to see.

            Joseph Smith saw God when he went out to pray. This experience is found in Joseph Smith-History 1:16-17. He wrote, I saw a pillar of light exactly above my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me… When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other- This is my Beloved Son. Hear Him!
            I remember telling a woman this on my mission, who immediately retaliated by saying it was impossible for man to see God. She had believed everything we had said up to that point, but because Joseph claimed to see God, she was convinced he was a fraud.
            Manoah, of the Old Testament, seemed to believe this same notion. He and his wife saw God, and he exclaimed, “We shall surely die, because we have seen God.” Interestingly enough, they lived on for years after this event (Judges 13:20-22).

            Certainly it is true we cannot see God and live, but remember that God has the power to do all things. If God can do anything, does it not make sense that he could temporarily endow someone with the power to see Him and live?
            The Pearl of Great Price demonstrates this as God shows himself to Moses. Moses 1:2 And he saw God face to face, and he talked with him, and the glory of God was upon Moses; therefore Moses could endure his presence.
            Verses 10-11 And it came to pass that is was for the space of many hours before Moses did again receive his natural strength like unto man; and he said unto himself: Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed. But now mine own eyes have beheld God; but not my natural, but my spiritual eyes, for my natural eyes could not have beheld; for I should have withered and died in his presence; but his glory was upon me; and I beheld his face, for I was transfigured before him.

            Not only has God been seen in the Pearl of Great Price, but the Bible also shows these experiences. Exodus 24:9-11 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: and they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

            Isaiah 6:1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
            Verse 5: Then said I, Woe is me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

Of course, the argument would never end here. There is still the matter of John 1:18, which says, No man hath seen God at any time… Although this still leaves room for someone to see God in the future, wouldn’t it undermine any account given by Moses, Manoah, or Isaiah? The simple answer is no. Later, John went back to this topic and added more detail.
John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. If a man of God could see the Father, then it makes sense that Moses and Isaiah could. This shows that Joseph Smith was not a liar, or himself deceived, but he also was a man of God.

Not only was it possible for Joseph Smith to see God, but it is possible for us to see. In Matthew 5:8 Jesus taught, “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God”. There is no reason to suppose this blessing could only occur after the death of an individual, especially in conjunction with the doctrine taught in the Doctrine and Covenants.
Doctrine and Covenants 67:10-11 And again, verily I say unto you that it is your privilege, and I promise I give unto you that have been ordained unto this ministry, that inasmuch as you strip yourselves from jealousies and fears, and humble yourselves before me, for ye are not sufficiently humble, the veil shall be rent and you shall see me and know that I am- not with the carnal neither natural mind, but with the spiritual. For no man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God.

In conclusion, I would like to state the testimony of Jesus Christ, given by Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon. Doctrine and Covenants 76: 22-24 And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives! For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard a voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father- That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God.
Surely Joseph Smith was a man of God, even a prophet of God, and he did see the Father and the Son.

Sayings by Joseph Smith

This Baptist Preacher Likes!

By: Lynn Ridenhour

I grew up a conservative Baptist in the hills of southern Missouri, and was taught all my life that Joseph Smith was an imposter, a plagiarist and egotist. I was taught to stay away from his teachings and not “let any of those Mormon missionaries in the house” when they came around ringing our doorbell.

I also taught at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA., one of the “hotbeds” of fundamentalist Christianity—a very “anti-Mormon” university. Required reading for every student at Liberty University was a book written by Dr. Walter Martin titled, “The Kingdom of the Cults.” In it was a chapter devoted to Mormonism, and its founder, Joseph Smith.

I’m saying—I had lots of “anti-Mormon” sentiments…until I read Joseph Smith’s works!

No, as said--I’m not a convert to the Mormon religion, or any of its sects; i.e., RLDS (aka The Community of Christ), Restoration Branches, Strangites, or Culterites. I’m still a Southern Baptist minister—but I have read Joseph Smith’s writings, including the Book of Mormon. And have come to this conclusion: the man’s sayings are not as “weird” as I was taught. Which brings up the point—most evangelicals have never investigated firsthand the sayings of Joseph Smith. Never read what he had to say. Most of our information has come from second-handed sources; i.e., what our pastor told us, what we learned from our family and friends, and what we were taught in our seminaries and evangelical colleges.

Surprisingly, I had a paradigm shift—a change of heart—once I read what Joseph Smith taught his followers, and believed. Oddly enough, I found myself agreeing with much of what I was reading. “I believe this,” I would say to myself, as I read a passage in LDS church history, or from one of the many church publications.

So, I thought it would be good to share some of these passages from church history, and let you see for yourself. Following are some sayings by Joseph Smith that I happen to like as a Baptist preacher. My brief comments follow.

“…Do you believe Jesus Christ and the gospel of salvation, which he revealed? So do I. Christians should cease wrangling and contending with each other, and cultivate the principles of union and friendship. I am just as ready to die defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination.”

--Joseph Smith, --LDS Church History, Vol.5: p.498

Brief Comments: Joseph is setting the record straight. We both believe the same—if you believe Jesus and the gospel that our Lord preached. And Joseph is touching on the theme of unity within the body of Christ, regardless of denomination. In other words, differences are not necessarily division, but neither is conformity unity. Christian fellowship is centered on the Lordship of Christ, not creed or doctrine.

“…The Son of God came into the world to redeem it from the fall. But except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. This eternal truth settles the question of all men’s religion.”

--Joseph Smith, LDS Church History, Vol.1: p.282

Brief Comments: Joseph is advocating the born again experience for all Christian sects.

“…Salvation cannot come without revelation; it is in vain for anyone to minister without it.” --Joseph Smith,

“Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” p.160

“…The plea of many in this day is, that we have no right to receive revelations; but if we do not get revelations, we do not have the oracles of God; and if they have not the oracles of God, they are not the people of God.” --Joseph Smith,

“Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.272

Brief Comments: In both these sayings, Joseph touches upon a very critical distinction: the difference between a profession of faith and a confession of faith. The former is based on what men say; the latter, on what the Spirit of God reveals. Christianity is often referred to as The Great Confession. Our example is best illustrated in that classic interchange between Peter and Jesus in Matthew sixteen.

Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do men say that I am?” They responded, “Some say you are Elijah, others say you are John the Baptist, or one of the prophets.” In other words, a profession of faith is based on what men say—and will get you nowhere with God. There’s no revelation from heaven.

Jesus turns to Peter, “Who do you say that I am?” And Peter gave his classic response, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Peter made a confession of faith based upon a direct revelation from the Spirit of God. Only a confession moves the heart of Jesus. He responded, “You’re blessed, Peter…”

Joseph would agree: the gospel is not an explanation. The gospel begins with a revelation that breaks into a revolution that leads to a reformation.

The late Hugh Nibley said it well. When it comes to the gospel, there are only two options: prophets who reveal, or philosophers who explain.

Yes, Joseph knew—the gospel begins with a revelation. To say it another way: Christianity is a revealed religion. There’s much truth in the cliché: The Christian faith cannot be taught; it must be caught!

“Salvation cannot come without revelation; it is in vain for anyone to minister without it,” said Joseph.

He’s absolutely right.

“…There is no other way beneath the heavens whereby God hath ordained for man to come to Him to be saved, and enter the Kingdom of God, except faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins, and any other course is in vain; then you have the promise of the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

--Joseph Smith, “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” p.198

Brief Comments: Joseph gives the classic Protestant understanding of salvation. He also gives a comprehensive view of biblical salvation. Salvation includes: repentance, water baptism, and receiving the promise of the Holy Spirit as a gift. Or Spirit baptism. Too often we Baptists are prone to stop at repentance, faith, and water baptism—without including the gift of the Holy Ghost as taught in Acts chapter two. Not Joseph. In fact, he mentions this very matter:

“…We ask the sects, Do you believe this? They answer, No. I believe in being converted. I believe in this tenaciously. So did the Apostle Peter and the disciples of Jesus. But I further believe in the gift of the Holy Ghost. Baptism by water is but half a baptism and is good for nothing without the other half—that is, the baptism of the Holy Ghost.” [bold mine]

--Joseph Smith, LDS Church History, Vol.5: 499-500

Brief Comments: Very plainly stated. As said, Joseph’s understanding of biblical salvation was comprehensive. Water baptism without Holy Spirit baptism was “good for nothing,” to use his words. I think I understand. He’s saying, we, the church of the living God, are doing converts a grave injustice if we’re giving birth to spiritual babies, and then not nurturing them to full maturity. It takes the baptism in the Holy Spirit for a person to grow in grace and knowledge of our Savior.

And Joseph is precise in what he regards as--receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. Here's an interesting anecdote recorded by Joseph on Sunday, the 4th. of November, 1838:

"...We were visited by some ladies and gentlemen. One of the women came up and very candidly inquired of the troops which of the prisoners was the Lord whom the 'Mormons' worshiped. One of the guards pointed to me with a significant smile and said, 'This is he.' The woman then turning to me inquired whether I professed to be the Lord and Savior. I replied that I professed to be nothing but a man and a minister of salvation, sent by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel. This answer so surprised the woman that she began to inquire into our doctrine, and I preached a discourse both to her and her companions and to the wondering soldiers, who listened with almost breathless attention while I set forth the doctrine of faith in Jesus Christ, and repentance, and baptism for remission of sins, with the promise of the Holy Ghost, as recorded in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles..." [bold mine]

--Joseph Smith, --RLDS Vol.2, p.p.285--86

Brief Comments: Joseph taught as official doctrine of the church “the promise of the Holy Ghost, as recorded in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles.” In other words, included in experiencing the “restored gospel” was the act of receiving the Pentecostal experience. It bears repeating—Joseph’s understanding of biblical salvation was: faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, water baptism, and Spirit baptism.

I wholeheartedly agree. Joseph, in his writings, often speaks of the need for spiritual gifts and the power of God to experientially operate in our lives. In fact, I find the first miracle of the church to be quite fascinating.

“…Accordingly, he [Newel] deferred praying until next morning, when he retired into the woods; where, according to his own account afterwards, he made several attempts to pray, but could scarcely do so, feeling that he had done his duty, in refusing to pray in the presence of others. He began to feel uneasy, and continued to feel worse both in mind and body, until, upon reaching his own house, his appearance was such as to alarm his wife very much. He requested her to go and bring me to him.

I went and found him suffering very much in his mind, and his body acted upon in a very strange manner; his visage and limbs distorted and twisted in every shape and appearance possible to imagine; and finally he was caught up off the floor of the apartment, and tossed about most fearfully.

His situation was soon made known to his neighbors and relatives, and in a short time as many as eight or nine grown persons had got together to witness the scene. After he had thus suffered for a time, I succeeded in getting hold of him by the hand when almost immediately he spoke to me, and with great earnestness requested me to cast the devil out of him, saying that he knew he was in him and that he also knew that I could cast him out.

I replied, ‘If you know that I can, it shall be done;’ and then almost unconsciously I rebuked the devil, and commanded him in the name of Jesus Christ to depart from him; when immediately Newel spoke out and said that he saw the devil leave him and vanish from his sight. This was the first miracle which was done in the Church, [bold mine] or by any member of it; and it was done not by man, nor by the power of man, but it was done by God, and by the power of godliness; therefore, let the honor and the praise, the dominion and the glory, be ascribed to the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit…

…This scene was now entirely changed, for as soon as the devil had departed from our friend, his countenance became natural, his distortions of body ceased, and almost immediately the Spirit of the Lord descended upon him, and the visions of eternity were opened to his view. So soon as consciousness returned, his bodily weakness was such that we were obliged to lay him upon his bed, and wait for him for some time. He afterwards related his experience as follows:

I now began to feel a most pleasing sensation resting on me, and immediately the visions of heaven opened to my view. I felt myself attracted upward, and remained for some time enwrapt in contemplation, insomuch that I knew not what was going on in my room. By and by, I felt some weight pressing upon my shoulder and the side of my head, which served to recall me to a sense of my situation, and I found that the Spirit of the Lord had actually caught me up off the floor, and that my shoulder and head were pressing against the beams.

All this was witnessed by many,” says Joseph, “to their great astonishment and satisfaction, l when they saw the devil cast out, and the power of God, and his Holy Spirit made manifest. As may be expected, such a scene as this contributed much to make believers of those who witnessed it, and finally the greater part of them became members of the Church.”

--LDS History of the Church, Vol.1, pp.82-84

Brief Comments:

My, my! What a miracle! The first miracle of the restoration movement was a deliverance session; that is, casting out evil spirits from a young lad, and then the presence of the Spirit descending upon the same lad—elevating him to the ceiling! The gift of miracles was at work early on in the restoration. And the Book of Mormon tells us the miraculous has not ceased. If it has, it’s because of our unbelief (Moroni 10:18 RLDS; Moroni 10:24 LDS).

LDS church history is “jam-packed” with charismatic experiences where the power of God descended on the early saints. For instance, I took a yellow marker and counted over 150 passages where spiritual gifts were present and operating among the saints.

"...The gifts which follow them that believe and obey the gospel...began to be poured out among us, as in ancient days...I spoke to the conference in another tongue...the Lord poured out his Spirit in a miraculous manner...." -RLDS Vol.1, p.277

"...The Holy Ghost was poured out upon us in a miraculous manner--many of our number prophesied, whilst others had the heavens opened to their view, and were so overcome that we had to lay them on beds..." -RLDS VOI.1, p.87

“…Any man that has the Holy Ghost, can speak of the things of God in his own tongue as well as to speak in another…”

--LDS Church History, Vol.3: p.380

Brief Comments: As said in previous chapters, I tell my Pentecostal/Charismatic friends, the great outpouring of the Holy Spirit in our day did not begin in 1906 out west in California on Azusa Street. It began in the Midwest in a little town called Kirtland, Ohio, seventy years earlier! The year was 1836. Most of my friends have never heard the marvelous story of the great outpouring that accompanied the early Saints. It was a Pentecost, indeed, and a time of rejoicing. I would say—a time unparalleled in our day. So few of today’s Christians know about it.

“…In the evening a few of the brethren came in, and we conversed upon the things of the kingdom. He [Joseph Smith] called upon me [Brigham Young] to pray; in my prayer I spoke in tongues. As soon as we arose from our knees, the brethren flocked around him, and asked his opinion concerning the gift of tongues that was upon me. He told them it was the pure Adamic language. Some said to him they expected he would condemn the gift Brother Brigham had, but he said, ‘No, it is of God.’” --Millennial Star, 25:49; Also LDS Church History, Vol.1: p.297 footnote

Brief Comments: Joseph Smith was open to the supernatural. He understood—spiritual experiences can only be discerned by spiritual senses. He welcomed manifestations of the supernatural.

This hits close to home. The supernatural must return in our worship services, as well as our personal lives. Rick Joyner points out the urgency: “Very soon,” says Joyner, “neutrality concerning spiritual gifts and power will not be possible. Those who have not matured,” says Joyner, “in the use of true spiritual gifts will become increasingly subject to false ones” (The Prophetic Ministry, p.32).

The Protestant prophet warns us:

“As we proceed toward the conclusion of this age, the conflict between light and darkness will become increasingly supernatural. The day when it was possible to take a neutral stance toward the supernatural is over. If we do not know the true power of God’s Spirit, we will become increasingly subject to the power of the evil one. Those whose fears or doctrines have led them to avoid even the Lord’s supernatural power will soon find themselves and their children easy prey for evil supernatural powers.”

--The Prophetic Ministry, p.73

I believe Joyner’s sense of urgency is warranted. I also believe Joseph’s open willingness to accept the supernatural demonstrates maturity and wisdom.

“…The great Jehovah contemplated the whole of the events connected with the earth, pertaining to the plan of salvation, before it rolled into existence, or ever ‘the morning stars sang together,’ for joy; the past, present, and the future were and are, with Him, one eternal ‘now.’”

--Joseph Smith, “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” p.220

Brief Comments: The one thing I like as a Baptist minister regarding restoration theology is: its consideration of pre-mortal existence. According to restoration theology, from eternity to eternity, the Lord had our salvation planned and mapped out. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism states:

"Latter-day Saints believe that eons ago, God, in his infinite wisdom and never-ending mercy, formulated a plan whereby his children could experience a physical existence, including mortality, and then return to live in his presence in eternal felicity and glory."

I think we evangelicals could learn a thing or two about the depth and breadth of salvation from our LDS brothers and sisters. We too often take too narrow approach.

“…Where there is no kingdom of God there is no salvation. What constitutes the kingdom of God? Where there is a prophet, a priest, or a righteous man unto whom God gives His oracles, there is the kingdom of God; and where the oracles of God are not, there the kingdom of God is not.”

--Joseph Smith, “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” p.272

“…It is one thing to see the kingdom of God, and another thing to enter into it. We must have a change of heart to see the kingdom of God, and subscribe the articles of adoption to enter therein.”

--Joseph Smith, LDS Church History, Vol.6: p.58

Brief Comments: I like the fact that Joseph, in both these passages, connects salvation with seeing and entering the kingdom.

As Christians, we're to be "born again" in order to see the kingdom, according to Jesus. And if we're not born again, we won't see it. We'll be living right in the middle of it and miss the mystery. Miss the revelation of the kingdom, and its King. The Master was tossing hints right and left to Nicodemus.

And he's tossing hints to all of Christendom today, as well. For the most part, we've missed it. Though one of the most read passages in the Bible, John chapter three is still one of the least understood. Too often we evangelicals have narrowed the new birth experience beyond what Jesus intended. We link being "born again" as a prerequisite for "going to heaven." Jesus linked the new birth as a prerequisite for "seeing the kingdom." That's different from what we preach.

Joseph understands the link between being “born again” and seeing and entering the kingdom.

“…Salvation is nothing more nor less than to triumph over all our enemies and put them under our feet. And when we have power to put all enemies under our feet in this world, and a knowledge to triumph over all evil spirits in the world to come, then we are saved, as in the case of Jesus, who was to reign until He had put all enemies under His feet, and the last enemy was death.”

--Joseph Smith, “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.297

Brief Comments: Joseph views being “saved” as total triumph. In this respect, he sees salvation as a series of progressive deliverances from cradle to grave—which conveys the biblical sense of the word. In the purest sense of the word, that’s exactly what “getting saved” means. The Greek word for “salvation” is: soteria, which means: deliverance, soundness and safety. The etymology of the word means: total power and victory over all your enemies, including and especially that last enemy, death.

“…I read German, and visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that ‘a prophet is always a prophet;’ but I told them that a prophet was a prophet only when he was acting as such.” --Joseph Smith, LDS Church History, Vol.5: p.265

Brief Comments: I like Joseph’s genuine sense of humility here. He knows his gifts and calling reflect God’s character, not his. By his own self-characterization, he admits: “I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else” (HC 5:401). The man was quick to acknowledge his own weaknesses. On another occasion he remarked: “I told them I was but a man, and they must not expect me to be perfect; if they expected perfection from me, I should expect it from them; but if they would bear with my infirmities and the infirmities of the brethren, I would likewise bear with their infirmities” (HC 5:181).

Some fault Joseph for his weaknesses, and point to them as signs of a false prophet. Put in plain English—often times the man didn’t act like a prophet, according to our views of what a prophet should act like. For instance, no one felt more at home in the presence of God’s glory one minute and then in the presence of children playing “sticks” the next

Those who knew him best acknowledged--Joseph had a lighter side. There are dozens of references in his official diary that read like this one of March 27, 1834: "Remained at home and had great joy with my family." Indeed, according to a cousin, George A. Smith, one convert family apostatized because, when they arrived in Kirtland from the East, Joseph came downstairs from the room "where he had been translating by the gift and power of God" and began to romp and play with his children (Journal of Discourses, 2:214).

Jedediah M. Grant, who was close friends with the prophet, said that Joseph preached against the “super-abundant stock of sanctimoniousness” that characterized so much of the religion of his day.

According to Elder Grant, a certain minister, out of curiosity, came to see the prophet in Nauvoo and carried this sanctimonious spirit so far that the prophet finally suggested to the minister that they engage in a little wrestling. The minister was so shocked that he just stood there rigid and dumbfounded, whereupon the prophet playfully acted as though to put him on the floor and help him get up and then called attention to the so-called Christian "follies" of the time, the absurdity of the long, solemn, "asslike" tone of speaking and acting, and the dangers of excessive piety and fanaticism (Journal of Discourses, 3:66–67). –Devotional address given at BYU by Leonard J. Arrington, Church Historian, on November 19^th, 1974.

Regarding this matter of holiness, much of our thinking, I believe, could use an over haul. Again, I like the way Rick Joyner puts it:

“Over the years,” says Joyner, “I have noticed that some of those who have made the greatest advances in prophetic ministry and gifts were the very ones who had previously made some of the most embarrassing mistakes. Their advances usually came right after a great mistake. In fact, their one common denominator was that they did not let the mistakes stop them. Humbling themselves by acknowledging the mistakes, they kept on going, trusting a little less in themselves, but determined to trust even more in the Lord.”

--The Prophetic Ministry, p.69

Joseph was always quick to acknowledge his mistakes and then move on.

“…Have the Presbyterians any truth? Yes. Have the Baptists, Methodists, etc., any truth? Yes. They all have a little truth mixed with error. We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up, or we shall not come out true ‘Mormons.’”

--Joseph Smith, LDS Church History, Vol.5: p.517

Brief Comments: Joseph Smith was extremely tolerant of Christians of other sects—a fact little known by those outside the restoration movement.

While mayor of Nauvoo, Joseph passed an ordinance “…that the Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Latter-day Saints, Quakers, Episcopals…and all other religious sects and denominations whatever, shall have free tolerance and equal privileges in this city…”

It was “against the law” not to show charity and tolerance toward those of other sects in the city of Nauvoo, the city Joseph built.