“Daniel
says (chap. 7, v. 16) when he saw the vision of the four beasts, “I came near
unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this,” the angel
interpreted the vision to Daniel; … for I refer to the
prophets to qualify my observations which I make, so that the young elders who
know so much, may not rise up like a flock of hornets and sting me. I want to
keep out of such a wasp-nest.” (Teachings, p. 289)
Here is
another:
“A
fanciful and flowery and heated imagination beware of, because the things of
God are of deep import, and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and
solemn thoughts can only find them out.” (Teachings, p. 137)
It is
not clear exactly what caused that to happen. Jealousy may have had something
to do with it; pride, thinking that they were smarter than they really were was
another possible factor; having a “fanciful and flowery and heated imagination”
was still another possible cause; and not being genuinely interested in divine
truth was another possible reason. They were not all genuine seekers of divine
truth (D&C 97:1–2), so they became uneasy and uncomfortable when Joseph Smith taught them
great truths and mysteries which they were not prepared for, and reacted
against it in that way. A consciousness of their failure to establish Zion as God had expected them to (D&C 105:2, 9–10) may have been another factor contributing to their behavior in that way.
The
Lord was constantly pouring knowledge and truth into Joseph Smith’s mind; and
he made it look so easy that they were fooled by their own pride into thinking
that they could do the same or better. They did not realize that Joseph Smith
did it by revelation, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost (D&C 121:26). They thought he did
it by his own intellect and imagination, and they thought they could do as
well.
Joseph
was also very young (and uneducated) compared to many of his associates. That
may have caused some to despise or become jealous of him. There are hints and
references to that in some of the things that he said:
“I
rejoice in hearing the testimony of my aged friends. You don’t know me; you
never knew my heart. No man knows my history. I cannot tell it; I shall never
undertake it. I don’t blame anyone for not believing my history. If I had not
experienced what I have, I could not have believed it myself. I never did harm
any man since I was born in the world. My voice is always for peace.
“I
cannot lie down until all my work is finished. I never think any evil, nor do
anything to the harm of my fellowman. When I am called by the trump of the
archangel and weighed in the balance, you will all know me then. I add no more.
God bless you all. Amen.”1 (Teachings, pp. 361-62)
Here is another:
“When did I ever teach anything wrong from this stand? When was I ever confounded? I want to triumph in Israel before I depart hence and am no more seen. I never told you I was perfect; but there is no error in the revelations which I have taught. Must I, then, be thrown away as a thing of naught?”2 (Teachings, p. 368)
That was another reason3 why the great outpouring of (doctrinal) revelations that Joseph Smith was receiving for the Church at the beginning of the Restoration gradually diminished until it was reduced to a trickle towards the end of his life. He mentions that in this quote:
“Some
people say I am a fallen Prophet because I do not bring forth more of the word
of the Lord. Why do I not do it? Are we able to receive it? No! Not one in this
room.”4 (Teachings, p. 194)
That
spirit pervaded the whole Church at that time nearly, and even affected the
minds of some of the early leaders of the Church, and it continued in the
Church for a long time after Joseph Smith’s death.5
The
Lord’s response to it was a very subtle one. He played a mean trick on them. He
gave them things that they could not understand “save a man should inquire of
the Lord” (1 Nephi 15:3). And they being “hard in their hearts” (1 Nephi
15:3); or being too proud, thinking that they “knew of themselves” (2 Nephi
9:28); or taking the attitude of “We have received the word of God, and we need
no more of the word of God, for we have enough” (2 Nephi 28:29); or just
thinking that they were smarter than they really were; they did not inquire or
seek counsel of the Lord as they should have done when challenged with various
kinds of doctrinal issues. They relied on their own intellect and imagination instead,
and made horrendous mistakes in the process. They became speculative thinkers
instead of being sober-minded seekers of divine truth, when faced with
important theological challenges which they could and should have resolved by
revelation. They thought they knew of themselves, and did not need to inquire
of the Lord. The things of God are spiritual, and are spiritually discerned
(D&C 29:34; 1 Cor. 2:13–15). They cannot be comprehended by the carnal or
natural mind, which is what they were trying to do.6 And this continued in the
Church for a long time, and even affected the thought patterns of the First
Presidency and the Twelve Apostles in those early days.
I don’t
know of a single important doctrinal or theological issue that arose in the
Church after Joseph Smith that was resolved by revelation. Since Joseph Smith,
the First Presidency has issued a number of statements that were specifically
designed to address doctrinal or theological issues and challenges that had
arisen in the Church, or had confronted the Church from outside. I don’t know
of one of these that was resolved by revelation. They are all (or nearly all,
as far as I can recall) the product of the human mind.
A
typical example is a statement issued by the First Presidency in 1909 titled,
“The Origin of Man” (published in the November 1909 issue of Improvement
Era; reprinted in the February 2002 issue of The
Ensign). This statement was issued in response to the theory of Evolution which had become very controversial at that time (not just in the Church, but in the community at large). Yet it is entirely the product of the human mind. There is no inspiration or revelation in it at all. And it does not address the issue of Evolution properly either. It does not address any of the “evidences” that the evolutionist theories are based on—such as the age of the earth, or the discovery of ancient fossils of extinct species and of prehistoric early man, which seem to contradict the biblical account of creation—which could only have been resolved by revelation. It doesn’t even declare categorically whether Evolution is true or false. It starts by admitting that it is not declaring anything new. It is an innocuous statement which affirms the biblical account of creation and leaves it at that. That was a great opportunity for the Church at that time to resolve this great mystery by revelation, not just for the benefit of the Church but for the whole world, and thus to demonstrate the Church’s supremacy in the field of religion which they did not take advantage of.
Perhaps
some might say, If it was important enough God would have revealed it to them
of his own accord. The fact that he didn’t means that God didn’t think it was
sufficiently important. The answer to that is that he doesn’t
unless he is asked:
“If
thou shalt ask, thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation, knowledge upon knowledge, that thou mayest know the mysteries and peaceable things—that which bringeth joy, that which bringeth life eternal.” (D&C 42:61)
It is
not so much a question of whether God thinks it is important enough to give it to us, but whether we think it is important enough to ask him. We won’t know what he thinks until we ask. God is not going to do our thinking for us. He is not going to teach us something if we think we already know it, or if we think that we don’t need to know it. To be taught one needs to be teachable; and seeking, searching, asking, questioning, inquiring, desiring to know are signs of that teachableness.7 And it has been like that for most of Church history since Joseph Smith. The result has been that for a century and a half the Church has been in a theological wilderness. They have been speculating endlessly about Church doctrine without coming to a knowledge of the truth.
So the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints basically has a credibility problem when it comes to dealing with important theological issues that may arise in the Church. They claim to be able to resolve such issues by revelation; but in practice they never have—either because they thought they already knew the answer, or because they thought they didn’t need to know.
They have been criticizing the early Christians for resolving their theological differences by the philosophies of men in church councils, and by argumentation rather than by revelation; when they haven’t been doing any better themselves. That is not to say that the authority to receive such revelations had not existed in the Church; but they chose not to. Hopefully things have changed since then, and that attitude no longer prevails in the Church today.
─────────
Notes
1 Joseph Smith spoke those words in April 7, 1844. That
was 81 days before he was martyred on June 27, 1844, aged 38. Why is he talking
about “lying down” at the tender age of 38 unless he had a premonition that he
was not going to be around for very long, and he knew that there were a lot of
people who did not want him to be, including some in the Church? They were good
at eulogizing him when he was dead, but not so good at following him when he
was alive.
2 This was said on May 2, 1844. That was 55 days before he was martyred on June 27, 1844. Note that again he appears to be predicting with prophetic certainty his own imminent demise, aged 38.
3 See endnote 6 to the article, “Martin Luther Versus the Catholic Church”.
4 That accusation was coming from Church members, not unbelievers. He also preached his famed King Follett sermon in the April 7, 1844 Conference, at the height of those shafts of envy being directed at him from many quarters in the Church, which would have caused him sharp pain, deep sorrow and emotional distress. See D&C 136:39; Teachings, p. 355. Moses also seems to have experienced the same problem with the Israelites in his day. See Num. Ch. 16–17; D&C 84:22–26.
5 Here is an interesting quote from Brigham Young, given at the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City in March 15, 1854 (Journal of Discourses Vol. 4), indicating that that spirit still persisted in the Church well after Joseph Smith’s death: “This is the case with a
great many of the Elders of Israel … They burn with the idea, ‘O, I know things that brother Brigham does not understand.’ Bless your souls, I guess you do. Don’t you think that there are some things that you do not understand?”
6 To give an example, following the death of Joseph Smith
two attempts were made by two of the early Apostles to produce a work
comparable to the Lectures on Faith by Joseph Smith. The first was Key to the Science of Theology by Parley P. Pratt, published in 1855; and the second was True Faith by Orson Pratt, published around 1856 (also a third attempt made later on by John Andreas Widtsoe, titled: Rational Theology, published in 1915). Yet there is no comparison between them and the Lectures on Faith. The Lectures on Faith are scripture. They are revelations, inspired by the Holy Ghost. The other attempts are at best imaginative speculations, and the product of the human mind. They are worlds apart from the
Lectures on Faith.
7 “For he that diligently seeketh shall find …” (1 Ne. 10:19.) “Seeking”
is made a prerequisite for “finding”. Also Deut. 4:29; 1 Chr. 28:9; 2 Chr.15:2; Prov. 7:15; 8:17; Isa. 55:6; Jer. 29:13; Matt. 7:7–11; 21:22; Mark 11:24;Luke 11:9–13; John 14:13; 15:7; 16:23-24; 1 John 3:22; 5:14–15; James 1:5–6.
