Letter 7 — Further Tests of Joseph Smith,
“the Prophet” Vision
Letters To A Mormon Elder
by James R. White
Friday, June 29
Dear Elder Hahn,
As promised in my last letter, I am going to continue with my examination of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, based upon the biblical guidelines of who is, and who is not, a “true prophet of God.” I have not yet heard from you regarding my last letter (if something of that size can be called a “letter”!), but I would imagine it will take you a while to read it, digest the information, and do any research on your own before you would make any comments upon it. I hope you have had an opportunity to pick up the Tanners’ books at the Christian bookstore because what I will be discussing in the next two letters is covered in-depth in those works. I realize that you are very busy, but, as what we are discussing is directly relevant to the propriety of your missionary activities, I hope you will make time for study.
I have shared with you some of the reasons why I reject Smith’s First Vision as being historically accurate and theologically correct. Now I would like to discuss the specific prophecies of Joseph Smith and ask the common question, “Did Joseph Smith give forth false or erroneous prophecies?” Obviously, I believe that he did. I will gladly substantiate that position. However, I’d like to point something out first. In reality, the burden is upon you, Elder, and anyone else who would take the LDS position, to demonstrate Positively that Smith was a prophet. You are claiming he was — it is not really my place to have to disprove an unsubstantiated claim. I will do so because I believe that your acceptance of Smith as a prophet is primarily “religious” in nature what I mean by that is that you accept Smith as a prophet not because you have studied his prophecies or simply come to the conclusion on the basis of historical evidence that he was a prophet, but because you have been told that Smith was a prophet, and you have “faith” that he was.1Three Irrefutable Reasons Why Joseph Smith Was a Fraud.
It takes little effort to disprove Joseph Smith’s claim to being a divinely called prophet of God. First, Smith fails Moses’ test of a true prophet due to his many failed prophecies, and his own ungodly and immoral character would cause even the most ardent hedonist to blush. Second, the three witnesses to the quintessential event underlying all of the LDS religion — the translation of the golden plates into the Book of Mormon — were even denounced by their own fellow Mormons. And, third, the Mormon scriptures have long been proven to be plagiarized frauds.
I have attended a number of “fasting and testimony meetings” at LDS churches. I remember the first time I did so at the Glendale 6th Ward about ten years ago. I watched as individuals would get up behind the podium and give their testimonies. Many of the older folks would talk about various topics, but just about every single younger person said the same thing, and it ran something like this: “I testify that Jesus is the Christ, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, that (at that time) Spencer Kimball is a prophet of God, and that the Church is true. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.” The youngest folks frequently added “and I love my mommy and my daddy” as well. Now, Elder, if you were to say that over and over again from the time you were knee-high to a grasshopper until you were eighteen years of age, chances are pretty good that you would really believe it whether or not you had ever actually examined the evidence that could tell you whether Smith was, or was not, a prophet. Yes, I know, many Christians believe what they believe in the same way — I’m not picking on the Mormons for training their kids. What I am saying is that you cannot assume that Smith is a prophet, and then do whatever it takes to keep him as a prophet once the factual and historical data is examined. I am not saying that we should be unfair to Joseph Smith in examining his story — believe it or not, I really do try to be fair in weighing his claims. But, in my experience, most LDS are willing to close their eyes to the mountain of evidence that contradicts Smith’s claims. I hope you will keep your eyes open and really consider the evidence about Joseph Smith.
You’ve probably seen some pretty long lists of “false prophecies” of Joseph Smith. I do believe that he made many prophetic errors during his lifetime — I fully believe that he expected Christ to return before the year 1890 or 1891. But, I don’t expect you to put a whole lot of stock in my personal opinion. Also, I don’t expect you to allow me to operate on a double standard either — in other words, I will not apply criteria to Joseph Smith that I would not allow to be applied to a biblical prophet such as Isaiah or Jeremiah or, yes, Jonah, too. So my list of false prophecies is considerably shorter than other versions you might have seen. It is not that I don’t agree with some of those lists, or feel that they are inaccurate in what they say. I just don’t feel it is best to attempt to multiply examples at the cost of the effectiveness of each individual example. For instance, it is common to hear someone allege that Joseph Smith “blew it” when, in Alma 7:10, the Book of Mormon says,
And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.
The allegation is that since Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not Jerusalem, Smith must have just been “mixed up” when he dictated this section and made a mistake. That may well be, but I do not believe that an airtight case can be made on the basis of this passage. It is possible that Bethlehem, being a small city, could be part of a larger area (“the land of our forefathers”) called by the name of the major city of the area, Jerusalem. Since this is a logical possibility, I see no sense in pressing the issue. I’m willing to grant the benefit of the doubt in an instance such as this.
The same is to be said for a number of other prophecies of Joseph Smith. I don’t feel that giving the benefit of the doubt in any way changes the simple fact that there are clear, unambiguous false prophecies in Smith’s writings — in fact, by limiting the list of these prophecies to only those that are clearly errors on Smith’s part! strengthen the case. So, in line with this, I shall offer you only two examples of false prophecies by Joseph Smith. They will not be taken from some obscure source, but both come directly from Mormon Scripture — specifically, the Doctrine and Covenants. And, to avoid the whole debate about whether a prophet has to say “thus saith the Lord” to be held accountable for the prophecy, both of these examples contain these important words. I begin with the 84th Section of the D & C, verses 1-5:
1 A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high.
2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.
3 Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.
4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.
5 For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.
Let’s outline the major elements of this passage: (1) it is “the word of the Lord” (verses 2 and 4); (2) “New Jerusalem” shall be built at this place (which according to verse 3 is in Missouri); (3) the temple would be built “in this generation”: (4) “this generation” would not pass away until the temple is built and the glory of the Lord rests upon It.
As I noted previously when referring to the major problems with D & C 84:21-22, this revelation was given September 22 and 23, 1832. The prophecy is that the temple would be built on the “temple lot” within the time span of the current generation. As we both know, Elder, no temple has been built on that site — in fact, the property is owned by another religious group that claims Joseph Smith as its founder, just as you. What then shall we say about this prophecy? I would like to note how the friendly contemporaries of Joseph Smith understood his words:
Here we learn the arts of cultivation and of building; we learn to irrigate the land; we also, in many respects, prepare ourselves for a day when we shall go to the place that has been appointed for the building up of the city of Zion and for the building of the house which shall be a great and glorious temple, on which the glory of the Lord shall rest — a temple that will excel all others in magnificence that have ever been built upon the earth. Who is there that is prepared for this movement back to the centre stake of Zion, and where the architects amongst us that are qualified to erect this temple and the city that will surround it? We have to learn a great many things, in my opinion, before we are prepared to return to that holy land; we have to learn to practice the principles that we have been taught: we have to study to fill up every hour of our time in industrial pursuits and the acquisition of knowledge, and by economy and patience prepare ourselves as good and skilful workmen, as builders in the great building which our Father has prepared. And let me remind you that it is predicted that this generation will not pass away till a temple shall be built, and the glory of the Lord rest upon it, according to the promises. (Elder George A. Smith, Journal of Discourses, 3/10/1861, 9:71)
From the day that God established this Church to the present the stream of revelation has continued to flow uninterruptedly. It flows pure for us to drink at until we are filled to repletion; and if we do not drink, it is our own fault. The servants of God are not to blame, for they have been laboring by day and by night, from the beginning, with us, as a people, to prepare us for the great things that are at our very doors, and that God intends to perform in this generation. I feel the importance of this, probably not as much as I ought, and wish to do; nevertheless, when I see the great events that are taking place at this time among the nations — when I view the destiny that awaits us as a people, and the great things God has in store for us, I almost feel as though I was a laggard on the path, and too slow entirely for the great events that are coming upon the earth. The day is near when a Temple shall be reared in the Center Stake of Zion, and the Lord has said his glory shall rest on that House in this generation, that is in the generation in which the revelation was given, which is upwards of thirty years ago. How much are we prepared for this? We talk about it, sing about it, and delight to dwell upon it; but are we prepared for this great manifestation of glory in our midst? (Elder George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, l0/23/1864, 10:344)
. . . that is, that they should continue to gather, but not let their flight be in haste, and let all things be prepared before them. God led forth the Prophet that He had raised up to the western part of Missouri, and pointed out, by His own finger, where the great city of Zion should stand in the latter days, the great city of the New Jerusalem that should be built up on the American continent. I say He pointed out these things and gave direction to His people to gather to that land, and commanded them to lay the corner stone of a great and magnificent temple that was to be built during the generation in which the people then lived. The corner stone was laid in the summer of 1831, in Jackson County, State of Missouri. All these things were done by commandment and revelation, and in this way they still further showed, one to another and to all people as well as to the heavens, that they did love the Lord their God.
God has been with us from the time that we came to this land, and I hope that the days of our tribulations are past. I hope this, because God promised in the year 1832 that we should, before the generation then living had passed away, return and build up the City of Zion in Jackson County; that we should return and build up the temple of the Most High where we formerly laid the corner stone. He promised us that He would manifest Himself on that temple, that the glory of God should be upon it; and not only upon the temple, but within it, even a cloud by day and a flaming fire by night.
We believe in these promises as much as we believe in any promise ever uttered by the mouth of Jehovah. The Latter-day Saints just as much expect to receive a fulfilment of that promise during the generation that was in existence in 1832 as they expect that the sun will rise and set to-morrow. Why? Because God cannot lie. He will fulfill all His promises. He has spoken, it must come to pass. This is our faith. (Elder Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, 5/5/1870, 13:360, 362)
It seems to me, Elder Hahn, that these men who were called “apostles of Christ” and who took active roles of leadership in the LDS Church understood D & C 84:4-5 in such a way as to preach that the temple would be built in Jackson County, Missouri, within the generation that was alive in 1832. There can be no mistaking that. And with reference to the meaning of “generation” in this passage, I note as well the definition given by Bruce R. McConkie when, in Mormon Doctrine, page 310, he addresses the term and says, “A generation may be measured in terms of the life of the oldest persons who live in a particular period” (D & C 45:30-31; 84:4-5). Note he specifically references D & C 84:4-5 in his definition.
One common defense given by LDS people is to be found in D & C 124:49-51, a “revelation” that was given after the Mormons were driven from Missouri, resulting in an inability to build the temple as D & C 84:1-5 had commanded. It is clear that the early apostles, such as those cited above, did not think that this passage released them from the imperative action of building the temple; however, modern LDS refer to it as an “explanation” of Smith’s prophecy. The passage reads,
49 Verily, verily I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings.
50 And the iniquity and transgression of my holy laws and commandments I will visit upon the heads of those who hindered my work, unto the third and fourth generation, so long as they repent not, and hate me, saith the Lord God.
51 Therefore, for this cause have I accepted the offerings of those whom I commanded to build up a city and a house unto my name, in Jackson county, Missouri, and were hindered by their enemies, saith the Lord your God.
This is, of course, a very convenient “out” for Joseph and his prophecy. However, it is also just as obviously an excuse for a false prophecy. Is God incapable of controlling the actions of men? In the Old Testament, the enemies of Israel came against them and defeated them as a part of God’s will and purpose (Isaiah 10:5-19). Nothing is mentioned about this by Smith — in fact, the blame is put squarely on the enemies of the LDS Church, not upon any sinfulness of the people. Are God’s decrees really dependent upon the actions of evil men, Elder Hahn? The tests of a prophet given by the Holy Spirit in Deuteronomy 13 and 18 do not make a place for “failures due to enemies that are too strong to be resisted.” Smith, upon failing to rear the temple in Missouri, came up with an excuse for the failure — but his excuse does not keep him from falling under the condemnation of God’s Word as a false prophet.
No matter how you stretch it, Elder, this prophecy fails the test. Even if you were very liberal and gave to the word “generation” a meaning of a full hundred years, you still ran out of time over fifty years ago. Smith said it was the word of the Lord; he defined the exact event that would take place — the temple would be built at a specific location that is known to this day; he defined the time parameters in which it would take place — prior to the death of that generation. It is a classic prophecy that can be tested — and it fails.
I will address one more false prophecy and leave the subject at that, for as I noted in my last letter, it only takes one false prophecy to disqualify a person as a true prophet of God. The next prophecy is found in D & C, Section 114:
1 Verily thus saith the Lord: It is wisdom in my servant David W. Patten, that he settle up all his business as soon as he possibly can, and make a disposition of his merchandise, that he may perform a mission unto me next spring, in company with others, even twelve including himself, to testify of my name and bear glad tidings unto all the world.
2 For verily thus saith the Lord, that inasmuch as there are those among you who deny my name, others shall be planted in their stead and receive their bishopric. Amen.
The revelation is dated April 17, 1838, and was given to Joseph Smith at Far West, Missouri. Daniel Ludlow, in his book A Companion to Your Study of the Doctrine and Covenants, cites Joseph Fielding Smith’s words from Church History and Modern Revelation, 2:85:
On April 17, 1838, the Prophet received a revelation for David W. Patten who had for some time been located in Missouri and with Elder Thomas B. Marsh was maintaining a steady influence amidst the opposition of disaffected brethren, including the three who had been appointed to preside, David Whitmer, William W. Phelps and John Whitmer. The Lord called upon Elder Patten to settle up his business as soon as possible, make a disposition of his merchandise, and prepare to take a mission the following spring, in company with others to preach the Gospel to all the world. . . Elder Patten obedient to this revelation took steps to meet this call which had come to him. Events were to develop, however, which would change the nature of his mission before the following spring could arrive.
And what was the nature of these “events” spoken of by Joseph Fielding Smith? David W. Patten died October 25, 1838, in the “battle of Crooked River.” He never lived to see the “next spring” as the revelation predicted. He went on no mission with eleven other men.
Why would the Lord command that Patten should prepare for a mission the next spring, which would take place in the company of eleven other men, if the Lord knew that he would not live to see that day? Is it not clear that here we have Joseph Smith, in the name of the Lord, giving instructions to a man to prepare for a mission, when in fact Smith did not know that Patten was going to die? How could he? This shows the human origin of Smith’s “revelation.” He did not know the future, and could not foresee what was going to happen to Patten.
But the true God knew what was going to happen. That is why, in fact, the true God of the Bible is able to mock the idols of the peoples in Isaiah 40 through 48 more than once he challenges these false gods to predict the future, but they cannot. Any predictions they make, any commands they may give, can be overthrown by something as simple as a musket ball fired by a fleeing man near the Crooked River.
I have encountered three common responses from LDS people to this prophecy and its failure. The first runs like this: “All blessings are based upon obedience and faithfulness. Patten must not have remained faithful to his calling, and as a result lost his blessing. See, even the second verse talks about people denying God’s name, and others being planted in their stead.” Folks who respond in this way obviously know little of the historical situation in which Patten died. Note the story from the Documentary History of the Church, pages 170-175: According to the DHC, a “mob” takes some Mormon brethren captive. “Captain” David W. Patten (who was also an apostle, by the way) is dispatched with about seventy-five men to catch the mob and rescue the prisoners. Early on the morning of Thursday, October 25, they approach the mob’s camp:
Fifteen of the company were detached from the main body while sixty continued their march till they arrived near the ford of Crooked river, (or creek) where they dismounted, tied their horses, and leaving four or five men to guard them, proceeded towards the ford, not knowing the location of the encampment. It was just as the dawning of light in the east, when they were marching quietly along the road, and near the top of the hill which descends to the river that the report of a gun was heard, and young Patrick O’Banion reeled out of the ranks and fell mortally wounded. Thus the work of death commenced, when Captain Patten ordered a charge and rushed down the hill on a fast trot, and when within about fifty yards of the camp formed a line. The mob formed a line under the bank of the river, below their tents. It was yet so dark that little could be seen by looking to the west, while the mob looking towards the dawning light, could see Patten and his men, when they fired a broadside, and three or four of the brethren fell. Captain Patten ordered the fire returned, which was instantly obeyed, to great disadvantage in the darkness which yet continued. The fire was repeated by the mob, and returned by Captain Patten’ s company, who gave the watchword “God and Liberty.” Captain Patten then ordered a charge, which was instantly obeyed. The parties immediately came in contact, with their swords, and the mob was soon put to flight, crossing the river at the ford and such places as they could get a chance. In the pursuit, one of the mob fled from behind a tree, wheeled, and shot Captain Patten, who instantly fell, mortally wounded, having received a large ball in his bowels.
I went with my brother Hyrum and Lyman Wight to meet the brethren on their return, near Log creek, where I saw Captain Patten in a most distressing condition. His wound was incurable.
Brother David Patten was a very worthy man, beloved by all good men who knew him. He was one of the Twelve Apostles, and died as he had lived, a man of God, and strong in the faith of a glorious resurrection, in a world where mobs will have no power or place. One of his last expressions to his wife was — “Whatever you do else, O! do not deny the faith . . .
Saturday, 27. — Brother Patten was buried this day at Far West, and before the funeral, I called at Brother Patten’s house, and while meditating on the scene before me in presence of his friends, I could not help pointing to his lifeless body and testifying, “There lies a man that has done just as he said he would — he has laid down his life for his friends.”
As can be seen, Patten died “strong in the faith” according to Joseph Smith himself. The mention of men denying God’s name and being removed from their bishoprics in verse 2 of Section 114 is not in any way in reference to Patten — rather, it is in reference to a situation that existed at the time in Far West where David Whitmer, John Whitmer, and William W. Phelps were “causing trouble” and had been removed from the local presidency. See Elder George Q. Cannon’s narration of these events in his Life of Joseph Smith the Prophet, pp. 221-224.
The most common defense raised is that Patten did indeed serve a mission — but his mission was in the “spirit world” where he went after he died. But surely you can see that this is not what the “revelation” says at all. There are far too many objections to this understanding. First, did the eleven other men also die and go to the “spirit world” with Patten? Second, what is “spring” in the spirit world? Are there seasons there? Third, the revelation says that he would “testify of my name and bear glad tidings unto all the world,” not to the spirit world. This revelation clearly speaks of an earthly mission to take place in the spring of 1839, not a spiritual mission to take place in the fall of 1838.
Finally, a not very common, but plausible defense is this: This is not really a prophecy of a future event, but simply a command to David Patten to be prepared to go on a mission. It is not explicitly stated that he was going to go on the mission at all, rather he was simply to be prepared to do so. You can probably see immediately, Elder Hahn, how this perspective can create a route of escape for Joseph Smith by stretching the revelation to the breaking point so as to avoid his obvious error. It is true that the spring mission itself is not specifically prophesied; however, the spring mission is given as the reason why Patten was to settle up his business and make a disposition of his merchandise. There is not even a hint that this was just a “theoretical” mission, or simply a “testing” of Patten’s obedience. None of this comes from the text itself. It is interesting to note with reference to this the fact that according to the DHC 3:23, another revelation was received by Smith on the same day as Section 114, though this revelation is not a part of the D & C. It reads:
Verily thus saith the Lord, let my servant Brigham Young go unto the place which he has bought, on Mill Creek, and there provide for his family until an effectual door is opened for the support of his family, until I shall command him to go hence, and not to leave his family until they are amply provided for. Amen.
Note that both of these “revelations” were giving specific directions for specific men to do specific things. There is nothing in the “revelation” for Brigham Young that would lead us to believe that he was “testing” him, nor is there anything in D & C 114 that would suggest that this was anything but a straightforward command to prepare for a mission that was supposed to take place the next spring, that being the spring of 1839. Smith had no way of knowing Patten would not live that long — Patten was only about thirty-eight years of age. Also, the fact that he says that this mission would be conducted “in the company with others, even twelve including himself” indicates that Smith was laying out the specifics of how the mission would be run. If this is really the “word of the Lord” as Smith claims, why would God speak in this way? Why would God describe the specifics of a mission that would never take place?
So here you have two prophecies, Elder Hahn. Remember at the outset that I said that it is not really my duty to have to prove them wrong, but, since you claim Smith was a prophet, it is really your duty to prove them right! Can you do so? Can you show me how D & C 84:1-5 has come to pass within the time frames contained within the revelation itself? Can you show me how D & C 114 came to pass within the time frame provided again within the text itself? If not in either case, you have to admit that you cannot call Joseph Smith a true prophet in the biblical sense of the word.
Now before I move on to a few other issues, I want to make some brief comments in reply to a common objection that is raised to the criticism of Joseph Smith on the basis of prophecies such as those given above and others. It normally follows along this line: We allege that Smith gave false prophecies because what he said didn’t come to pass, but biblical prophets did the same thing. The classic example? Jonah. According to the Bible, Jonah was commanded to “go to Ninevah, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me” (Jonah 1:2). Of course, Jonah ran the other way. After his run-in with a rather large-size fish, God repeated His command: “Arise, go unto Ninevah, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee” (Jonah 3:2). Unfortunately, we are not given an exact recitation of what the Lord told Jonah to say — all we get is a very brief quotation from Jonah 3:4: “Yet forty days, and Ninevah shall be overthrown.” Not a very moving message, it would seem. But, according to the Bible, the people of Ninevah were convicted — so much so that it is said that they “believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.” The king gave forth a decree and said, “Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?” Obviously, somehow, the people knew that God was angry at them for their sin, though we don’t find any mention of sin in Jonah’s one-line message (which seems to indicate that there was more to what he said than just the proclamation of the destruction of Ninevah).
So, though Jonah had said that Ninevah was going to be destroyed in forty days, it wasn’t. The people repented of their sins (though we know historically that this repentance didn’t last long — they went back to their evil ways and were destroyed as a result), and God spared the city, at least temporarily. So poor Jonah is found in chapter 4 sitting on the hillside waiting to see God destroy the wicked capital of the enemy of his people, the Assyrians. When it doesn’t happen he is all upset, and says, in the modern vernacular, “I knew it, I knew it, I knew it! It’s just like I said back in Tarshish — I knew you were a God of mercy and kindness, that you are slow to anger, and that you are willing to hold back your punishment of man. I knew it all along” (Jonah 4:2). In fact, he is so upset, he wants to die (4:3). So God shows him a great object lesson with the gourd in chapter 4 and closes with a strong rebuke of Jonah’s self-centeredness and Israel’s lack of concern for other nations. But, all of that aside, is not Jonah technically a false prophet? He said Ninevah would be overthrown in forty days, and it wasn’t. Christians accept Jonah’s book as part of the Bible, so why accuse Joseph Smith as being a “false prophet” when we don’t do the same thing for Jonah’?
A principle of God’s dealing with men is brought out by the prophet Jeremiah in the eighteenth chapter of his prophecy, verses 7-10:
At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good with which I said I would benefit them.
As creatures, we are locked in time, and only see things as they come to pass. The eternal God of the Bible, not being limited by time, is working out His purpose and decree in the world. From our viewpoint, we hear God proclaiming destruction upon a nation for its wickedness. The people repent of their sin and cry to God for mercy. The only way they could possibly think this would do any good is if God is able to be merciful, to withdraw the sentence of death. Now, we know that from God’s perspective, that was His will all along — the decree of judgment was designed specifically to bring about repentance — but the people didn’t know that. In the same way, God decreed judgment on Judah, and, though she had so many times cried to God for deliverance in the past and had received mercy, this time she did not, and was destroyed in 586 B.C. To us it looks just like it is found in Jeremiah — if people will repent, mercy will be found. If people will be disobedient, judgment will be found.
Jonah’s message to the city of Ninevah was directly connected with their sin. It was a message of judgment upon sin. The specific event proclaimed by Jonah was a destruction that was due to sin. The men repented of their sin. God was merciful and did not destroy them. Does this make Jonah a false prophet?
No, it doesn’t. Remember that a false prophet is one who speaks a word in the name of the Lord that God did not command him to speak. God commanded Jonah to say what he did for a specific purpose (Deuteronomy 18:20). Jonah’s message was one relevant to sin and judgment, and the true God of Israel is a God of mercy and compassion. If we were to say that a message of judgment cannot possibly in any way be rescinded, then we would have no hope, for the Bible teaches that “the soul who sins shall die” (Ezekiel 18:4). If any sinner receives eternal life, then God has lied. We both realize that this is not the case and are thankful that God can have mercy, too. Jonah knew that God was a merciful God, and became furious when God proved himself as merciful to Gentiles as He had been so often to the Jews.
But when we turn to the prophecies of Joseph Smith, particularly the two we examined above, do we find the same situation? Is Smith speaking of sin and judgment? No, he is not. The events he prophesied are not acts of judgment upon sinful men. They are specific occurrences — in the case of D & C 84:1-5, the building of a temple, in D & C 114, the performance of a mission. There is no relationship between Smith’s prophecies of events and Jonah’s proclamation of the destruction of Ninevah.
Joseph Smith and the Occult
Aside from the clear false prophecies in direct statements such as the above, and aside from the false teachings about God found in Smith’s sermons as seen previously, there is yet another set of historical facts that demonstrates that Joseph Smith was not led by the Holy Spirit of God as a prophet. This set of facts has to do with Smith’s lifelong involvement with the occult — magic, superstition, and the like. Let me refer to three points of information that will lay a foundation for my position.
Frazer’s Magazine of February 1873, (pp. 229-230), carried an account of a court action that took place in March of 1826. The defendant was Joseph Smith, Jr., The charge was “glass looking.” Here is what is found in Frazer’s Magazine on that date:
STATE OF NEW YORK v. JOSEPH SMITH.
Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an imposter.
Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826. Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed by Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasure in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them. That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business.
Josiah Stowel sworn: says that prisoner had been at his house something like five months; had been employed by him to work on farm part of time; that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes; once to tell him about money buried in Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania, once for gold on Monument Hill, and once for a salt spring; and that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and did possess the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone; that he found the (word illegible) at Bend and Monument Hill as prisoner represented it; that prisoner had looked through said stone for Deacon Attleton for a mine, did not exactly find it, but got a p (word unfinished) of ore which resembled gold, he thinks; that prisoner had told by means of this stone where a Mr. Bacon had buried money; that he and prisoner had been in search of it; that prisoner had said it was in a certain root of a stump five feet from surface of the earth, and with it would find a tail feather; that said Stowel and prisoner thereupon commenced digging, found a tail feather, but money was gone; that he supposed the money moved down. That prisoner did offer his services; that he never deceived him; that prisoner looked through stone and described Josiah Stowel’s house and outhouses, while at Palmyra at Simpson Stowel’s, correctly; that he had told about a painted tree, with a man’s head painted upon it, but means of said stone. That he had been in company with prisoner digging for gold, and had the most implicit faith in prisoner’s skill.
Arad Stowel sworn: says that he went to see whether prisoner could convince him that he possessed the skill he professed to have, upon which prisoner laid a book upon a white cloth, and proposed looking through another stone which was white and transparent, hold the stone to a candle, turn his head to book, and read. The deception appeared so palpable that witness went off disgusted.
McMaster sworn: says he went with Arad Stowel, and likewise came away disgusted. Prisoner pretended to him that he could discover objects at a distance by holding his white stone to the sun or candle; that prisoner rather declined looking into a hat at his dark coloured stone, as he said it hurt his eyes.
Jonathan Thompson says that prisoner was requested to look for chest of money; did look, and pretended to know where it was; and prisoner, Thompson, and Yeomans went in search of it; that Smith arrived at spot first; was at night; that Smith looked in hat while there, and when very dark, and told how the chest was situated. After digging several feet, struck upon something sounding like a board or plank. Prisoner would not look again, pretending that he was alarmed on account of the circumstances relating to the trunk being buried, [which], came all fresh to his mind. That the last time he looked he discovered distinctly the two Indians who buried the trunk, that a quarrel ensued between them, and that one of said Indians was killed by the other, and thrown into the hole beside the trunk, to guard it, as he supposed. Thompson says that he believes in the prisoner’s professed skill; that the board which he struck his spade upon was probably the chest, but on account of an enchantment the trunk kept settling away from under them when digging; that notwithstanding they continued constantly removing the dirt, yet the trunk kept about the same distance from them. Says prisoner said that it appeared to him that salt might be found at Bainbridge, and that he is certain that prisoner can divine things by means of said stone. That as evidence of the fact prisoner looked into his hat to tell him about some money witness lost sixteen years ago, and that he described the man that witness supposed had taken it, and the disposition of the money:
And therefore the Court find[s] the Defendant guilty.
Costs: Warrants, 19 c. Complaint upon oath, 25 1/2 c. Seven witnesses, 871/2 c. Recongnisances, 25 c. Mittimus, 10 c. Recongnisances of witnesses, 75 c. Suboena, 18 c. — $2.68
This account was referred to in Fawn Brodie’ s famous work No Man Knows My History. Mormon leaders, up until the early 1970s, were quick to deny the authenticity of the Frazer’s account. Mormon Apostle John Widtsoe said, “There is no existing proof that such a trial was ever held” (Joseph Smith Seeker after Truth, p. 78) and Dr. Hugh Nibley wrote in his book The Myth Makers that “. . . if this court record is authentic it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith” and that if the record were indeed authentic it would be “the most devastating blow to Smith ever delivered” (p. 142). And Mormon scholar Francis Kirkham wrote, “If any evidence had been in existence that Joseph Smith had used a seer stone for fraud and deception, and especially had he made this confession in a court of law as early as 1826, four years before the Book of Mormon was printed, and this confession was in a court record, it would have been impossible for him to have organized the restored Church” (A New Witness for Christ in America, Vol. I, p. 387).
But guess who discovered the 1826 trial bill in the basement of the county jail in Norwich, New York, in 1971? Yes, Reverend Wesley Walters. The trial bill was found among many other such bills from 1826. Here is what it looks like:
Note that it says,
same [i.e. The People]
vs.
Joseph Smith
The Glass Looker
March 20, 1826
Misdemeanor
To my fees in examination of the above cause 2.68
Further documents have been found since that time that substantiate this historical event — Smith was examined with reference to “glass looking” in March of 1826. Later study caused Wesley Walters to view this incident not as a full-blown trial, but as what we might call a “pretrial hearing” that would have resulted in a later full trial had Joseph Smith not taken what Joel K. Noble called “leg bail” (i.e., he fled the area). Walters pointed out that even Joseph Smith called a pre-trial hearing a “trial” in his 1843 journal (An American Prophet’s Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith, ed. Scott H. Faulring, pp. 432 — 33), so there is no need to quibble over terminology. The point is that Smith was actively involved in abominable practices and ran afoul of the law in the process. Think about what this means, Elder Hahn. According to Joseph Smith’s story in the Pearl of Great Price, this examination took place six years after Joseph’s supposed vision of God the Father and Jesus Christ; and it takes place right in the middle of the period of time when Smith is supposedly meeting with the angel Moroni each September twenty-first. What is he doing “glass looking” and digging for buried treasure when God is supposedly preparing him to be a prophet? “Glass looking” is very similar to modern occultic practices such as using a crystal ball — “New Agers” would love it! Is this a proper activity for a “prophet”?
“Well,” someone might say, “Smith could have repented of this kind of activity later on. It does not automatically disqualify him as a prophet.” But do we have evidence that he repented of his involvement in the occult? No, but we do have evidence that he continued his involvement. One such piece of evidence is to be found in comparing the above trial account, our knowledge of the common magical folklore of the day, and the Book of Mormon. Remember that Josiah Stowell and Jonathan Thompson, in their sworn testimony to the court, had spoken of the buried treasure “slipping away” or “going down” when they got close to it. This was a common belief of the day — that buried treasure that was protected by a curse or a spell would slip down into the earth so that it could not be recovered except by those who knew how to get around the magic spell. It is fascinating to note that this same kind of magic belief is to be found in the Book of Mormon! Note the following passages:
And these Gadianton robbers, who were among the Lamanites, did infest the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof began to hide up their treasures in the earth; and they became slippery, because the Lord had cursed the land, that they could not hold them, nor retain them again. (Mormon 1:18)
And behold, if a man hide up a treasure in the earth, and the Lord shall say Let it be accursed, because of the iniquity of him who hath hid it up — behold, it shall be accursed. And if the Lord shall say — Be thou accursed, that no man shall find thee from this time henceforth and forever — behold, no man getteth it henceforth and forever. (Helaman 12:18 — 19)
Behold, we lay a tool here and on the morrow it is gone; and behold, our swords are taken from us in the day we have sought them for battle. Yea, we have hid up our treasures and they have slipped away from us, because of the curse of the land. O that we had repented in the day that the word of the Lord came unto us: for behold the land is cursed, and we cannot hold them. (Helaman 13:34-36)
So we have Joseph Smith examined for “glass looking” in March of 1826; in the Book of Mormon, we find more evidence of his belief in the same magical practices found in the testimony given at his trial. Then, by comparing changes made in the revelations contained in the 1833 Book of Commandments and the same revelations in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, we can find further evidence of Smith’s continuing fascination with the occult. Note first verse 3 of Section 76 of the 1833 Book of Commandments (emphasis made to point out changes):
O remember, these words and keep my commandments. Remember this is your gift. Now this is not all, for you have another gift, which is the gift of working with the rod: behold it has told you things: behold there is no other power save God, that can cause this rod of nature, to work in your hands, for it is the work of God; and therefore whatsoever you shall ask me to tell you by that means, that will I grant unto you, that you shall know.
The modern D & C contains this revelation as Section 8, verses 5 — 9. The date of this revelation is given as April, 1829, in the 1833 Book of Commandments, in the 1835 D & C, and in the modern edition. The 1835 D & C contained this revelation as Section 34, but changed the wording:
O remember these words, and keep my commandments. — Remember this is your gift. Now this is not all thy gift; for you have another gift, which is the gift ofAaron: behold it has told you many things: behold there is no other power save the power of God that can cause this gift of Aaron to be with you; therefore, doubt not, for it is the gift of God, and you shall hold it in your hands, and do marvelous works; and no power shall be able to take it away out of your hands; for it is the work of God. And therefore, whatsoever you shall ask me to tell you by that means, that will I grant unto you and you shall have knowledge concerning it.
Originally in this revelation to Oliver Cowdery, Smith spoke of the “rod of nature.” Supposedly, Cowdery’s ability to “work the rod” (as in a dowsing rod, a common magical practice of the day) was from God and was an avenue of revelation (“whatsoever you shall ask me to tell you by that means, that will I grant unto you, and you shall know”). However, sometime between the original publication of this revelation and the printing of the 1835 D & C, Smith decided it would be best to “edit” this revelation, and in so doing he not only expanded it a good deal (as you can see above), but he changed the obvious “working with the rod” to the less obvious “gift of Aaron.” Now, he is still referring to the “witching rod” of common occultic practice — the dowsing rod was also called the “rod of Aaron” by some practitioners. Modern Mormons might be tempted to think that he is here referring to the Aaronic priesthood; however, it must be remembered that this revelation is dated April 1829, and Joseph Smith did not allegedly receive the priesthood until May 15, 1829. If Smith were trying to “smuggle” the priesthood into an earlier revelation, he got his dates mixed up in the process. More likely, he is using a less blatant (and more religious) name for the practice of using the dowsing rod.
In passing I would like to point out that the idea that Joseph “edited” his revelations to fit his evolving theology is founded on numerous examples of his doing just that. As David Whitmer pointed out clearly in his book An Address to All Believers in Christ, Smith had developed the concept of the “priesthood” after the founding of the Church in 1830. The modern Section 27 of the D & C has had over 400 words added or deleted, nearly all of which were relevant to the priesthood. No indication is made in the introduction that this has taken place. It is still indicated that this revelation was given in August of 1830, when, in fact, barely six verses of the eighteen are to be found in the original version.
Aside from all of this, we see that after the founding of the LDS Church, even as late as 1833, Joseph sees no problem with a revelation that speaks of a “rod of nature” and in 1835 only changes the name to the “gift of Aaron” while still, in all probability, retaining the same concept of the dowsing rod. Joseph and his close companions (such as Oliver Cowdery) are still deeply influenced by magic beliefs, and there is no sign of repentance from this practice.
But what about Joseph’s later life? Is there any indication that Joseph continued in these kinds of activities? There certainly is. Below I am providing you with another photocopy, this time of a small item that Joseph Smith owned. The copy gives you the front (right) and back (left) of the piece:
Mormon scholar LaMar C. Berret stated that the piece was in Joseph Smith’s pocket the day he died (The Wilford Wood Collection, 1972, Vol. l, p. 173). Charles Bidamon stated that Emma Smith “prized this piece (the one shown above) very highly on account of its being one of the prophet’s intimate possessions” (Charles E. Bidamon Affidavit, Wood Collection, #7-J-b-2 l). The same affidavit also stated, “I certify that I have many times heard her say, when being interviewed, and showing the piece. That it was in the Prophet’s pocket when he was martyred at Carthage, Ill.”
For many years people were not aware of its true nature, nor its significance. Then in 1974 Dr. Reed Durham of the Mormon Historical Association discovered the actual identity of the item. He discovered that it is actually a “Jupiter talisman,” an occultic item that when properly invoked was supposed to gain its possessor “riches, and favor, and power, and love and peace,” and further that the bearer of this object would “obtain the power of stimulating anyone to offer his love to the possessor . . . whether from a friend, brother, relative, or even any female” (speech before the Mormon History Association on April 20, 1974, from Mormon Miscellaneous, published by David C. Martin, Vol. l, no. l, October 1975, p. 15). Talismanic magic is a very common aspect of the occult and was very popular in the folklore and superstition of upstate New York at the beginning of the nineteenth century.
If you would like confirmation of Dr. Durham’s identification, then drop by just about any secular bookstore, find the “occult” section, and look for a book entitled The Magus: A Complete System of Occult Philosophy by Francis Barrett, published by Citadel Press, and look on pages 175 and 142. I have the book in my library if you’d like to stop by and take a look at it.
The 1826 examination for “glass looking”; the Book of Mormon talking about treasures becoming “slippery”; sections of the Book of Commandments and Doctrine and Covenants either containing magic practices or changed to hide them; and, at the very end of his life, Smith is still owner of a “magic talisman.” What does the Bible say about all of this? God is very clear:
When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who maketh his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LoRD: and because of these abominations the LoRD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12)
Joseph Smith’s magic practices were an abomination to God, and no true prophet of God would ever be involved in them. In Acts 19:19 we see that those who truly accepted Christ as their Savior repudiated their connections with the occult, and destroyed all the paraphernalia they owned that had anything to do with it. Yet Joseph Smith, even after supposedly meeting God the Father and Jesus Christ in 1820, continued to practice magic and sorcery.
Elder Hahn, we are told to examine those who claim to be prophets. If he gives a false prophecy, or if he prophesies in the name of another God, he is a false prophet. Joseph Smith not only gave false prophecies, and prophesied in the name of a false god, as we saw above, but he willfully rejected the Lord’s command to abstain from any sort of sorcery or magic or occultism. The Holy Spirit of God would never give someone a testimony that Joseph Smith was a true prophet — only one of the spirits Joseph Smith called on and used in his occultic practices would do that.
With your permission, I will send this letter out and follow it up with another letter on the Book of Mormon and the results of my research into that document. I will also add a few comments on the Book of Abraham as well, though that is quite a topic in and of itself! I believe that you have my number, and I’d like to mention that the vast majority of the sources I’ve cited are in my library, or I know how to track them down. Again, I challenge you to look into these things for yourself. My door is open to you.
Truly yours,
James White
Return to Table of Contents –––> Next Chapter
Letters To A Mormon Elder is available on Amazon.