Uncategorized

This video discusses various issues surrounding the sustaining of fallible church leaders.

---

Okay. On this video, I want to wrestle with the topic of sustaining fallible church leaders. Many are familiar with the statement from President Wilford Woodruff, where he stated that God would not allow him to lead the church astray. So many have taken that to say, “well then that means that the prophet’s not going to make mistakes. He can’t make mistakes, or he’s perfect”, essentially. It’s become a little cliche, but the saying you may have heard that the Catholic church says is that the Pope is not fallible, but the members don’t believe it.

Our church says that the prophet is fallible, but the members don’t believe it. Now, especially as the international growth of the Church happens and more and more members are removed from Church headquarters geographically, essentially, they can also put the leaders on a higher perfection pedestal in a sense.

Ironically, there’s also this trend too, in some senses just culturally, of bucking authority and institutional distrust, if you will, that’s also affecting in some ways or impacting the sustaining of church leaders. So we’ll talk about that a little bit too. So also, please listen at the very end. There’s some really great stuff I want you to be able to hear from Terryl and Fiona Givens, great gospel scholars, on ways to look at this topic you may have not considered. I think it was fascinating.

So if you look at the Bible, just to start, I think God wanted to make it clear that the prophets and apostles are not perfect. There’s lots of examples in the Bible. A couple of quick ones from the Old Testament: We’ve got Moses who’s rebuked by the Lord for his actions at Meribah and his punishment was to not go into the promised land with the people. You have Jonah who ran from his assignment. He didn’t want to do it. And then even after he did do it, he was upset that the people of Nineveh repented. This is the prophet. Then you’ve got, let’s go to the New Testament. You’ve got the apostles bickering about who was to be the greatest of them. And then you’ve got Paul who’s rebuking Peter in Antioch. So, just some examples from the Bible.

And then look at the Doctrine and Covenants. So the Lord reveals section one, and he calls it the preface to what would become the Doctrine and Covenants. And listen to this, does this sound like He would have perfect and infallible leaders?

He says, “The weak things of the world shall come forth and break down the mighty and strong ones, that the fullness of my gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the world, and before kings and rulers. Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding. And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known; And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed; And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent.”

That’s quite profound. How about section 21, verses four and five? “Wherefore meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.”

I want to talk about that a little more throughout the video. Section 112, “Whosoever receiveth my word receiveth me, and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth those, the First Presidency, whom I have sent, whom I have made counselors for my name’s sake unto you.”

Okay. Now how about a few quick examples from the Book of Mormon. Moroni in Ether 12:6 says, “Condemn me not because of mine imperfections, neither my father … but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.”

Now on the title page of the Book of Mormon we read, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.” I love what Joseph Smith we have recorded to new arriving converts. “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.” And his famous statement, “A prophet is only a prophet when he’s acting as such.”

Now how about this? The First Presidency, the current First Presidency in their first press conference, President Nelson says this, “Give your leaders a little leeway to make mistakes, as you hope your leaders will give you a little leeway to profit by your errors.” President Oaks, “We don’t believe in the infallibility of our leaders.” And then April 2013, Elder Holland wanted to emphasize this leader fallibility issue. He says in General Conference, “Except in the case of His only perfect Begotten Son, imperfect people are all God has ever had to work with. That must be terribly frustrating to Him, but He deals with it. So should we. And when you see imperfection, remember that the limitation is not in the divinity of the work. As one gifted writer has suggested, when the infinite fullness is poured forth, it is not the oil’s fault if there is some loss because finite vessels can’t quite contain it all. Those finite vessels include you and me, so be patient and kind and forgiving.”

And six months later, President Uchtdorf in the October 2013 conference, “And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles or doctrine. I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us–His imperfect children–and imperfect people make mistakes.”

Then the Church Newsroom website back in 2007. They really wanted to clarify that not everything that’s said by a general authority means its official doctrine of the Church. I shared this by the way in the video, one of the first videos I did, and I apologize for some of the poor production quality back in some of those early videos. But this one was called “Doctrines, Opinions and Practices: Sorting It All Out”, and I’ll link it on the end screen of this video.

But this statement here, “Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture, official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.”

Then the Encyclopedia of Mormonism states online under the topic doctrine, “There are many subjects about which the scriptures are not clear and about which the Church has made no official pronouncements. In such matter, one can find differences of opinion among Church members and leaders. Until the truth of these matters is made known by revelation, there is room for different levels of understanding and interpretation of unsettled issues.”

There’s a lot of those. All right, so this is fascinating from Henry Eyring, “Reflections of a Scientist”, the book that he wrote there. This is the scientist Henry Eyring, President Erying’s father. He said, “The Lord uses imperfect people. He often allows their errors to stand uncorrected. He may have a purpose in doing so, such as to teach us that religious truth comes forth ‘line upon line, precept upon precept’ in a process of sifting and winnowing similar to the one I know so well in science.”

But how does this jive with the statement from Wilford Woodruff about the prophet not leading the people astray? Well, let’s look at the actual statement. You find this in the Official Declaration 1 underneath the Manifesto, some statements from President Woodruff. And this is when he was really trying to calm the saints that were affected by the Manifesto.

He says, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place.”

More recently, this was in 1996, President Hinckley, he had been the prophet for one year. He says, “I want to make you a promise. I know it’s true. The Lord will never let the General Authorities of this Church lead it astray. It won’t happen. We have a presidency of three. We have a Council of Twelve Apostles. We meet together in the temple every Thursday. We pray together, we discuss together, we seek the inspiration of the Almighty, and it’s my testimony that it comes.”

Now, Elder Ballard gave a a devotional at BYU just a couple of years ago. I’m going to share it towards the end of the video a little more on that, but he actually said the Lord called the apostles and prophets, he said, to invite others to come unto Christ. That’s their job, their mission essentially, and also we’re promised this is the last dispensation. There will be no apostasy. The Church will not fail. So if you think about it in that broad sense though, inviting others to come unto Christ, they’re not going to fail in that mission. I love the recent talk Elder Anderson gave, a prophet doesn’t stand between you and the Lord, the prophet stands by your side and points you to Lord Jesus Christ. But it doesn’t mean that errors won’t occur. Another quick one on that, President J Reuben Clark, “We are not infallible in our judgment, and we err”.

And I love this as a wonderful clarifying quote from President Packer. In fact, he was talking about the protection from councils. He says, while explaining benefits of councils, also included an important clarification: “men of very ordinary capacity may be guided through counsel and inspiration to accomplish extraordinary things.” Yet he added, ” … even with the best of intentions, it does not always work the way it should. Human nature may express itself on occasion, but not to the permanent injury of the work.'”

I love that. That’s fascinating. Not to the permanent, it may even cause injury to the work, but not the permanent injury to the work. It’s kind of fascinating wording.

Okay, so the gospel scholar Taylor Halverson has a great blog, and he just did a piece on sustaining the brethren, and I’ll link to it in the description. But one of the things that really fascinated me, he talked about the etymology of the word sustain, and in Latin it means, there’s a number of things, it means “stand up, bear up, support, suffer and endure.” I thought those were fascinating words that could apply. I’m going to bring this back in a minute on some things we’ll talk about. But think about those words.

I wanted to share a brief story from somebody who went through a very tough experience of receiving stark consequences from an announcement from a prophet. And this was shortly after the Manifesto had been issued against polygamy by President Woodruff, and this was the experience of somebody experiencing this and what they went through. There’s some lessons here, and I’ll get into some of those here in a little bit, but this is a autobiography of Lorena Larsen who was in a polygamous marriage when the Manifesto came out.

“My husband told me about it and my feelings were past description. I had gone into that order of marriage because I believe God had commanded his people to do so, and it had been such a sacrifice to live it as I thought God wanted me to. It seemed impossible that the Lord would go back on a principle which had caused so much sacrifice, heartache, and trial before one could conquer one’s carnal self and live on that higher plane and love one’s neighbors as one’s self. My husband walked out without saying a word, and as he walked away, I thought, ‘Oh yes, it’s easy for you. You can go home to your other family and be happy with her, while I must be like Hagar, sent away.'”

“My anguish was inexpressible, and a dense darkness took hold of my mind. I thought that if the Lord and the church authorities had gone back on that principle, there was nothing to any part of the gospel. I fancied I could see myself and my children and many other splendid women and their families turn adrift, and our only purpose in entering it had been to more fully serve the Lord. I sank down on our bedding and wished in my anguish that the earth would open and take me and my children in. The darkness seemed impenetrable. All at once I heard a voice, which said ‘Why this is no more unreasonable than the requirement of Abraham to offer up Isaac, and when the Lord sees that you were willing to obey in all things, the trial shall be removed.’ There was a light whose brightness cannot be described, which filled my soul and I was filled with joy and peace and happiness that I felt that no matter whatever should come to me in all my future life, I could never feel sad again.”

The spirit can also help us to sustain our leaders through difficult, challenging situations we may be in. Also, I thought of, I shared this in the Women and the Priesthood video about the oath and covenant of the priesthood and some thoughts that Sheri Dew shared about this, so I wanted to share that again. It’s perfect placement here.

“The words ‘also all they’ and the word ‘receive’, used no fewer than 10 times in these verses, arouse my curiosity. The phrase ‘also all they’ seems to refer to more than those who are ordained. And though we typically use ‘receive’ to mean ‘to acquire something’, receive can also mean ‘to believe’ or ‘to accept as true’. Interestingly, the secondary definition of ‘receive’ is used frequently in the scriptures by the Lord Himself.”

“As I read verses such as these and ponder the secondary definition of ‘receive’, I found myself wondering if the transcendent promises of D&C 84:35-40 might be tied to believing the priesthood is the power of God, accepting the manner in which the Lord has organized his kingdom, sustaining those who hold priesthood keys, and honoring priesthood power as the power of God.”

That was helpful to see. Now some say we have blind obedience and the critics will often deceptively point to a key phrase that was once published in our church magazine in 1945. Very unfortunate. It said, literally, quote, “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done.” Now, “This statement was printed in Ward Teacher’s Message in the June 1945 Improvement Era Church Magazine. Later it was discovered that it had been written by a young clerk in the Presiding Bishop’s office and was sent out without anyone in authority having approved it.”

Now critics won’t say that the error in publishing was addressed immediately by the prophet actually. And he was addressing criticism that had come immediately about this. So here’s what he said, President George Albert Smith, “The leaflet to which he refer …”, so he’s addressing this to Dr. Raymond Cope, “…and from which you quote in your letter, was not ‘prepared’ by ‘one of our leaders’. However, one or more of them inadvertently permitted the paragraph to pass uncensored. By their so doing, not a few members of the Church have been upset in their feelings, and General Authorities have been embarrassed. I am pleased to assure you that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does not express the true position of the Church. Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true idea of the Church, which is that every individual must obtain for himself a testimony of the truth of the Gospel, must, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, work out his own salvation and is personally responsible to His Maker for his individual acts.”

So I thought that was helpful. Okay, so I love this. 1969, then apostle George Q. Cannon wrote a great editorial in the Deseret News. He said, “We could conceive of a man honestly differing in opinion from the Authorities of the Church and yet not be an apostate; but we could not conceive of a man publishing these differences of opinion and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special pleading to enforce them upon the people to produce division and strife and to place the acts and counsels of the Authorities of the Church, if possible, in a wrong light and not be an apostate, for such conduct was apostasy as we understood the term. We further said that while a man might honestly differ in opinion from the Authorities through a want of understanding, he had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him, and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostasy and be found fighting against God and the authority which He had placed here to govern His Church.”

I want to talk about this. I want to share two other things and then share a couple thoughts on that. So the next one is Linda Burton at the BYU Women’s Conference 2013. I also shared this in the Women and the Priesthood video. She said “What a healthy discussion to have about the priesthood. What is cultural and what is doctrine? It is enlivening and wonderful. It helps us define: what is authority, what are the keys? But let’s go to the right sources for answers. Why would we believe the internet and not the prophets. We can figure out how to ask the questions in a way that facilitates cooperation and brings honest concerns to the table. If you aren’t in a leadership position, bring questions to your leaders in an honest and humble way. See what we can figure out together. Offer solutions. What would you do if you were the leader? But be patient and humble.”

And then the one that’s really stuck with me over the years is this modern-day example from Dallin H. Oaks and President David O. McKay. It illustrates a great point I want to make. So, “Decades ago when the U.S. …” now this was published in Interpreter Journal in 2015, Duane Boyce wrote this. “Decades ago, when the U.S. Supreme Court first ruled against prayer in the public schools, President David O. McKay publicly criticized the ruling: he considered it to be leading the country ‘down the road to atheism’. Dallin H. Oaks, on the other hand, who was a law professor at the time, saw good reason for the Court’s decision in the case before it and worried that criticism might be based on incomplete information and the full rationale and intent of the ruling. Brother Oaks began organizing his thoughts on paper, reviewing the Court’s reasoning and showing its application to secular influences in the public schools as well as to religious ones.”

“Soon after completing this document, he met President Henry D. Moyle of the First Presidency at a church function in Chicago. When President Moyle asked him about his work, Brother Oaks gave him a copy of this writing. President Moyle took interest in it and upon returning to Salt Lake City, shared it with President McKay. Interestingly, after reading Brother Oaks’ thoughtful treatment, President McKay directed that it be published in the Improvement Era. Thus, brother Oaks did not give up his ‘right to think’. He felt dissonance between his own judgment and the public expressions of the prophet. He wondered about the issue and prayerfully brought to bear his own best thinking on the relevant questions. Significantly, however, he did not publish a critical article or give a disapproving speech. Instead, he expressed his feelings respectfully and privately (remember that it was President McKay who directed that it be published), with no motivation other than to help and in the spirit of true discipleship.”

“The outcome of this story is also instructive..” And this is interesting. “Some 30 years later, and now one of the Twelve himself, Elder Oaks wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal on the subject of school prayer. He said, ‘When the Supreme Court decided the original school prayer case in 1962, I thought the case was correctly decided. What I did not foresee, but what was sensed by people who’s vision was far greater than mine, was that this decision would set in motion a chain of legal and public and educational actions that would bring us to the current circumstances in which we must reaffirm and even contend for religious liberty.'”

“While the Court’s decision was probably the correct one on the matter before it at the time, the way the majority opinion was written set in motion a chain of events that President McKay had originally feared. In recognition of the prophetic nature of President McKay’s warning, Elder Oaks wrote ‘My worldly wisdom in writing approving of the school prayer case on the facts of the decision was just a small footnote in history compared with the vision of a prophet who saw and described the pernicious effects of that decision in the years to come.’ It was, he says ‘a powerful learning experience on the folly of trying to understand a prophetic vision in terms of worldly wisdom.'”

And this brings me to the thought of, we sustain them as “seers”, “see-ers” and they can see. Remember, they’re the watchmen on the tower. We are not on the tower. We might be winning a battle, but losing a war that they can see the bigger picture of that. So I think it’s just a very helpful thing to remember this experience and the one I shared about Lorena Larson too. The Spirit can comfort and help us through some of these things.

But I also like some of these examples from Elder Oaks, I had them on the screen, that little box: politely, privately, respectfully, pure motives, prayerfully, best thinking, patience and faith. And I would say that one of the biggest things is prayer. Pray. Pray for our leaders that they will have the Spirit to guide them and direct them. They will seek this revelation. And this is particularly if you feel in conflict on something, pray for the body of the saints. I’m about to show you that the body of the saints matters too. The Lord can only move as the body of the saints moves.

So be aware of that too. And pray for yourself that you will have maybe experience like Lorena Larson, or that you’ll have the patience to endure, that you’ll sustain in that sense of that suffering and the enduring aspect of it, and that you’ll have that experience to add the comfort in the meantime there. And then to be patient, and the Church might change, the body of the church, the leaders, you might change there, but to be patient and be faithful in the meantime there.

So now about the saints themselves, listen to what the prophet Joseph said. It’s fascinating here. He said, “I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions: they cannot stand the fire at all.”

And listen to what he said about the great vision of the kingdoms of glory described in section 76. “I could explain a hundred fold more than I ever have of the glories of the kingdoms manifested to me in the vision, were I permitted, and were the people prepared to receive them.”

And here’s George Q. Cannon, even a more clarifying statement. He says, “There are many things that the leading men of the Church can see and understand that they cannot impart to the people nor ask the people to do. Why? Because they know that the people would not come up to the requirement and that therefore they would be disobedient. Better to give them line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little than to give them something that they could not receive and that they would rebel against. That is the manner in which the Lord deals with his children, and it is the manner in which wise men inspired of the Lord deal with their fellow man. Speaking as a First Presidency, if we could have our way, there are many changes that we would make; but you know how difficult it is to have people see alike upon many points.”

And the last thing on this is the Samuel Principle that President Benson talked about, limiting things. And I actually shared this in the priesthood ban video as one of the possible possibilities that could have been involved in that. I will link this on the end screen.

This is what he said, “If you see some individual in the Church doing things which disturb you, or you feel the Church is not doing things the way you think they could or should be done, the following principles might be helpful. God has to work through mortals of varying degrees of spiritual progress. Sometimes he temporarily grants to men their unwise requests in order that they might learn from their own sad experiences. Some refer to this as the ‘Samuel Principle’. The children of Israel wanted a king, like all the nations. The prophet Samuel was displeased and prayed to the Lord about it. The Lord responded by saying to Samuel, ‘They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.’ The Lord told Samuel to warn the people of the consequences if they had a king. Samuel gave them the warning, but they still insisted on their king. So God gave them a king and let them suffer. They learned the hard way. God wanted it to be otherwise, but within certain bounds he grants unto man according to their desires.”

Now switching gears for just a second, misunderstandings also come up with the thought of the prophet being a fax machine for the Lord. And I used to say that and now I should probably say receiving texts from the Lord, essentially there. They work and grow line upon line as well. Just as we’ve learned in Luke two, the Lord himself, Jesus, said He grew in wisdom and stature before God and man. And so we see this even in Joseph Smith changing revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, as he grew in revelation and experiencing this.

And I love what Robert Boylan runs a blog called Scriptural Mormonism. It’s a great blog and he wrote this back in 2015. I’ll link to it in the show description. It’s called Biblical Prophets Changing their Words and Words of Previous Prophets. So he first gives us a great example from a biblical scholar, Michael Heiser of how we know the Bible has had different changes from anachronisms and things that are in there. And then he says, “Who had the authority to edit the Bible like this? The short answer is whomever God moved to do so under inspiration. The longer answer is that, in the case of the prophetic writings, someone accepted by the believing community of Israel to be a member of the prophetic class or tradition served as editor of the preaching and teachings of the prophets.”

And then there was a master’s thesis at BYU in 1955 that had been written by Melvin Petersen on a study of the changes that had been made in the Doctrine and Covenants. And he summarized this, “Once a man has been recognized and accepted as a prophet and favored with communications from God, his great responsibility is to make sure, inasmuch as he has power to do so, that those to whom the communications are directed, understand what God has revealed for them. The power is his to revise, correct, omit, or change any of his writings in order that he might manifest more clearly what God revealed through him.” And he, the prophet, might understand more and more as we grow line upon line.

This was actually, the Church website did an article called “How the Revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants Were Received and Compiled”. And I love this in the middle where he says “he updated them in light of continued revelation.” And I was thinking, I had an experience just a couple of months ago. I was reading some notes that I had written in my scriptures just five or six years ago in 1 Nephi. And I read this comment I wrote and I literally thought, “I don’t think that’s right. And I feel very different about that right now.” I thought “why?” And it’s from experiences I’ve had and from greater light and knowledge I’ve gained from learning and studying. I thought “this happens with the prophets too.”

Think about Joseph Smith. Compare his early sermons and teachings to the King Follett Discourse right before he died. Fascinating to see that growth. And think about even the institutional church, how we have grown and built upon the foundation from the past. It’s just a fascinating thought.

Okay. Now a handful of quick items here, various things. So seek personal revelation. Elder Marion G. Romney, “those who will through mighty prayer and earnest study inform themselves as to what these living prophets say, and act upon it, will be visited by the spirit of the Lord and know by the spirit of revelation that they speak the mind and will of the Father.”

So President Nelson, he just spoke at BYU in September of 2019. He said, “Ask your Heavenly Father if we truly are the Lord’s apostles and prophets. Ask if we have received revelation on this and other matters”, that he had been speaking about. “Ask if these five truths…” that he just taught “…are, in fact, true. My dear brothers and sisters, I plead with you to seek earnestly a confirmation from the Spirit that what I have told you is true and it’s from the Lord.”

Okay. Now look at this example of how Brigham Young dealt with the teaching from Joseph Smith on the three degrees of glory, which were totally new to him. He grew up with heaven and hell concept, as most Christians did. He said, “I was not prepared to say that I believed it, the three degrees of glory, and I had to wait. What did I do? I handed this over to the Lord in my feelings, and said ‘I will wait until the Spirit of God manifests to me for or against.’ I did not judge the matter, I did not argue against it, not in the least. I never argued the least against anything Joseph proposed, but if I could not see or understand it, I handed it over to the Lord.”

Also, it’d be great to have Lorenzo Snow’s attitude that he had about Joseph Smith’s weaknesses. He says, “I saw Joseph Smith the prophet, do things which I did not approve of; and yet, I thanked God that He would upon a man who had these imperfections the power and authority which He placed upon him, for I knew I myself had weaknesses and I thought there was a chance for me.”

Okay. Now, are there exceptions sometimes to the rules? Yes, but the general authorities do not teach the exceptions. Elder Oaks said, “As a General Authority, I have the responsibility to preach general principles. When I do, I don’t try to define all the exceptions. There are exceptions to some rules. For example, we believe the commandment to not kill is not violated by killing pursuant to a lawful order in an armed conflict. But don’t ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach the general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord.”

And I love what Elder Ballard just said a few years ago in a devotional at BYU on here. Remember what general authorities are and what they are called to do. Here’s a poignant reminder. He says, “As we begin to consider some of your questions, it’s important to remember that I’m a general authority, but that doesn’t make me an authority in general. My calling and life experiences allow me to respond to certain types of questions. There are other types of questions that require an expert in a specific subject matter. This is exactly what I do when I need an answer to such questions: I seek help from others, including those with degrees and expertise in such fields. I worry sometimes that members expect too much from Church leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities.”

And listen carefully here. This is what I said before, “The Lord called the apostles and prophets to invite others to come unto Christ, not to obtain advanced degrees in ancient history, biblical studies, and other fields that may be useful in answering all the questions we may have about scriptures, history, and the Church. Our primary duty is to build up the Church, teach the doctrine of Christ, and help those in need of our help. Fortunately, the Lord provides this counsel for those asking questions: Seek ye out of out of the best books by studying and also by faith.”

Okay, now remember also that the Lord often doesn’t explain why. Elder Maxwell says, “I found that the Lord gives more instructions than explanations.” Elder Oaks said, “If you read the scriptures with this question in mind, ‘Why did the Lord command this or why did He command that’, you find that in less than one in a hundred commands was any reason given. It’s not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to revelation. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do, we are on our own.”

Now this is the conclusion I wanted to share from Terryl and Fiona Givens in their book, “The Crucible of Doubt”. Just fascinating thoughts about the subject of fallible leaders. So they say here, “Mormons frequently describe priesthood as the authority to act in God’s name. Authority is the source of delegation, delegation involves humans, humans entail error, and error in the context of authority creates conflict and tension. These stresses, which involve fallibility in conduct as well as in words, can be a challenge to the most faithful. Delegation is a terrifying gesture on God’s part. To delegate or to deputize, both mean that the person receiving that authority has something like God’s power of attorney; the person’s acts, within circumscribed limits, carry the weight and efficacy of God’s own acts. But surely no human can act with the wisdom, the perfect judgment and infallibility of God. Precisely so. And if delegation is real principle, if God really does endow mortals with the authority to act in His place and with His authority, even while He knows they will not act with infallible judgment, then it becomes clearer why God is asking us to receive the words of the prophet ‘as if from my mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.'”

“A different question emerges when it is the action, not the person, that is imperfect. If a Bishop makes a decision without inspiration, are we bound to sustain the decision? The story is told of a Church official who returned from installing a new stake presidency. ‘Dad, do you brethren feel confident when you call a man as the stake president that he is the Lord’s man?’ the official’s son asked upon his father’s return home. ‘No, not always,’ he replied, ‘but once we call him, he becomes the Lord’s man.”‘

The Givens say some may say it’s arrogant to think God would work this way. I love what the Givens said, “It’s also possible that this church official’s reply reveals the only understanding of delegation that’s viable.” And then they went on to say, “If God honored only those decisions made in perfect accord with His perfect wisdom, then His purposes would require leaders who were utterly incapable of misconstruing His intention, who never missed hearing the still small voice, who were unerringly and unfailingly, a perfect conduit for heaven’s inspiration. And it would render the principle of delegation inoperative … After calling Joseph Smith to his mission, the Lord didn’t say, I will stand by you as long as you never err in judgment. He said, Thou was called and chosen … Devote all thy service in Zion; and … lo, I am with thee, even unto the end.”

Then Nathaniel Givens observed, “As for the question of what is or is not revelation, the answer is simple. People just don’t like to hear it. D&C 68:4 says, ‘And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.'”

“There’s your answer and, in terms of simple language, it’s not hard to understand. The problem is it doesn’t do what people want. What people want is to be absolved of responsibility. They want a formula, a rule book, or an oracle to which they can defer tough questions. God says: ‘if you want to know if it’s scripture or not, you’re going to have to have your own connection to the Holy Ghost sufficient to figure that out.’ In other words, ‘The burden is on you.’ People say, ‘That sounds like hard work. Please give us a cheat sheet.’ And when God refuses to give out a cheat sheet, people just invent one. They invent doctrines of prophetic or scriptural inerrancy or infallibility, that doesn’t ask us to do any genuine hard work.”

And I love how they finished this with Elder Todd Christofferson repeating counsel given earlier by J. Reuben Clark Jr. with an interesting caveat: “The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’: and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.” And then Givens then says, “Hence the ‘in all patience’ part of the Lord’s revelation on the subject.”

Which I think is a perfect way to end on. Hope you enjoyed the video. I hope it was helpful. Subscribe for more. Thanks.

---

Resources:

Other Latter-day Saints Q&A Videos:

Doctrines, Opinions & Practices – Sorting It All Out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ts5u…

Priesthood & Temple Ban – How Did This Happen? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqjlu…

Articles:

Taylor Halverson Blog Article on Sustaining Church Leaders: https://taylorhalverson.com/2019/09/3…

Robert Boylan Blog Article on Biblical Prophets Changing Their Words and the Words of Previous Prophets: http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.c…

Fairmormon helpful links:

https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2016/…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mo…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mo…

Books:

Crucible of Doubt by Terry & Fiona Givens – Chapters 5 & 6

Planted by Patrick Mason – Chapter 6

Shaken Faith Syndrome by Michael Ash – Chapter 3

Other Videos:

Faith Matters Foundation – Can I Trust & Sustain Fallible Leaders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75juR…

FairMormon Podcast – Can A Prophet Make Mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g5kY…

FairMormon Podcast – Are Prophets Perfect https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g5kY…

FairMormon Podcast – Why Would God Allow Prophets to Make Mistakes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmznb…

Saints Unscripted – Can Prophets Make Mistakes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVIMq…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video goes over a significant number of verses in the Bible, which can be seen with hindsight now, as amazing evidences of foreknowledge by prophets and apostles of the latter day restoration.

VIDEO EDIT NOTE: Twice during the video I mentioned that Lehi and Mulek are from the tribe of Joseph – I meant to say Lehi and Ishmael.

---

In this video we’re going to talk about biblical verses or prophecies on the Restoration. There’s a lot of them, and I know that a number of these verses can have dualistic meanings, especially some of the Old Testament prophets. Isaiah was classic in this. So I know there’s multiple meanings for some of these verses. But in light of the Restoration, we can look back and see there’s some bulls-eyes in some of these verses. So I’m going to break it up into various categories. Let’s start with the Book of Mormon.

First here, I’ve got three examples here. I won’t read the full verses of these, but you can see the verses here. “Biblical prophets, they used a trumpet to symbolize the preaching of the gospel, the gathering of Israel, and the coming of the Messiah. On top of many Latter-day Saint temples stands the statue of the angel Moroni with a trumpet pressed to his lips. On September 22, 1827, Moroni again appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him gold plates to translate and to use as a tool to gather Israel from the four corners of the earth.”

Now let’s talk about the meaning of that very specific day that Moroni had designated and told Joseph this was to be the day this was to happen. So the significance, “This day happened to be one of the Jewish high holy days, Rosh Hashanah, also known as the Feast of Trumpets. On this Jewish holiday, the trumpet (ram’s horn or shofar) is sounded in celebration of the future gathering of Israel, the rebuilding of the temple, and the coming of Messiah Ben David, whom we believe is Jesus Christ.”

Another interesting, rich symbolism too is this is the day where light would come in, the autumn equinox, into the Holy of Holies in the temple in Jerusalem, ancient temple. So fascinating.

Okay. Revelations 14:6, this is our angel Moroni scripture, “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” Why would this be needed if it was already on the earth?

Psalms 85:11, “Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven.” Think about the Book of Mormon, came out of the earth. It had been buried for over 1,400 years.

Okay. Isaiah 29:4, coming out of the ground, “And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.” Think of the familiar spirit. A second witness to the Bible. Very much a familiar spirit.

Okay. Ezekiel 37, the two sticks. Now, remember Lehi and Mulek were both from the tribe of Joseph there. Here it talks about the Stick of Joseph and the Stick of Ephraim to be written on, and that the coming day would come when these two would be joined together and become “one in mine hand.” And you think today the Stick of Joseph being the Book of Mormon and then the Stick of Judah being the Bible and they’re one in our hand today.

And critics hate this scripture, Latter-day Saints pointing to this because they say, “Well, it could just have been sticks that were to be written on. That’s what it says.” Well, you could say that. But you could also say it could very easily be scrolls. And that even makes more sense if you think about it, why would you just write the name on a stick? So I think it’s very powerful evidence too. And also where is this happening? Who else is talking about this?

Okay, let’s take a look at the specific blessing given by Jacob to his sons, his patriarchal and prophetic blessing to his 12 sons before he died. This one to Joseph was very specific in Genesis 49:22 through 26. He talked about, “Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well …”, think water, ” … whose branches run over the wall.” Think of the ocean as kind of a wall, going over the ocean.

Again, think of Lehi and Mulek both coming from the tribe of Joseph. And then look at the end. “The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound to the everlasting hills. They shall be on the head of Joseph and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.”

And he was going to be separate. Very interesting. Everlasting hills. Take a look at the globe and you’ll find the everlasting hills in the Americas, the Rockies up in the North, the Andes. In fact, the Andes, they are the longest continental mountain range in the world. So definitely the everlasting hills.

Now let’s go to John 10:16, other sheep. This is Jesus Christ Himself. “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” Notice the emphasis. It was Him. Christ that was going to bring it. They were going to hear His voice. This was not the apostles going out to the Gentiles, which is often quoted there.

Isaiah 29. This is fascinating as we look back and see some of the events in the Restoration happened. “And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of the book that is sealed, which men delivered to one that is learned, saying, ‘Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot: for it is sealed.’ And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, ‘Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.'”

Then, Verse 14, “I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder.” If you go to watch the video on the production of the Book of Mormon, the miraculous nature of it, it simply boggles the mind. 65 days with the unlearned farm boy producing this stuff. It is truly a marvelous work and a wonder.

And then also Joseph was not learned. Yeah. He didn’t feel up to the task. I mean, this was overwhelming for him. And then the learned was actually Professor Charles Anthon. You can read this in Joseph Smith History. In fact, Joseph said he used these exact words when Martin talked about some of the book being sealed. He says, “I cannot read a sealed book.”

Okay, let’s look at witnesses, the law of witnesses. Here’s two, Matthew 18:16 and 2 Corinthians 13:1, both. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” Doesn’t it just make logical sense that the Lord would want to have a second witness to the Bible? For me, it’s why I believe the Bible there.

Okay. Now, new category. Let’s talk about Joseph Smith. All right. I love 1 Corinthians. Paul says, “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the wise, which are mighty.”

It reminds me of Joseph’s calling of the young boy prophet, David was called. And Moses had this speech impediment and inferiority complex almost, Enoch. It’s just like the the Lord to have called somebody like Joseph, the weak of the earth, and actually to really even show more miraculous nature of what happened.

Okay. Messiah ben Joseph. I did an entire video on this. There’s actually a book, 25 years of research, David Mitchell has gone into this. It’s very fascinating here.

But this is the Jewish tradition of a Latter-day restorer that would be called Messiah ben Joseph. So I’m going to give you Randal Chase in the Church History Study Guide that he did. I’m going to give you a quick commentary on this and there’s a whole video, as I mentioned.

He says, “The disciples in Jesus’ day knew all about the coming prophet of the Restoration, known as the Messiah ben Joseph, that would gather Israel together prior to the coming of the Messiah to reign on earth. This great prophet, a descendant of the tribe of Joseph, was especially important to the Samaritans, partly descended from Joseph, and a sore subject for the Jews, who despised the Samaritans as unworthy half-breeds.”

Okay. Now, here’s the verse, John 1:19 through 21, and he gives some commentary about the verses. “Troubled by his rising popularity, mighty preaching and baptisms, the leaders of the Jews sent priests to ask John the Baptist, ‘Who are thou?’ There had been many who had pretended to be the Messiah over the years, but John made it clear, ‘I am not the Christ.’ ‘Well then, who? Art thou Elias?’ meaning Elijah, who they knew would come prior to the advent of the Messiah. John said, ‘I am not.’ There was only one other possibility if he was not the Christ and not Elijah. They asked, ‘Art thou that prophet?’ meaning the prophet descended from Joseph who would also come before the Messiah. And John said again, ‘No.'”

Okay. Cleon Skousen said: “From the most ancient times, Jewish tradition has proclaimed that a great servant of God from the House of Joseph would come in the latter days to prepare the way for the coming of Shilo, the great Messiah. In fact, so profound was the respect of the rabbis for this Joseph that they began calling him Messiah ben Joseph and called their Savior, Messiah ben David. Literally translated, these appellations mean, the anointed one, Son of Joseph, and the anointed one, Son of David. A comprehensive study of this mysterious Messiah ben Joseph was made by Dr. Joseph Klausner, Professor Emeritus of Hebrew literature and Jewish history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who put down the basic attributes which Jewish tradition variously ascribed to him.”

Here’s how Skousen summarized that. He says, “He will rise up shortly before the coming of Messiah ben David. He will be a descendant of Joseph through Ephraim. His mission will commence at about the time Elijah comes in preparing the world for the coming of the Messiah ben David. The Messiah ben Joseph will enter into a great contest with the anti-Christ forces. As part of that contest with the anti-Christ, Messiah ben Joseph will be killed.”

And you can see there the other Samarian traditions there. So that is fascinating. Like I said, a whole video on that.

Okay. Let’s talk about the apostasy. Amos 8 talks about a famine in the land that was going to come. Look at verse 12, “They wander sea to sea, from north to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord and shall not find it.” And it was the famine, in verse 11, it says the famine was for hearing the words of the Lord. Interesting. They shall not find it.

Here, Isaiah 24. It talks about, “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken their everlasting covenant.” I did the video on restoring original Christianity. Just one example of the baptism. Think about children being baptized. In the New Testament, they weren’t; they were blessed. Jesus blessed the little children, not baptized them. Think about the mode of baptism. Jesus came up straightway out of the water. It was a symbolism of death and burial and newness of life. Sprinkling doesn’t do that. So changing the mode of the ordinance as an example.

2 Thessalonians 2. Paul wrote to the saints in Thessalonica. He says, talking about the Second Coming, don’t be concerned or worried about it. And then, verse 3, “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day …”, meaning Christ’s second coming, ” … shall not come, except there come a falling away first.” Very clear. Very fascinating.

Okay. How about some of these comments from various types of reformers? One of the old ones, Roger Williams, pastor of the oldest Baptist Church in America, in Rhode Island there. “There is no regularly-constituted church on earth, nor any person authorized to administer any church ordinance; nor can there be, until new apostles are sent by the great Head of the Church, for whose coming I am seeking.” He went on to say, “The apostasy hath so far corrupted all, that there can be no recovery out of the apostasy until Christ shall send forth new apostles to plant churches anew.”

Okay. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, prepared my 73 noted theologians and Bible students. “We must not expect to see the Church of Holy Scripture actually existing in its perfection on the earth. It is not to be found, thus perfect, either in the collective fragments of Christendom, or still less in any one of these fragments.”

Dr. Fosdick, prominent American Baptist clergyman and author. He said, “Christianity today has largely left the religion which he prepared, taught, and lived, and has substituted another kind of religion altogether. If Jesus should come back to now, hear the mythologies built up around him, see the creedalism, denominationalism, sacramentalism carried on in his name, he would certainly say, ‘If this is Christianity, I am not a Christian.'”

Then, John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, “It does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy spirit were common in the church for more than two or three centuries. We seldom hear them after that fatal period when the emperor Constantine called himself a Christian, and from a vain imagination of promoting the Christian cause thereby, heaped riches and power and honor upon Christians in general, but in particular upon the Christian clergy. From this time, they almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind were found. The cause of this was not as has been supposed because there was no more occasion for them because all the world was become Christian.”

“This is a miserable mistake; not a twentieth part of it was then nominally Christian. The real cause of it was the love of many, almost all Christians, so-called, was waxed cold. The Christians had no more of the Spirit of Christ than the other heathens. The Son of Man, when he came to examine his church, could hardly find faith upon the earth. This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in a Christian Church because the Christians were turned heathens again, and only had earth a dead form left.”

Okay. Will Durant, famed historian. “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated [new] life in the theology and liturgy of the Church.” I did an entire video on that called Original Christianity Restored: Part One.

“Thomas Jefferson, who was a serious student of Christianity, acknowledged the loss of the original gospel and looked forward to the prospect of a restoration of primitive Christianity.”

Now for some passages on the Restoration. So this one, Matthew 9, talks about the importance of a restoration rather than a reformation of something that was already there. Verse 17, “Neither do men put new wine into old bottles; else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish; but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.”

Okay. One of my favorites is Acts 3. We read there: “Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” So there would need to be this restitution of all things before Christ would come again.

And then my all time favorite is Daniel 2, how Daniel interprets King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. You can look on the page. I’ll just read the key part and then again describe the dream. The last part where he says, “Whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided. And the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings…” This is so important. “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed.”

Look at the calendar. When could this have happened? So the vision of the… Here’s what it looks like. The gold head was Babylon and this King Nebuchadnezzar. The silver, the breasts and arms were those in the Medes and the Persians. The brass was the Grecian empire, Alexander the Great. The legs of iron were the Roman empire. But the 10 toes were the 10 divisions that ended up coming out of the Roman empire, and that’s actually exactly what happened. By 476 A.D., Rome had lost its power, and the tribes that sacked the Roman empire became the 10 nations of Europe.

So the earliest that this could have been on the calendar, and others marked this as much later, but the earliest was 476 A.D. Think about that for a minute. It had to be after that. So I want to point to… The history of Christianity, I’m saying that His kingdom had to have been set up after 476 A.D. Note that, that is so critical. So think about any church formed before 476 and then those that claim that that’s their authority, they link off from that church. And then think about this, the Church itself being restored, the newness, the restoration, and in the fullness. But also it talks about consuming all these kingdoms. That’s obviously not going to happen until the millennium, but it will be a part of the way the millennium works there that will be established.

Okay. Now let’s talk about the temple. And I did an entire video on the temple. So I’m just going to hit a couple of super quick highlights. Isaiah 2, of course, this is an amazing one. It says, “… in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall say, Come and let’s go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths.”

Utah comes from the Native American Ute tribe. “Ute” means actually high places or mountain tops. Think about that. It’s right there. Then “Utah” means people of the mountains. So I think it’s a great example.

Now, Obadiah. This one is fascinating just because it talks about saviors, plural, upon Mount Zion prior to the Second Coming. “For the day if the Lord is near … And saviours shall come up on Mount Zion.” So think about that. We understand that now from the aspect of proxy temple work and how people have those ordinances.

Let’s look at Elijah here. We know this one well. Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. “And he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers.”

It’s fascinating when you think about proxy temple work and saviors on Mount Zion. I did an eternal marriage video, talks about this specifically. In fact, when Elijah came on April 3rd, 1836 it was a very unique day. The only one that would wind up like this within the 19th century. But then to take it one step, it was just crazy. This lunar solar calendar, there’s kind of this very scientific. In fact, it’s on the Church website a link to it there. But this was in the video. It says, “It means that the Easter of 1836 to this very day was calendrically the most similar in history to the Easter of 33 A.D. And if the earth’s orbit continues unchanged, that Easter should retain this distinction for another 3,000 years, when a better realignment interval is due.” So quite fascinating.

Okay. Now, a few verses on prophets, apostles, and priesthood authority. Amos 3:7, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” This is so important. Where are the prophets today?

And in that vein, how about the apostles? Paul says to the Ephesians, “Ye … are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.” And then he says two chapters later that this will last, that we will have apostles and prophets, the key part of that until we all come in the unity of the faith. So we aren’t in the unity of the faith so you can say, “Well, where do you find apostles and prophets on the earth today?”

Hebrews 5:4, how this is done, “No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” For example, you don’t become a pastor by going to divinity school and then applying for a job as a pastor, is an example of that potentially.

Okay. Missionaries and prophesied gathering of Israel. Romans 10:14 and 15. So verse 15, “And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things.” So we’ve had over a million people serve full-time missions at their own expense that are bringing the glad tidings even in foreign languages in the history of the Restoration.

And then some on the gathering. “He will lift up an ensign and they shall come”, says Isaiah. “With great mercies will I gather thee.” “Israel and Judah are to be gathered to their lands.” “The Lord shall gather the house of Israel from the people among whom they are scattered.” Just think about our prophet today who’s talking about the gathering of Israel out there on the earth today. And I was definitely part of it. It was a huge theme of the prophets of old.

And then think about the patriarchal blessing given to Ephraim. Genesis 48, this is Jacob giving the blessing here. I don’t know if you remember this, but he puts his hands like this. In the right hand is the one to get the birthright blessing. The firstborn, right? And that was supposed to be to Manasseh, but he’s putting it on the head of Ephraim. And Joseph says, “No. No, father, it’s not supposed to be that way.” Look at verse 19, “I know it, my son, I know it. He also shall become a people … “, meaning Manasseh, ” … and he also shall be great. But truly his younger brother shall be greater than he and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.” Verse 22, “I have given to thee one portion above thy brethren.”

And so this birthright that Joseph had of the sons went to Ephraim. Now that birthright, you have a double portion, but you also with that have the responsibility to take care of the family. And that is the responsibility that Ephraim has today, gathering and helping bring the gospel to all of Israel today.

If you look at, think about, 1 Peter 2:9 says that these saints, they would be a peculiar people, and you think about the saints today, how peculiar they are relative to the world. We talk about sending out these missionaries, I mean it’s stunning what you see happening there. Who’s talking of this? Even Moses himself brought the keys of the gathering of Israel. Talk about Elijah turning the hearts. Who’s talking about this? What about the temples being built? Look of the map here all over. Who’s paying tithing? Malachi says, “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. And ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.”

Here you can see the Pew research study. 79% of active Latter-day Saints pay a full tithing. Only 4% of Christians actually pay full tithing. Who’s serving? I did a video on this study of the University of Pennsylvania. The hours spent serving, the active Latter-day Saints spends nine times the hours serving of active religious volunteers in United States. And then you look at the doctrine, you go to the Restoring Original Christianity video that I did, two parts on that. And it’s no surprise when Bishop Causse talked about the city in France, in Paris that did the study of the church before they would agree to build a temple. After a month long study, they came and reported that they viewed it as the church on the earth that was the closest to the original Christian Church anywhere to be found.

I hope this video did help in showing that as well. I hope you enjoyed the video. Subscribe for more.

---

Resources:

Book:

Biblical Roots of Mormonism – Eric Shuster

Many related videos on Latter-day Saints’ Q&A which are mentioned throughout this video

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video discusses Joseph Smith’s early 19th century rural culture which accepted belief in seer stones and other objects as gifts from God to find lost belongings, wells, and other valuable things. While this culture is foreign to us today, God used it to forge his work forward – as He speaks to his children in their language and understanding. The Smith family, Emma Hale Smith, Martin Harris & Oliver Cowdery, all key participants in bringing forth The Book of Mormon, were influenced by this culture in ways that nurtured faith in Joseph Smith’s divine call as prophet, seer, and revelator. Details are also discussed surrounding the seer stone’s use in translating The Book of Mormon, as well it’s use in the life to come (Revelation 2:17 – white stone).

---

Okay so on this video I want to talk about Joseph Smith’s seer stone culture, the culture that he grew up in as a youth. And I want to talk about really also some very key players in the coming forth of the Book of Mormon before the church was even organized: Joseph Smith’s family, especially his parents, Emma Smith, Martin Harris and Oliver Cowdery. And I want you to think, as I go through these, how critical, these specific people were critical in the Book of Mormon coming forth, and how this culture actually played into it, whether it was inspired by God or more likely how God always works with his people where they’re at. He adapts to essentially their language and understanding, right? As we’re told.

So now there’s been a plethora of material that has come out the last few decades. Really this was the seminal work, a cultural biography of Joseph Smith from Richard Bushman, Rough Stone Rolling, phenomenal work. If you like Saints, this is Saints on steroids, it’s fantastic. Love it. I’m going to add some quotes in the video here from that. And then actually, as part of The Joseph Smith Papers, two great books that came out, From Darkness Into Light: Joseph Smith’s Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones. Both of these from BYU Religious Studies Center and Deseret Book as part of The Joseph Smith Papers, people working on those projects, putting these books out in conjunction with that.

So, but even going back further, back to the 80’s. The Mark Hoffman forgeries created a firestorm of really looking at early church history and really trying to understand it better and really trying to get truthful clarity on what documents we can trust, et cetera. So I’ll talk about that as we go through. So in the midst of that environment in the 80’s, I did want to share this quote from the Ensign, October, 1987 from then apostle Elder Dallin H. Oaks. And he said, “Some sources close to Joseph Smith claimed that in his youth during his spiritual immaturity, prior to his being entrusted with the Book of Mormon plates, he sometimes used a stone in seeking for treasure.”

“Whether this is so or not, we need to remember that no prophet is free from human frailties, especially before he is called to devote his life to the Lord’s work. Line upon line, young Joseph Smith expanded his faith and understanding and his spiritual gifts matured until he stood with power and stature as the prophet of the Restoration.” Now Richard Bushman in his book Rough Stone Rolling. This is a little section. He said, “In 1833, an ex-communicated Mormon named Doctor Philastus Hurlbut collected affidavits in Palmyra and Manchester from people who remembered the Smith family. One of the repeated charges in the affidavits was that Joseph Sr. and his sons hunted for treasure and looked in stones. The aim of the affidavits was to discredit the Smiths, but the firsthand accounts of treasure seeking necessarily came from people who had gone on expeditions themselves and were participant observers.”

“In exposing the Smiths, the neighbors inadvertently described a culture of magic in which they and many others in 19th century New York were involved.” In fact, there were superstitions that the Native Americans had built up mounds to hide treasure. So the mounds around there is one example. In this book actually, even within Joseph’s town there in Palmyra, they record the number of people that are recorded to have had seer stones from 1820 to 1827 and there’s actually one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Nine different people in there. So just part of this culture there. And then look at this. Local newspapers of Joseph’s time on money digging activities, “Digging for money hid in the earth is a very common thing and in this state it is even considered an honorable and profitable employment. One gentleman digging ten to twelve years found a sufficient quantity of money to build him a commodious house.”

“Another dug up fifty thousand dollars! And, in 1825 the Wayne Sentinel in Palmyra reported that buried treasure had been found by the help of a mineral stone, which becomes transparent when placed in a hat and the light excluded by the face of him who looks into it.” Richard Bushman shared this, “Given the financial difficulties under which the Smith family labored, it would hardly be surprising that they might hope for such a reversal in their fortunes. Richard Bushman has compared the Smith’s attitude toward treasure digging with a modern attitudes for gambling or buying a lottery ticket. Bushman points out that looking for treasure had little stigma attached to it among all classes in the 17th century and continued to be respectable among lower classes into the 18th and 19th century.” Now, there’s a great article from, again, some of the people involved in the Joseph Smith Papers project and these books put out in the October, 2015 Ensign where they actually, the Church published a picture of the seer stone, the brown seer stone, which I’ll show you in a minute.

And in that article it says here, “Joseph was raised in a family that read the Bible, which mentions seers repeatedly. The Bible also mentions people receiving spiritual manifestations by means of physical objects such as rods, a brass serpent on a pole, an ephod (part of the priestly clothing that included two precious stones), and the Urim and Thummim. Seeing and seers were part of the culture in which Joseph Smith grew up. Some people in the early 19th century believed it was possible for gifted individuals to see or receive spiritual manifestations through material objects such as seer stones.”

“The young Joseph Smith accepted such familiar folk ways of his day, including the idea of using seer stones to view lost or hidden objects. Since the biblical narrative showed God using physical objects to focus people’s faith or communicate spiritually in ancient times, Joseph and others assumed the same of their day. Joseph’s parents affirmed the family’s immersion in this culture and their use of physical objects in this way, and the villagers of Palmyra and Manchester, New York, where the saints lived, sought out Joseph to find lost objects before he moved to Pennsylvania in late 1827.”

So let’s talk about Martin Harris for just a second. Very early experience that Martin had. And as you think about this experience, think about how this laid a foundation for Martin to see Joseph of having a gift from God, and I’ll tell you, this becomes in this book very clear that without Martin Harris, we don’t have the Book of Mormon being published. He was the financier of the Book of Mormon essentially there. So this was recorded, Michael Ash shared this in the Gospel Scholar in Deseret News in the publication in 2009, said, “In Joseph’s world, the ability to use a seer stone to see the location of lost objects was a gift from God. Joseph, his family, and many of his associates believed he had this gift. Martin Harris recounted an incidence when he literally lost a needle in a haystack, shavings and straw, and asked Joseph to find it with the seer stone.”

In a manner common to frontier diviners, Joseph put his seer stone into the bottom of a hat and then put his face into the hat, obscuring all ambient light and somehow was able to see something in the stone. Martin watched Joseph closely to see he did not peek out from out of the hat. According to Martin, Joseph reached out his hand beyond me on the right and moved a little stick and there I saw the pin, which he picked up and gave to me. I know he did not look out of the hat until after he had picked up the pin. We don’t know how Joseph was able to do this. We don’t know what his success rate was, finding lost or hidden objects. The important thing is that Joseph believed that he was able to find lost objects and this was a gift granted him by God.”

So this was actually helping Joseph too, himself and confidence there that he had this gift and Martin there. Okay, so Richard Bushman in Rough Stone Rolling, let me share this about this folk magic culture as part of religion actually. “Enlightened newspaper editors and ministers scoffed at the superstitions of common people but were unable to erase them. Ordinary people apparently had no difficulty blending Christianity with magic. Willard Chase, the most vigorous of the Manchester treasure seekers was a Methodist class leader at the time. He knew the Smiths and his obituary was described as a minister. At the time he employed Joseph to use his stone to find Spanish bullion.” Oh, let me back up. “At the time he employed Joseph to use his stone to find Spanish bullion, Josiah Stowell was an upright Presbyterian and an honored man in his community.”

“The so-called credulity of the money diggers can be read as evidence of their general faith in invisible forces. Christian beliefs in angels and devils blended with belief in guardian spirits and magical powers. The saints were as susceptible as their neighbors to treasure seeking folklore … for people in a magical frame of mind, Moroni sounded like one of the spirits who stood guard over treasure. The similarities may even have made the extraordinary story more credible in the Smith family.” So again, think about how, what if Joseph’s family, especially his parents, did not believe him about Moroni and about the gold plates that were to be buried in the hill. This fit right in with their understanding and their culture there and it allowed them to express confidence in Joseph. Okay, so Bushman also noted in his chapter in a book called Reason For Faith.

And keep in mind the word magic here is not anything like how we use that term today or associate with it today. And more on that in a minute, but he says, I’m going to only read the underlying parts here. “This fascination with magic began to fade among the educated classes in the later 17th century, but it did not disappear among ordinary people. According to Yale historian John Butler, folk magic was prevalent among Yankees well into the 19th century. The Smiths may have been subscribing to folk religion, but in this they were part of the culture found virtually everywhere among Yankees of their generation. Church scholars now acknowledge that he had a seer stone and did look for lost objects as a young man. The difference is that since Thomas and Butler published their research, folk magic is no longer toxic. It was too commonplace to be scandalous.”

“Magic and Christianity did not seem at odds with one another, and the combination was altogether too common in the 19th century for it to invalidate Joseph Smith’s more conventional religious claims.” So on the Fair Mormon website they actually had a lot of great stuff on this. I’ll link to some of this and here are a few items I found particularly insightful. He says on the site, “Many people of the 1800’s did not see any differences between what latter generations would label as magic and religiously driven activities recorded in the Bible, such as Joseph’s silver cup in Genesis 44 in which he divineth (which was also practiced by the surrounding pagans and referred to as hydromanc), or the rod of Aaron, and it’s a divinely driven power, Exodus 7. The Bible records that Jacob used rods to cause Laban’s flocks to produce spotted and speckled offspring.”

That’s in Genesis 30. “One can only imagine what the critics would say should Joseph Smith have attempted such a thing. Joseph and his contemporaries would likely have been shocked and dismayed to be charged with practicing magic. For them such beliefs were simply how the world worked. Someone might make use of a compass without understanding the principles of magnetism. This mysterious, but apparently effective device was useful even if its underlying mechanism was not understood. In a similar way, activities of the early 1800’s or biblical times, which later generations would view skeptically were simply thought of as part of how the world worked. But it was a huge leap from this realization to charging that Joseph and his followers believed they were drawing power from anything but a divine or proper source.” Okay. Now, Joseph’s attitude really began to change, and Richard Bushman does a great job in really showing some of this in Rough Stone Rolling.

Here’s a little snip from the book. He says, “Joseph Jr. never repudiated the stones or denied their power to find treasure. Remnants of the magical culture stayed with him to the end. But after 1823, he began to orient himself away from treasure and toward translation. Martin Harris, another early supporter, remembered Joseph saying that the angel told him he must quit the company, the money diggers. That there were wicked men among them. After 1823 he continued to be involved in treasure expeditions, but not as the instigator or leader. Perhaps he resisted by dragging his feet. William Stafford depicts Joseph Sr. hunting for gold and going back to the house to seek further instruction from Joseph Jr., as if the son was trying to stay out of the picture while the father pushed on. In 1825, when the family needed money, Joseph Jr. agreed to help Stowell find the Spanish gold, but with misgivings. Lucy said of Stowell’s operation that Joseph endeavored to divert him from his vain pursuit.”

“Alva Hale, a son in the household where the Smiths stayed in Harmony while digging for Stowell, said Joseph Jr. told him that the gift in seeing with a stone was a gift from God, but the peeping was all dang nonsense. He had been deceived in his treasure seeking, but he did not intend to deceive anyone else. By this time, Joseph apparently felt that seeing with a stone was the word of a seer, a religious term, while peeping or glass looking was fraudulent.” It is interesting how again, this situation, if Joseph had not been looking as a stone or treasure digging, he would not have ended up meeting Emma Smith. That’s how he met Emma because Josiah Stowell, who had a couple of experiences with Joseph with the seer stone, hired him to come, and Joseph even tried to convince him out of it and prevailed on him after a month.

But he stayed with Emma, stayed with the Hale home. That’s where he boarded, and that’s where he met Emma. And then actually, take it even a step further, Joseph was told that he could get the plates next time, meaning in 1827, if he brought the right person and Joseph asked Moroni who that was. And he said, you will know, and he later looked in the seer stone and saw Emma. That’s how he knew. So again, the seer stone played a key role in him meeting Emma and bringing Emma into the picture. It was 165 miles from Palmyra where Emma’s home was there in Harmony, Pennsylvania. So quite fascinating when you think about. Now, Josiah Stowell’s nephew took Joseph into court saying he thought he was deceiving his uncle by being involved in this, and it was ironic because Joseph was trying to talk him really essentially out of it and did prevail on him there. And then in court Josiah Stowell was actually testifying for Joseph, in his benefit and faith in Joseph.

So really interesting, but let me share from Rough Stone Rolling a little snippet from the court appearance that really was, I thought, quite illuminating. He says, “Under examination, the 20-year-old Joseph said that he had looked for hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth and had helped Stowell several times. For the past three years at Palmyra, going back to the time he had found the seer stone in 1822, he had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was, but he was not happy with this work. Treasure seeking, he said, was not his idea. He did not solicit business of this kind and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business. He had been under pressure from neighbors, from the enthusiastic and well-off Stowell, and from his own father.”

“They kept after him even though the hunts invariably failed. By the time of the court appearance, Joseph Sr. may have been backing off too. W.D. Purple, a skeptical observer at the hearing, said one statement particularly impressed him. Joseph Sr. testified that both he and his son were mortified that this wonderful power which God had so miraculously given him should be used only in search of earthly treasures. His constant prayer to his Heavenly Father was to manifest His will concerning this marvelous power. He trusted that the Son of Righteousness would someday illuminate the heart of the boy and enable him to see His will concerning him.” Nice timing too. This is right before Joseph is to get the plates and within the next year roughly, and also see how the family is being prepared as well. Interesting. Now, I love what the Fair Mormon website did on just a summary of some interesting aspects of this hearing.

Critics in Joseph’s day didn’t even bring this hearing up, but they bring it up a lot today. So it’s interesting to look at this. So first of all, they say on the website, “They didn’t bring it up in another trial in the same area in 1830. It was not mentioned in any of the affidavits collected by Hurlbut in 1833, even though he was diligently looking for any piece of dirt he could find. Although the trial was briefly mentioned in 1831, it was not mentioned again in a published record for 46 years.” So why today? Why later generations of critics? Here’s why. “Society had changed. Seer stones were no longer acceptable. Treasure digging was considered abnormal. Spiritual gifts were reinterpreted as manifestations of the occult.” Sound like today? So I thought that was helpful. Now let’s revisit that word magic. So again, a few more things from the Fair Mormon site.

They say, “Critics are generally not clear about what definition of magic they are using. And how to distinguish a magical belief in the supernatural from a religious belief in the supernatural. Scholars of magic and religion have, in fact, come to realize that defining magic is probably a hopeless task, John Gee noted. In 1990, Cambridge University published Stanley Tambiah’s Magic, Science, Religion, and the Scope of Rationality, which showed that the definitions of many of the most important writers on magic were heavily influenced both by their backgrounds and their personal ideological agendas. They define magic as religious beliefs other than their own. In 1992 the International Interdisciplinary Conference on Magic in the Ancient World failed to come to any agreement on what magic was.” Okay. The Fair Mormon site continues to go on and says, “So did Joseph Smith and his contemporaries believe in supernatural entities with real power?”

“Yes, and so does every Christian, Jew, or Muslim who believes in God, angels, and divine power to reveal, heal, et cetera. However, to label these beliefs as magic is to beg the question. To argue that Joseph believed in and sought help from powers besides God.” Note besides God. “Nobody disputes that Joseph and his family believed in the Bible which condemns divination and witchcraft.” And there’s a verse right there in Deuteronomy. “Therefore, Joseph and his family viewed folk magic and the use of seer stones as not falling under this biblical condemnation. It is clear that Joseph and his contemporaries believed that one could gain knowledge from such activities as dousing, using a rod to find water or buried treasure, and the use of the seer stones. This does not mean, however, that Joseph understood such activities to be a form of magic.” Okay. If you want to pause, I’ll flash this up on the screen, but you can see how scientific journals talked about this.

The divining rod may have worked in line with scientific natural principles, but they also viewed it as part of, in fact, it says, “It is further clear that those who use divinization by rods, for example, believe that the rod’s natural ability also required the grace of God to operate. Hence practitioners would consecrate their rods and pray to God to bless their efforts.” This is where Oliver Cowdery comes in. So if you read in Doctrine and Covenants section 8, it talks about that Oliver actually had this gift from God of dealing with the rod essentially. And what is it? So this is the culture they were living in. So think about Oliver. So he could easily accept Joseph Smith’s use of a seer stone because of that background and culture that he had. So I’ll pause this on the screen if you want to read it.

This is Revelations in Context, talking about D&C 8, but they looked at it and they looked at how Aaron had the use of the rod in Exodus 7:9 to receive God’s will. And, “many Christians in Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery’s day similarly believed in divining rods as instruments for revelation. Oliver was among those that believed and used a divining rod.” That’s interesting. Okay. So now after the Church started to grow, Joseph’s culture began to change rapidly. And many even account of this may have been some of Joseph’s reticence to share some details. But so from that 2015 Ensign article, we read, “Partly as a result of the enlightenment, or age of reason, a period that emphasized science and the observable world over spiritual matters, many in Joseph’s day came to feel that the use of physical objects such as stones or rods, was superstitious or inappropriate for religious purposes.”

“In later years, as Joseph told his remarkable story, he emphasized his visions and other spiritual experiences. Some of his former associates focused on early use of seer stones in an effort to destroy his reputation in a world that increasingly rejected such practices. In their proselyting efforts, Joseph and other early members chose not to focus on the influence of folk culture, as many perspective converts were expressing a transformation in how they understood religion in the age of reason. In what became canonized revelations, however, Joseph continued to teach that seer stones and other seeric devices, as well as the ability to work with them, were important and sacred gifts from God.” Okay, so let’s talk about Joseph’s use of the seer stone in the translation of the Book of Mormon. This is where he really differentiated from any other seer with a stone and became unexplainable. The production of scripture, and then look at the fruits of what that scripture then did.

This is where things really became amazing. So if you actually look back, this book talks about that Joseph had really two main seer stones, the brown one that the Church did the picture of recently, I’ll show, and then a white one. And the record is a little confusing as far as when and where for sure which was found. Either Lake Erie or digging a well on the Chase farm there. And then even the dates, scholars disagree, but it’s somewhere between 1819 at the earliest, up to maybe even 1826 at the very latest, one of them, the white stone possibly. But he had two stones there that he used. So, and if you recall, with the records, the golden plates Joseph was given, they called them interpreters, and it was two stones set in silver rims, if you recall.

So that was what is talked about in the book of Mormon as interpreters there. But in addition to that, if you go to the Church website under the Gospel Topics Essay, The Book of Mormon Translation, they share this. “The other instrument which Joseph Smith discovered in the ground years before he retrieved the gold plates, was a small oval stone, or seer stone. As a young man during the 1820’s, Joseph Smith, like others in his day, used a seer stone to look for lost objects and buried treasure. As Joseph grew to understand his prophetic calling, he learned that he could use this stone for the higher purpose of translating scripture. Apparently for convenience, Joseph often translated with the seer stone rather than the two stones bound together to form the interpreters. These two instruments, the interpreters and the seer stone, were apparently interchangeable and worked in much the same way that, in course of time, Joseph Smith and his associates often used the term Urim and Thummim to refer to the single stone as well as the interpreters.”

“In ancient times, Israelite priests use the Urim and Thummim to assist in receiving divine communications. Although commentators differ on the nature of the instrument, several ancient sources state the instruments involved stones that lit up or were divinely illumined. Latter-day Saints later understood the term Urim and Thummim to refer exclusively to the interpreters. Joseph Smith and others, however, seemed to have understood the term more as a descriptive category of instruments for obtaining divine revelations and less as the name of a specific instrument.” This is where things get really confusing as a lot of people say, “Oh, the Urim and Thummim are these interpreters, the spectacles, as they’re sometimes called.” That’s not how they referred to them back then. It was more of a class, so anything that was used to translate became a Urim and Thummim in a sense.

Also, if you look on the Church website, on the Gospel Topics, it says, “Some people have balked at this claim of physical instruments used in the divine translation process, but such aids to facilitate the communication of God’s power and inspiration are consistent with accounts in scripture. In addition to the Urim and Thummim, the Bible mentions other physical instruments used to access God’s power: the rod of Aaron, a brass serpent, holy anointing oils, the Ark of the Covenant, and even dirt from the ground mixed with saliva to heal the eyes of a blind man.” So I think we struggle too with the seer stone being so natural, a rock in the ground versus these ancient mystical glasses, and they must have come from God, in the stone box that was hid up for all those centuries.

So I think that’s also our struggle, but God will work with wherever Joseph’s at and whatever is going to work best for him. At the end of the day, God achieved his purpose by bringing the Book of Mormon forth and He works with us where we’re at, and I’m going to talk in a second about why maybe the stone was better for Joseph to use. Now here’s an example of a quote. This is Emma Smith. She says, “Now the first that my husband translated the book, was translated by the use of the Urim and Thummim, and that that was the part that Martin Harris lost. After that, he used a small stone, not exactly black, but was rather a dark color.” Emma Smith, this was her sharing this. So a couple of things about this. She’s talking about the majority of the book was translated with the seer stone.

That was after the lost 116 pages, but we always say the Urim and Thummim there, and then she’s even referring to the interpreters as the Urim and Thummim there, but then it’s shown that you can see in the art there, that they maybe were even put in a hat. I’ll mention that also in a second here. But again, this is what a part of the confusion is on trying to understand each of these. Also look at the picture of where the plates are, how they’re covered with a cloth. Some may say, “Wait a minute. If Joseph’s looking in a hat doing this and not looking at the plates, why does he even need the plates?” Well try and imagine the Book of Mormon coming forth in his day without those golden plates. Those golden plates were a tangible evidence that this was an ancient record that was brought forth through the gift and power of God, but that was a tangible witness. And it was shown, as we know, to the three and to the eight witnesses there.

So there was a critical component to it. So President Nelson, well Elder Nelson at the time, back in 1992 at a mission president seminar, said, “The details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known. Yet we do have a few precious insights. David Whitmer wrote, ‘Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light, and in the darkness, the spiritual light would shine.'” Then here’s some interesting details about maybe why the seer stone came so much into play. This was in Michael Ash’s Deseret News article. He said, “We don’t know what instructions Joseph received in utilizing the interpreters, but it seems that he may have been on his own to figure that out. Since they were shaped like glasses, Joseph apparently tried to use them, at least initially, as one would use spectacles.”

“This proved to be difficult, however, because the lenses were set wider than Joseph’s eyes and caused eyestrain. Apparently Joseph likened the interpreters to a seer stone and, according to Martin Harris, tried to use them in the bottom of a hat but found that they were too big to fit. Somewhere during the early stages of translating, Joseph tried his seer stone and found that they, like the Nephite interpreters, could serve as a tool for receiving the Book of Mormon translation. Once Joseph used his seer stone for translating, he never went back to divining. Martin Harris, Joseph’s first scribe during the translation process, wanted to test the veracity of Joseph’s seer stone and related the following incident. During a break from translating the two men would sometimes go to the river and throw stones. Once Martin found a rock that closely resembled Joseph’s seer stone and, when the prophet wasn’t looking, switched the stone with the one in the hat. When the translation resumed Joseph paused for a long time and then complained that he was unable to see the translation.”

“Martin confessed to switching the stones because he wanted to stop the mouths of fools who said that Joseph merely memorized material and repeated it back to Martin.” So quite fascinating. This was, I’m sure, helpful for Martin to have that experience, but also shows the power of the seer stone that Joseph had. Okay, Gazelem. This is mentioned in Alma 37. Look at this. It talks about preserving these interpreters, but then listen to this, in verse 23, “And the Lord said, I will prepare unto my servant, Gazelem, a stone.” Now that’s singular, “A stone which shall shine forth in darkness unto light.” Very interesting. Daniel Ludlow says, “Gazelem is a name given to a servant of God. The word appears to have its roots in gaz, a stone, and Aleim, a name of God as a revelator, or the interpreter in the affairs of men.”

Also Joseph was called Gazelem as a pseudonym when they were in 1835 Doctrine and Covenants that needed to use code names for protection for different reasons in 1835. That was associated with that and, in fact, at Joseph Smith’s funeral, W.W. Phelps said that that was Joseph’s name in the preexistence there. So quite fascinating, but I really like how, and even in the Book of Mormon, it talks about a single stone that would light up as part of the help there for the record. Okay, so the transition, the general memberships evolution of viewing the stone in the hat, if you will, versus the interpreters. So if you look at this here, this talks about how the process happened. So in 1828 to 1830, this is on the Fair Mormon site, “Joseph was reluctant to describe the translation process in detail.”

“BYU professor Stephen Ricks feels that Joseph’s reticence was probably well justified. It may have been due to the inordinate interest some of the early saints had shown in the seer stone or to the negative, sometimes bitter reactions he encountered when he had reported sacred experiences to others. Thus Joseph never discussed the details regarding which translation instrument he used to both translate the Book of Mormon and to receive revelation. Joseph simply told people that he received his early revelations through the Urim and Thummim.” And then in the 1930’s, “Dr. Francis Kirkham endeavored to gather and evaluate all the newspaper articles he could locate about the Book of Mormon.” And you can read about that there, but he basically concludes he didn’t believe in Joseph, the story there. And that then moved on. 1956, “Joseph Fielding Smith knew of the seer stone, but he did not believe that Joseph actually used it during the translation of the Book of Mormon. Like Kirkham, Joseph Fielding Smith simply refused to accept accounts of Joseph having utilized his seer stone for the purpose of translation as having any validity.”

“In his opinion, such accounts were simply erroneous.” And then in the 1980’s, “The visibility of these issues among the general church membership began to change significantly in the early 80’s as the result of a tragic event, the exposure of the Mark Hoffman forgeries. Some of Hoffman’s documents were created based upon existing eyewitness accounts regarding treasure seeking, and, to some extent, simply amplified concepts that were already known to historians. Once the forgeries were exposed, it became necessary to re-examine what had been written to support the now discredited documents. Although the Hoffman forgeries were discounted, the underlying legitimate historical accounts that fueled their creation began to become more well known among the general church membership.” And then that went like crazy with the Joseph Smith Papers and all this stuff we’ve talked about to the point of, look at the screen.

This was in… literally the Church published a picture of the seer stone. They have the brown seer stone published here, being on display of this photograph in the 2015 October Ensign article. Now look at the picture of these paintings here. Part of the challenge is, sometimes artists are trying to convey ideas, and that can be a challenge also. And it’s the way they may interpret this progress that people and their understanding of the process. So Anthony Sweat particularly has tried recently to get some solid art showing Joseph with the hat. And if you look here, he did some sketches, in fact look at number three there. He called that the sick of Joseph and he said, this is probably why it was hard for artists even to attempt to do this, is that his head buried in a hat, how do you portray that?

It looks like he’s sick there. And so number four was how he decided to paint this and show Joseph really maybe starting to go down to the hat, but it really telegraphs what’s the image of what’s trying to be communicated. But at the end of the day, the artists are trying to get the message across that Joseph is receiving God’s communication of what was on the plates in various ways there. But I think the new art really dovetails nicely with history. Now to finish, the seer stone no longer needed. I want to emphasize something here to be careful on. So in the article, in the Ensign it says, “Joseph had other seer stones, but in the words of Elder Orson Pratt, a member of the Twelve, ‘Joseph had also matured by this time in his spiritual understanding.'”

“At a meeting in 1874 attended by Brigham Young, Elder Pratt told his audience about being present many times when Joseph was translating the New Testament. Seeing no interpretive instruments in use during the translation process, he wondered why Joseph did not use the Urim and Thummim, as in translating the Book of Mormon. As Elder Pratt watched the prophet translate, Joseph, as if he read his thoughts, looked up and explained that the Lord gave him the Urim and Thummim when he was inexperienced in the spirit of inspiration. But now he had advanced so far that he understood the operations of that spirit and did not need the assistance of that instrument.” And we should be careful about thinking of this as like training wheels and not used again. Joseph gave his brown stone to Oliver Cowdery after the translation of the Book of Mormon in 1830 or so, and that did end up through back to Brigham Young at some point and then to pass down to the prophets.

But he kept his white stone and, in fact, he used that, Lorenzo Brown mentioned seeing him use it in parts of the Joseph Smith translation. Parley P. Pratt talked about him using it somewhat in the Book of Abraham translation. 1836 he gave a patriarchal blessing to Newel K. Whitney using his white seer stone there. And then in 1841, he showed the white seer stone to the 12 apostles. And Wilford Woodruff in 1888, when he dedicated the Manti temple, he put it on the altar and consecrated the seer stone there. But more powerfully, look at these two scriptures, Revelations 2:17 and D&C 130 and think about this for us in the future, “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.”

Doctrine and Covenants elaborates on this. “Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation 2:17 will become a Urim and Thummim.” Notice what they’re calling it. A Urim and Thummim, “To each individual who receives one whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known; And a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word.” I think that’s fascinating. So I hope you enjoyed this and got some interesting thoughts out of it and subscribe for more. Thanks.

---

Resources:

Books:

Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman

Joseph’s Seer Stones by Michael MacKay and Nicholas Frederick

From Darkness Unto Light by Michael MacKay and Gerrit Dirkmaat

Articles:

Church Website – Gospel Topic: Seer Stones https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/s…

Church Website – Gospel Topics Essay – Translating the Book of Mormon: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/s…

Church Website – Revelations in Context – Oliver Cowdery’s Gift: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/s…

Ensign Article, Oct 2015, Joseph the Seer by Richard Turley Jr (Asst Church Historian & Recorder), Robin Jiensen, and Mark Ashurst-McGee (Church History Dept) https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/s…

Deseret News Article from Michael Ash on Seer Stone in Translation: https://www.deseret.com/2009/11/23/20…

FairMormon articles:

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Bo…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Jo…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Jo…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Jo…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video discusses many items that have been in the media recently regarding finances for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, such as a possible $32 billion stock portfolio, building $1.5 billion City Creek Mall, welfare & humanitarian assistance, total tithing collected, living allowances for general authorities, and the heavy financial needs anticipated as the church grows internationally. To quote D. Michael Quinn, the non-member author of a new book on this topic in an interview by the Salt Lake Tribune: “These figures represent an astonishing accomplishment. It is an American success story without parallel. No institution, no church, no business, no non-profit organization in America has had this kind of history”.

---

This video on church finances I thought was timely. There’s been a lot of media stories about church finances, and I wanted to address some of these things that have been talked about.

First of all, I want to share, there’s a book that was just recently released by D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Wealth and Corporate Power. Tremendous resources in here. It’s a fascinating book. D. Michael Quinn is actually not a member of the Church.

In an interview that he did with the Salt Lake Tribune, and I want to share a quote from that, he said here, “The Church, launched in 1830 in upstate New York with six members, counts nearly 16 million members worldwide and untold billions in assets. It wasn’t always so. At one point, the federal government confiscated all its properties, withholding them for nearly a decade.

Thereafter, the Utah-based faith endured cycles of near bankruptcy every 20 to 30 years until it finally found its economic footing in the 1960s. No matter the precise bottom line, these figures represent an astonishing accomplishment. It is an American success story without parallel. No institution, no church, no business, no nonprofit organization in America has had this kind of history.”

Now, a little bit on the history or some background of what he was talking about. The last real crisis in the church came in in 1963. In the 30s, 40s, 50s, the church was saving quite a bit of of their income, but coming out of the Great Depression, they were quite fearful and were keeping the money, the reserves that had been saved in cash, in the banks and not investing the funds.

Then they went on essentially a building spending spree in the late 50s from ’58 to ’62, ’63, used up all the reserve, in fact went into debt. Today it would have been in 2010 dollars Quinn points out about $236 million in debt at that point, and in 1963, they even feared being able to make the payroll for the employees, the paid employees in the Church Office buildings.

So, it was a very challenging time. N. Eldon Tanner came in, a very sharp businessman, understood a lot about corporate finance, helped to develop policies and procedures and also introduce sophisticated wealth management techniques used by Harvard Endowment Fund is an example, the Ford Foundation, a lot of these sophisticated institutional money management processes that have been used now for decades in the Church.

This did help turn the Church around. To give you an example, if you were to have invested in the stock market in 1975, $1 million in 1975, today would be worth $228 million. That’s the growth that would’ve happened there, and we did get back in the black on the reserves in the ’67, ’68 period. So, reserves were being restored at that point.

Now, if you look at today, one of the huge stories that came out in June was broke by a group with the MormonLeaks that put out and it’s all over the place now online, that the church has a $32 billion stock portfolio, and I can get into the details of how they came up with this. They cobbled it together with different things and you could question some of the results for various reasons, but I think if you just set it on the face of it, let’s say they had 32 billion. Well, based on the math I just said, if you went back to 1975, that would actually be 228 million invested then would be 32 billion today.

Bishop Caussé of the Presiding Bishopric, shared a quote recently in a symposium, Church History Symposium in March of 2018. He says, “The Church also methodically follows the practice of setting aside a portion of its resources each year to prepare for any possible future needs. The money set aside are then added to the investment reserves of the church. They are invested in stocks and bonds, majority interest in taxable businesses, some of which date to the Church’s early Utah history, commercial, industrial and residential property,” and I’ll take a minute to add the City Creek Center.

There’s a lot of controversy of that, but $1.5 billion, that was part of this portfolio and diversification, and why not? Why wouldn’t you do that across from Temple Square as part of your portfolio of assets? I think it’s a very strategic decision, but it was people looking at that. There wasn’t any tithing funds used. This was part of the reserves there to build that, and it’s part of the investment portfolio.

Then he goes on to say, “Agricultural interests, the church’s reserves are managed by a professional group of employees and outside advisors. Risks are diversified consistent with wise improvement, stewardship, and moderate investment management principles. In the parable of the talents, the Lord who asks for an accounting from His servants, chastised the one who had not invested the money entrusted to him, but instead had hid that money in the earth. He characterized this servant as wicked and slothful for not investing that money for a reasonable financial return.

Consistent with this spiritual principle, the church’s financial reserves are not left idle in nonproductive bank accounts, but are instead employed where they can produce a return. These invested funds can be accessed in times of hardship to ensure the ongoing uninterrupted work of the Church’s mission, programs, and operations, and to meet emergency financial needs.

The funds are also needed to provide additional financial resources to support the Church’s mission to prepare for the Lord’s Second Coming. They will help all nations of the earth. We anticipate that a large part of this growth will take place in the developing and populous nations of the world. Ever-increasing financial means will be required to provide thousands of meeting houses, additional temples, and other essential resources to bless members’ lives wherever they are. In short, all these funds exist for no other reason than to support the Church’s divinely appointed mission.”

So, the church is actually building a new building somewhere in the world every day. That’s the average, and to give you an idea, also Quinn’s book was great on some details of this. If you were to look at the nations of the earth, the United States is the only area that is self-sustaining, where the tithing receipts are able to cover the expenses for operating the Church.

Actually, I’d say there’s one exception. Canada goes in and out a little bit, but it is self-sustaining, but to give you one example, the United Kingdom, the UK on average gets a 40% to 60% supplement from Church headquarters because they’re tithing there in the UK is not enough to overcome the expenses of operating the Church there, and to give you one dramatic example, in 2006, the Church sent the United Kingdom $450 million in that one year. This is a developed country. It was the first one the Church was in, 1837, one of the first ones that the Church was in. Also, if you look at where the Church is growing dramatically, Africa, the Philippines, and over 90% being supplemented from Church headquarters.

So, these funds are extremely important and needed especially for the future, and that’s also where this becomes a very critical thing in trying to develop what is being done and how to allocate it. There are some challenges that are sometimes presented with, is the church doing enough from a humanitarian perspective, especially with these kinds of dollars, and I think they’re trying to also be cautious in not doing their alms before man, but also letting their light shine and finding the right balance, and there has been some statements that have been confusing about amounts that had been said.

There was recently a comment that was made on the Mormon Newsroom site. It says “The Church has spent billions of dollars over the past few years to meet welfare and humanitarian needs around the world. We anticipate these needs will continue to increase over time. Church affiliated, for-profit entities also contribute to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Foundation, which gives to various charitable causes.”

The brethren through revelation were told, the Council on the Disposition of Tithes, which is the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and Presiding Bishopric are to seek revelation on how to use these funds for the Church, and so they do seek revelation and try and guide both now and into the future, but particularly being aware of these massive costs that could be coming down the road. Remember, every time that the Church builds a building or a temple, it’s not an income-producing property, it’s an income-using property and with future costs to the Church.

Also in Michael Quinn’s book, he did an estimate on maybe the tithing funds that are being brought into the church. It may sound dramatic from some of the analysis that he’s pulled together. There’s lots of assumptions that are used. I take this with a big grain of salt, but he came up with a number of $33 billion a year and then maybe another 15 to 17 billion from the portfolio of the Church as well that provides the resources for the operating of the church.

Some others have done analysis that show numbers less than half that and have some good assumptions associated with those too, so it’s hard to know there. Those are huge numbers, but again, remember some of the numbers I just shared with you. Also, to give you an example, The Economist several years ago talked about the operating budget of the Catholic Church just in the United States was $170 billion a year, to just give a frame of reference of the operation.

There is a powerful concept though of the lay ministry of the church and if you think about on the local level, all of the services done by all these bishops, stake presidents, all the leaders, no one’s paid, and all of those dollars for other churches that’s a cost, an expense, that has also helped to lead to where we are today with this large growth in the assets that can be used for the furthering of the growth of the Church.

Okay, some have complained about transparency as well. The Church does not publish financial reports. It does in certain countries where it’s required to. Here is a piece on the lds.org site about this. It says, “The Church is not a financial institution or a commercial corporation. It has no other objective than preaching the gospel and inviting all to come unto Christ. While the Church chooses not to publish the details of its finances, the church does provide public information on the financial principles it follows, the financial controls in place to protect Church funds and the source and use of these funds. The Church also provides all financial information required by law.”

Now, I will say, I kind of wish they would publish, and I think it would be phenomenal, but I understand there’s probably an aspect to this of the micromanaging and the criticisms that could come with people that probably have 1/100th of the information of those that were making the decisions and that were also seeking inspiration from God about what to do. I do understand that there are controls and processes in place.

Here’s a, I’ll just put it up on the screen for a minute here. You can pause the screen if you want to read about the Council on the Disposition of the Tithes and the principles they follow, as well as Bishop Caussé’s breakdown of the Church spending into the six major areas out there.

Now, another controversial thing that’s come about recently has been discussions online, particularly about the living allowances that general authorities receive. I will talk first of all just about the scriptural basis for this. If you look in both the New Testament and the Doctrine and Covenants, Luke 10:7, “And in the same hour remain eating and drinking such things as they give; for the laborer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.” D&C 70 verse 12, “He who is appointed to administer spiritual things, the same is worthy of his hire, even as those who are appointed to a stewardship to administer temporal things.”

Now, I know there’s some concern with the concept of priestcraft when it comes to receiving any compensation in the Church. I’d like to share, and remember these general authorities are not seeking a career path here. They have been asked to do this. They are called to do this. Same thing with mission presidents. They’re asked to do this.

I’d like to read this from the FairMormon website on addressing this question of priestcraft. On here it says, “Church members have a particular sensitivity to issues surrounding paid ministries particularly due to admonitions in the Book of Mormon relative to a practice known as priestcraft, which is ‘That men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world, but they seek not the welfare of Zion.'” And then this is repeated multiple times in the Book of Mormon.

“For this reason, the idea of compensation for service seems contradictory to strongly held values of the Latter-Day Saint community. However, it should be noted that priestcraft as it has been defined is a condemnation of intent to get gain and praise and not for the welfare of Zion and not about an individual receiving support. Living stipends are not compensations for service, but recognition of a practice, a practical reality that individuals who decide to dedicate their full time to church service are sometimes unable to simultaneously provide for their own modest living needs.”

The example of King Benjamin adds to the LDS value of self-sufficiency of leaders in particular. Benjamin while king, still labored for his own support. This is a very admirable demonstration of humility on the part of the king. However, this example was being used in the context of his political position as king and would be comparable to a president refusing to accept his salary for his service,” which we’ve had three presidents in the U.S., Hoover, Kennedy, and Trump, that did this. “It should not be used to condemn the practice of helping provide for the modest living needs of full-time leaders who are unable to dedicate time to earning a living.”

Now, there are some examples out there of getting rich off the people, in a sense, from religion. Here is an example of the top 10 richest pastors in the world and their net worths, put up on the screen there: Kenneth Copeland, 760 million net worth; Bishop TD Jakes, 150 million. You can see these names. Pat Robertson, 100 million; Joel Osteen, many know him, 40 million; Billy Graham, 25 million; Rick Warren, the Saddleback Church there in Lake Forest, California, 25 million.

These are some examples, and again we talked about the lay ministry at the local levels are all volunteer service, and that’s part of the reason why the Church has been able to grow so much. Also, if the Church did not provide a living allowance for these general authorities or the modest living allowance for the mission presidents, then only the wealthy could serve. Nobody else who would be able to logistically.

So, it gives the ability to call anyone to those positions. Also, this has not been hidden. President Hinckley said in General Conference, “The living allowances given the general authorities, which are very modest in comparison with executive compensation in industry and the professions, come from the business income of the church and not from the tithing of the people.” Then the Ensign talked about mission presidents as they put their lives on hold, can often go through challenging financial situation with that and they are provided with the minimal living allowance because of that circumstance as well.

The dollar amount that was recently disclosed online on this also causing controversy, 120,000, if you were to compare that to the CEO of the Red Cross as an example, it’s 10 times that, it’s 1.2 million for the CEO of the Red Cross. If you were to look at the highest paid Church employee full-time paid employee running the administration or the bureaucracy side of the Church up in Canada, because they do have to disclose that up there, 250,000 is the top pay. So, twice the amount of the general authority. Keep in mind too, the general authorities are all getting paid the same. The prophet down to the newest called general authority all receive that same dollar amount.

So, the only additional income sources that the general authorities could actually get, especially the Twelve and the First Presidency that are called for life, would be books, book royalties, and so you might think that might be a decent amount. It’s not. It’s very, very minimal. A great example that Quinn put in here, the most prolific general authority writer, probably dozens of books, Joseph Fielding Smith.

When he died in probate they looked at his last royalty check and annualized it and figured it out. In today’s dollars, it would have been less than $50,000, and again, with dozens of books that had been produced, and to close I will say in the Doctrine and Covenants we’re told the Lord will hasten His work in His time. These resources are critical towards that measure, and I believe personally, that that’s part of why this is happening now, and it’s told that He will do it in His own way and it’s wonderful to watch and see where the Church is going.

Hopefully, this is a helpful video on the topic. Subscribe for more.

---

Resources:

Books:

The Mormon Hierarchy: Wealth & Corporate Power by D. Michael Quinn

Talks:

Talk by President Bishop Causee at the Church History Symposium, Mar 2, 2018: In the Lord’s Way: The Spiritual Foundations of Church Financial Self-Reliance https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl…

Articles:

Mormon Newsroom Press Release: Church Finances & A Growing Global Faith https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl…

Summary on LDS.org on the financial information released by the Church: https://www.lds.org/church/news/read-…

Deseret News Article – LDS Church Leaders Provide Insight Into Church Finances: https://www.deseretnews.com/article/9…

Salt Lake Tribune Article on Michael Quinn’s book: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/local…

Podcasts:

Salt Lake Tribune Podcast ‘Mormon Land’ with Michael Quinn on his book: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/local…

RadioWest Interview Podcast with Michael Quinn on his book: http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/mormon…

Websites:

Link to many articles within FairMormon on the topic of Church Finances: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mo…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video discusses the unparalleled missionary program of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Over 1.3 million missionaries have now served, not only paying their own way, but answering the call to serve at a time of life often associated with peak levels of self-absorption and self-interest. To quote a Business Week article interviewing Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen: “I don’t think there’s any more demanding profession that being a Mormon missionary.”

---

On this video in the Evidences series, I’m going to talk about missionary work, the missionary program of the Church. When Jesus Christ was on the earth and formed His church, He sent out His disciples, two by two was the pattern, to preach the gospel to every creature, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. The restored gospel, restored church of Jesus Christ has a missionary program with the same pattern, and it is really unparalleled in the history of the world what has happened with this program.

Since 1830, we’ve had over 1.3 million missionaries that have served and returned home, having gone out to preach the gospel throughout the world. Currently, there’s actually 970,000 people currently alive that have served missions, so the vast majority of those are in this current day, 70,000 are serving today. Five of youth, of young adults, there are 5800 senior missionaries. There are 23,000 church service senior missionaries. Almost 100,000 total missionaries at this point collectively. About 25% of teens are going on missions. If you view it as from those that are active, it’s probably closer to 50% or more. There the men are able to go at age 18 and the women are eligible to go at age 19.

The men go for two years. The women go for 18 months. There’s 170 different languages that are spoken. They’re expected to learn this language in one of the 15 missionary training centers throughout the world. They learn the language in two months. On top of all this, they’re expected to pay their own way, and the church has levelized the cost to $400 a month for everybody that serves. And if you’re unable to pay completely, the church does provide a supplement to be able to still be able to serve. 160 million Books of Mormon have been given out since 1830 and there have been millions of hours of community service that the missionaries have done. And the thing that I love the most is the age that these missionaries go. It is at the peak time for them in self-absorption, self-interest.

They’ve just gotten out of high school, they’re focusing on thinking about colleges and careers. It’s the peak level of self-focus. And instead they completely turn outward and go and serve the Lord in sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. I wanted to share a couple of quotes. One was from the Deseret News. And they were actually quoting in 2011 there had been articles published in Business Week and Financial Times and commenting on these, it says, “Both Business Week and the Financial Times concluded aspects of missionary training and missionary service were catalysts for business success. International assignments and language learning spawning multicultural sensitivities and global adaptability; companionships leading to the development of interpersonal skills and the combination of suffering, sacrifice, and self-improvement, helping instill a strong work ethic.” Business Week quoted Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen, a Rhodes scholar and LDS missionary in Korea in the early 1970s, “I don’t think there’s any more demanding profession than being a Mormon missionary.”

Now, this is the benefit to the missionary that we’re talking about here and some of the secular benefits. The church also on the newsroom site had a great piece that they talked about all the benefits from serving in mission, holistically and collectively. This is the quote. “Returning missionaries carry home a wealth of knowledge and experiences that set the course of their life. Firm faith in God, an increased knowledge of the teachings of Jesus Christ and the restored gospel, an exposure to cultural diversity, a new language competence, possibly with a foreign language but often with an improvement in their communication skills, an increase in confidence and an overwhelming love for the people with whom they have served, abilities to set and reach goals, to gain a sense of responsibility for themselves and others, to concentrate on their educational studies, and then build positive relationships with people of varied backgrounds. The experience of that service for the individual missionary becomes a strong foundation for the future, both within the family and the church and in academic and professional pursuits. Many missionaries credit their full-time service with influencing their direction for the rest of their lives. Some move on to successful business pursuits. Others find useful in the service, education, or technical fields. Most also continue church and community service with a focus on family.”

And I know personally, I’ve been home for over 30 years from my mission, but I still reflect back so much of what is good in my life today I can tie back to the foundations of my mission. It really changed the trajectory path of my life and brought tremendous blessings and joy, not just when serving, but since then as well. One of my favorite quotes in the Bible is Isaiah 52:7. I want to read this and then show you a brief video clip of a missionary choir at a worldwide leadership training meeting and show you a clip of that that I found. But Isaiah 52:7 says, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings and publishes peace, that bringeth good tidings of good, that publishes salvation, that sayeth unto Zion, ‘Thy God reigneth’. Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with a voice together shall they sing.” And please enjoy the singing that you’re going to see now.

(singing)

---

Resources:

Articles:

Mormon Newsroom, Missionary Program: https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/topic/…

Mormon Newsroom, Missionary Work – Experiences Shape the Future https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl…

Deseret news article summarizing both Business Week and Financial Times articles https://www.deseretnews.com/article/7…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

A just released study from a group of researchers at BYU illustrates how authors have a ‘soundprint’ in the names they create, even when they are trying to avoid this. Tolkien, a linguistic scholar and master of languages, purposely set forth in his works to create unique names and languages for his distinct groups of creatures. His efforts seemed to have failed in comparison to the distinct names for the 4 major cultural groups in the Book of Mormon – an evidence this book wasn’t written by a singular author (Joseph Smith)

---

Okay, so in this Evidences video, I’m excited to share some brand new research, just came out, from a group down at BYU of researchers that put together a paper.

They just issued it in the Interpreter Foundation on the website, called Comparing Book of Mormon Names with Those Found in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Works: An Exploratory Study.

This has to do with names, and it has to do with sounds. Sounds that the names make, as getting a sound print, in a sense. And in this, it’s fascinating as they compare the names that Joseph Smith had in the Book of Mormon from different cultures, that you would have said if Joseph made the Book of Mormon up, then there would be a sound print, and you could see Joseph’s fingerprints all over those sounds.

With Tolkien, with how much knowledge he had, it would just be the opposite. He should be able to not have a sound print. And so it’s fascinating to see he did, all throughout his work. So that’s what this paper’s about. Now, let me share the abstract at the beginning.

“The works of Tolkien and the Book of Mormon have been compared in a variety of ways, by multiple authors and researchers, but none have looked specifically at the unusual names found within both. Word print studies are one tool used in author attribution research …,” which, by the way, I’ll do a separate video on that at some point.

But it says, “… but do authors use specific sounds more than others, consciously or subconsciously, when selecting or inventing names? Some research suggests they may, and that their patterns can create a sound print or phonoprint. This constitutes a fresh and unusual path of research that deserves more attention.”

So this is in its infancy really, but I thought it would be fun to just visit a little bit, give you some thoughts from the paper, show you some of the research, and add a few things at the end.

So first of all, if you compare J.R.R Tolkien to Joseph Smith, Tolkien had mastered 13 languages, both ancient and modern, had a working knowledge of 9 others. He liked to create languages that had the basis in ancient languages. He created worlds, cultures, characters, and he knew how to create linguistic systems. He was a professor of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford, and, “created languages based on some characteristics of natural languages. He deliberately used different sound systems for each of them, and he particularly enjoyed the names that evolved from these systems.”

So, with all that, he should not have, if he was trying to do this, he would not have a sound print in a sense. Whereas Joseph Smith would, definitely. If he was creating a fictional work as would be claimed by critics, then you would be able to see his fingerprints all over it, as the author.

It’s interesting if you note that, just a sidebar, when Joseph was translating in the Book of Ether, the name, Coriantumr, from the Jaredites. When, in the original text, it’s crossed out and he has Oliver respell that, and the spelling, it was spelled the way it would sound. At the end, it said M-M-E-R, Coriantummer, but he had it changed to M-R at the end, which is not the way anything would be done in English, but if fit perfectly in the old world there.

But it’s interesting to, again, compare these two, remember Joseph was a third grade education, bad speller, not educated. Now, in the study, they broke it out, with Tolkien in to the five different areas of languages that he had created, that had the most names associated with. So 183 names. If you look at the screen here: dwarf, 23 names; elf, 47 names; hobbit, 18 names; man, 74 names; and other, 21 names.

For Joseph, we had, they excluded names that showed up in the Bible, and they excluded names that were places, they excluded names that were not clear which culture they fit in, and came up with 130 names that would work for the analysis. So, Jaredites, there were 34; Nephites, there were 82; Mulekites, there were 6; and Lamanites, there were 8, and that these should have different sound prints if they were from different times and cultures.

And so should Tolkien’s, here, with what he was trying to accomplish.

So the first analysis they did, they, “examined all these 313 names, 183 from Tolkien, 130 from the Book of Mormon, to determine how much the five groups of Tolkien’s names differed from one another in their phonotactic probabilities …,” and that’s the sounds that letters make within a word, “… in comparison with the four groups of Book of Mormon names.

“The phonotactic probability calculator developed by Vitevitch and Luce, which is available online, provides probabilities by comparing the phonemes in each ordinal position of a given word to the standard American English frequencies.” Now this gets a little technical and complicated. The research piece, I’ll link in the resources and you can look through it, but I did like … it is interesting, the analysis.

The first one here, the outcome, it said, “There were notable differences among the groups in their variety of name links, phoneme probabilities, and bifone probabilities. The Book of Mormon name groups have much greater in-group divergence than Tolkien names, which are more homogeneous.

“The within-source comparisons, the language groups within each book, reveal additional differences between the texts. Although Tolkien created his character names, or claimed his character names were primarily based on different languages, real or invented, the phonotactic probabilities did not differ significantly. In the within-source comparisons, among the five Tolkien languages, only one of the 10 language group comparisons, 10%, is statistically significant.” It was the man versus elf.

“Among the four Book of Mormon name groups, four of the six variance ratios, or 67%, were significant. Nephite versus Jaredite, Mulekite versus Jaredite, Lamanite versus Jaredite, and Lamanite versus Nephite.”

Now, the second analysis they did had to do with the names themselves, the whole word, not just a sound within the name, and they compared it to a database of language software that IBM has, of 800 million names, to try and get to the root of where the names originated from. It’s based on modern languages, so these, both Joseph and Tolkien were supposed to have been tied to ancient languages here, so the software does give a generic rating to the word if there is no modern-day comparison. And so it is another way you can do an analysis, here.

So if you look at the screen, picture’s worth a thousand words. Here’s the screen: bar graphs, showing the frequency of the generic names. If you look at Tolkien on the left, you can see very little variation, almost all the same. If you look on the right, the high variety amongst the four groups in the Book of Mormon, which would be expected if it was from different times and different cultures.

At the end they say here, look on the screen, “Results suggest that Tolkien was unable to entirely escape his phonoprint when selecting or creating character names, even though he claimed he based them on or found them within distinct languages. The two analyses showed little differentiation involving his five major naming groups.

A possible phonoprint, of sorts, seems to have surfaced in his names, regardless of the language groups in which he placed them. In contrast in Book of Mormon names, a single author’s phonoprint does not emerge. Lamanite, Nephite, Mulekite, and Jaredite names have varied by group in the way one would expect names from different cultures to vary, when looking at sounds within names, and names as whole units.”

And then one last thing I wanted to share just from these … a couple of these same researchers did an article, published in Religious Study Center at BYU a number of years ago. The title was 188 Unexplainable Names: Book of Mormon Names No Fiction Writer Would Choose. And they actually did a survey of of authors, on how they create and invent and put together names in their stories and their works, and there were five themes that they use. And then they kind of compared what Joseph did in these.

So, first of all, “Authors made conscious and deliberate choices for character names, some of which require a great deal of time and consideration.” So think of Joseph as he was translating, without even pausing when he introduced extremely complex names.

Number two, “They chose names that are easily accessible so that readers can clearly distinguish between characters and keep them straight.” Think of Joseph’s. The names were often quite long and complex.

Three, “They are careful that names fit the characters’ personalities, backgrounds and cultures.” In fact with Joseph, some of the names are given to both heroes and villains.

Number four, “They go to many different sources to find names that are accurate and interesting.” Joseph did not use different resources. He did not have access to ancient foreign name lists. They were not available.

And last, “They often choose names that have personal significance for them,” which, the only two names you could tie that to, with Joseph, was Joseph and Samuel.

So in conclusion to share a last thought from that paper that they shared, was, “Does Joseph Smith’s disregard for naming conventions indicate he was a careless craftsmen, or does it indicate he was a careful translator of a record full of authentic names, which were not his inventions?

For Joseph Smith to have invented the 188 unique names found in the Book of Mormon seems highly unlikely. Coming up with that many names would have been overwhelming, especially considering Joseph Smith’s limited formal education. Even if someone were to suggest that inventing that number of names in a severely limited timeframe might have been possible, their consistency with language patterns yet to be discovered removes it far from the realm of probability.”

I hope you enjoy this video, and subscribe for notifications of new content. Thanks.

---

Resources:

Studies:

The main study published on the Interpreter Foundation website: https://www.mormoninterpreter.com/com…

Additional study by some of the same researchers published in the BYU Religious Studies Center https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/volume-1…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.