Was the Book of Mormon Buried with King Follett?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Was the Book of Mormon Buried with King Follett? S U N S T 0 N E Moving Gracefully Toward Godhood WAS THE BOOK OF MORMON BURIED WITH KING FOLLETT? By J. Frederic Voros, Jr. SOTERIOLOGY IS THE THEOLOGY OF SALVATION AND, IN ITS To many Mormons, the Fall, redemption, mercy, and grace are narrow sense, the study of how the atonement of Jesus Christ at best mysteries, and at worst "protestant," a distinctly pejorative works. Although soteriology has historically been a theological term in popular Mormon parlance. For them, Paul’s writings are battleground, Mormons have shown only passing interest in it. dead letters: complex, probably mistranslated, best left alone. The But recently, a controversy has been quietly brewing within Book of Mormon fares a little better, but it too is largely a sealed Mormonism that is distinctly soteriological, in the larger sense of book. The occasional sacrament meeting Book of Mormon quota- the word. Opinion divides roughly into two camps, the tion generally falls into one of three catagories: admonitions to redemptive view and the progressive view. obedience, patriotic encomiums to America as the promised land, The redemptive view tends to be theocentric: it emphasizes and the annual Mother’s Day quotation from thc stripling war- the Fall, rebirth, and redemption by grace. It is skeptical of riors. Its more doctrinal passages are sddom cited. human effort and insists upon God’s active role in the salvation Many scholars of Mormonism have also tended to ignore the process. Its defenders look primarily to Paul’s letters and the Book Book of Mormon. For example, Sterling McMurrin’s book pur- of Mormon for support. porting to explicate the theological foundations of the Mormon The progressive view tends to be anthropocentric: without religion contains thirty-two references to specifically Mormon denying the supernatural, it focuses primarily on the personal sources, of which only three are to the Book of Mormon.’ This progress of the individual. It is also progressive in the sense that omission is explainable in part by the fact that few past or present it emphasizes the goodness of human nature, human potential, Mormon authorities have cited the book for its doctrine, and in and human effort; it is skeptical, of rdiance on God and insists part perhaps by McMurrin’s stated belief that the Book of Mor- that man can earn salvation. Its defenders look primarily to the mon is not a revealed text. King Follett discourse for support. Some scholarly proponents of progressive Mormonism have Most rank and file members of the Church probably do not not been content merely to ignore the book, but have sought to hold a clear view on the subject. My casual observation is that eclipse it by superimposing an evolutionary model on Joseph’s many assume that "Mormons don’t bdieve in grace" and put a soteriological views. According to this model, the Book of Mor- high premium on "earning" or "being worthy off exaltation-in mon is the product of Joseph’s early thought, shaped by the short, "making it." But they also struggle with fedings of their own evangelical and revivalist influences in early nineteenth century unworthiness and sense that unless Christ intervenes decisivdy New England. The King Follett discourse then becomes a product they have no hope. of Joseph’s more mature thought-in effect, a revision of his However, Mormon meetings generally reflect little of this earlier and less original views, almost as if Joseph had let fly a tub ambivalence. There, the hegemony of the progressive view seems of rock on the doctrine of Nephi and Jacob, and then interred it nearly complete. Judging from public statements, if the average with the body of Eider Follett. Mormon is clear on anything, it is that he is a child of God, who has sent him to parents kind and dear, who will teach him all that he must do to live with God someday. In fact, "I Am a Child of The Book of Mormon is indeed replete with traditional God" virtually circumscribes our doctrinal discourse in the Christian concepts such as the Fall, rebirth, and redemption by Church, which is then reduced to an attempt to inculcate moral grace. It teaches that because of the Fall of Adam, human nature precepts, the "all that I must do." is "carnal, sensual, and devilish" (Alma 42:10), and man himsdf "an enemy to God" (Mosiah 3:18). Mortals are caught in a J. FREDERIC VOROS, JR., is a lawyer and writer living in Salt Lake worthless and fallen state (Mosiah 4:5; see also 4:11). This City. natural or fallen state is typified by willful stir-interest and the MARCH 1987 PAGE 15 S U N S T 0 N E proclivity to gratify one’s own appetites and ego. followers of Christ should (and will) perform many good works, Unlike Calvinism, which teaches that the human will is so it is still his grace, not their works, that saves them. depraved it cannot even desire God, the Book of Mormon stresses In keeping with the doctrine of grace, the Book of Mormon free will: though in a fallen state, the individual can at least seek specifically teaches that salvation cannot be earned. King Benja-" and accept God’s saving power. But free will alone provides no min describes even the most diligent disciples as "unprofitable escape from the Fall, since mortals tend to exercise their freedom servants" (Mosiah 2: 21). Again, some attempt to circumvent grace to satisfy their own wills. Left alone, and bearing the seeds of by distinguishing between salvation, which according to their spiritual as well as temporal death, man, like ripe fruit, has a explanation comes by grace, and exaltation, which must be earned. tendency to spoil, and, taught Alma, "must unavoidably perish" This distinction leaves unexplained how people whose supreme (Alma 34:9). effort cannot earn the lesser blessing can possibly earn the greater. Jacob’s assessment is stark: free or not, had there been no Nor does Moroni seem to observe this distinction when he speaks atonement, "our spirits must have become like unto [the devil], of being "by the grace of God . perfecl! in Christ" (Moro. and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the 10:32-33; emphasis added). presence of our God" (2 Ne. 9:9). Thus, while human beings are, The concept of grace is elucidated by other passages which as some Mormons are fond of repeating, "gods in embryo" in the explain that a person is saved, not by his own merits, but by the sense that they are the spirit offspring of a divine being, the Book merits of Christ. We read that since man had fallen he could not of Mormon teaches that humans are also devils in embryo in the merit anything himself’ (Alma 22:14); consequently, "no flesh.. sense that, without a savior, they would naturally devolve into ¯.. can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, diabolical, not divine, beings. mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah" (2 Ne. 2:8). In addition to asserting that men inherit the effects of the Fall, Although the Book of Mormon does refer repeatedly to a the Book of Mormon holds that all humans also commit personal judgment in which men are judged by their works, such references sin, so that "by the law no flesh is justified;" in fact, "by the law never purport to establish a scheme of salvation based on human men are cut off’ from happiness (2 Ne. 2:5). merit. They can best be understood as prophetic exhortations to -[he Book of Mormon explains how humans are rescued from avoid that judgment by exercising faith in Christ. Your choice, in this predicament. Alma the Younger states that "all mankind... other words, is to be judged yourself, on your own merit, or to must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal allow Christ to be judged in your stead, in which case you are and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of judged on his merit. Thus Alma warns that all men shall reap the God, becoming his sons and daughters ..." (Mosiah 27:25). So, "reward of their works.., if they have been :righteous they shall revising the metaphor, the natural man is less like a god in reap the salvation of their souls, according to the power and embryo than an ovum whose development will inevitably be deliverance of Jesus Christ" (Alma 9:28, emphasis added; see also truncated unless it is fertilized by "holy seed;" it is only the D&C 45:3-5). resulting zygote, the son or daughter of God, whose natural end Third Nephi records Christ himself stating that men will stand is godhood. before him to be judged of their works, where ihe, Christ, will hold This redemption comes "in and through the Holy Messiah" guiltless those who have repented, been baptized, and endured to who "offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the the end (3 Ne. 27:16). He will hold the repentant guiltless because law, unto all those who have a broken heart and contrite spirit" he will take upon himself their transgressions; they are redeemed, (2 Ne. 2:6-7). The gateway to salvation is "repentance and in Lehi’s words, "because of the righteousness of [their] redeemer" baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by (2 Ne. 2:3). This is the gospel: our sinfulness imputed to him, his fire and by the Holy Ghost." These acts are "the commandments righteousness imputed to us.
Recommended publications
  • Joseph Smith and the Plurality of Worlds Idea
    oseph Smith and the . Plurality of Worlds Idea Robert Paul JOSEPH SMITH WAS NOT THE FIRST PERSON to use the plurality of worlds concept. In the early seventeenth century, natural philosophers began speculating on the idea of multiple world systems. By the eighteenth century, Protestant evangelicals absorbed the idea into their Natural Theology. For them nature contained clear and compelling evidence of God's existence, sub- stantiating their own Christian beliefs and countering religious skepticism (Westfall 1958; Hovenkamp 1978). Joseph used the concept quite differently, though never defensively. Theologically he related man, God, and the uni- verse ; religiously, his message was millenarian and directed toward eschatologi- cal issues. On careful examination, these complex issues suggest that the en- vironmental thesis — the view that one's cultural matrix is entirely sufficient to account for the emergence of a coherent set of ideas or conventions — does not provide a wholly adequate explanation of the style and structure of restora- tionist pluralism. In addition to examining the astronomical pluralism in Joseph's writings, this essay will assess the merits of the environmental thesis without suggesting that Joseph Smith as a religious leader must always be seen either as a prophet or as a charlatan, a dichotomy which has prevented useful and productive understanding of an enigmatic character. For purposes of this study, it is per- fectly consistent with Joseph's own experiences and writings to see him as an emerging prophet, as one who was as much a part of the process of religious ROBERT PAUL is an associate professor of the history of science and of computer science at Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa.
    [Show full text]
  • Elohim and Jehovah in Mormonism and the Bible
    Elohim and Jehovah in Mormonism and the Bible Boyd Kirkland urrently, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints defines the CGodhead as consisting of three separate and distinct personages or Gods: Elohim, or God the Father; Jehovah, or Jesus Christ, the Son of God both in the spirit and in the flesh; and the Holy Ghost. The Father and the Son have physical, resurrected bodies of flesh and bone, but the Holy Ghost is a spirit personage. Jesus' title of Jehovah reflects his pre-existent role as God of the Old Testament. These definitions took official form in "The Father and the Son: A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Twelve" (1916) as the culmination of five major stages of theological development in Church history (Kirkland 1984): 1. Joseph Smith, Mormonism's founder, originally spoke and wrote about God in terms practically indistinguishable from then-current protestant the- ology. He used the roles, personalities, and titles of the Father and the Son interchangeably in a manner implying that he believed in only one God who manifested himself as three persons. The Book of Mormon, revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants prior to 1835, and Smith's 1832 account of his First Vision all reflect "trinitarian" perceptions. He did not use the title Elohim at all in this early stage and used Jehovah only rarely as the name of the "one" God. 2. The 1835 Lectures on Faith and Smith's official 1838 account of his First Vision both emphasized the complete separateness of the Father and the Son.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter from David Whitmer to Nathan West Concerning Caldwell County, Missouri, Property Once Owned by King Follett
    Scott H. Faulring: David Whitmer Letter 127 Letter from David Whitmer to Nathan West Concerning Caldwell County, Missouri, Property Once Owned by King Follett Scott H. Faulring Filed away in the David Whitmer Collection at the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS) Archives is an inconspicuous, handwritten copy of a November 1849 letter from David Whitmer to Nathan A. West.1 In this carefully worded letter, Whitmer responded to West’s inquiry about a legal title to land once owned by the late Mormon elder King Follett.2 One senses from reading the letter that although David was trying to be helpful to his friend, he wanted to distance himself legally from liability in a decade-old property question. This letter is historically significant and interesting for a variety of rea- sons. First, there are few surviving letters from David Whitmer written dur- ing the first ten to fifteen years after he separated himself from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.3 Second, this retained copy, and most probably the dispatched original, was handwritten by Oliver Cowdery—just a little more than three months before he died. As such, it is the last-known handwriting of Mormonism’s Second Elder.4 Third, the letter’s cautious, legalistic wording is not from the mind of David Whitmer but was composed by Oliver Cowdery, the lawyer. As such, it is the only example of his legal writing from his fourteen-month stay in Richmond.5 Fourth, the items dis- cussed in the letter evidence the confused state of affairs existing in Far West, Missouri, at the time the Latter-day Saints were forced to flee the state in 1839.6 SCOTT H.
    [Show full text]
  • Through the Lens of A
    How well does the depiction of God and humanity inJoseph SmithS King Follett Discourse and Lorenzo SnowSfamous "coupletnfit with traditional Christian views of Christ and the Atonement- or even with thosefound in the Book of Mormon? Must Latter-day Saints choose between them? THEOLOGY AND CHRISTOLOGY THROUGHTHE LENS OF A By L. Rex Sears HEN BYU RELIGION PROFESSOR STEPHEN E. and may be responding by moving the Church away from its Robinson collaborated with an evangelical King Follett heritage. Christian to write How Wide the Divide?, he de- voted his contributions to minimizing Mormon departures "THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF TRUTH from more orthodox forms of ~hristianit~.'Judging from AND OF THE GOSPEL" Robinson's position and influence, we have come a long way from our nineteenth-century heritage of glorylng in alienation N THE KING Follett Discourse he delivered shortly before from mainstream Christianity For my part, I suspect that we his death, Joseph Smith taught the Saints, as "the first have never fully appreciated how wide the divide really is-or I principle of truth and of the Gospel," that God "once was might be, if we took our founding prophet at his word. If ac- a man like one of us and that God Himself, the Father of us all, cepted, Joseph Smith's later teachings have implications, unap- once dwelled on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did preciated perhaps by the Prophet himself, which could place in the flesh and like "God Himself who sits enthroned in us even further from the biblical Christian tradition than the yonder heavens is a Man like unto one of yourselves-that is Mormon firebrands of the nineteenth century recognized.
    [Show full text]
  • The King Follett Discourse
    The King Follett Discourse The Being and Kind of Being God Is; The Immortality of the Intelligence of Man Joseph Smith April 7, 1844 History of the Church, 6:302-317 President Joseph Smith delivered the following discourse before about twenty thousand Saints at the April General Conference of the Church, 1844, being the funeral sermon of Elder King Follett. Reported by Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Thomas Bullock and William Clayton. Beloved Saints, I will call the attention of this congregation while I address you on the subject of the dead. The decease of our beloved brother, Elder King Follett, who was crushed in a well by the falling of a tub of rock, has more immediately led me to that subject. I have been requested to speak by his friends and relatives, but inasmuch as there are a great many in this congregation who live in this city as well as elsewhere, who have lost friends, I feel disposed to speak on the subject in general, and offer you my ideas, so far as I have ability, and so far as I shall be inspired by the Holy Spirit to dwell on this subject. I want your prayers and faith that I may have the instruction of Almighty God and the gift of the Holy Ghost, so that I may set forth things that are true and which can be easily comprehended by you, and that the testimony may carry conviction to your hearts and minds of the truth of what I shall say. Pray that the Lord may strengthen my lungs, stay the winds, and let the prayers of the Saints to heaven appear, that they may enter into the ears of the Lord of Sabbaoth, for the effectual prayers of the righteous avail much.
    [Show full text]
  • Becoming Like God? What Does the Bible Say About Humans' Divine
    Becoming Like God? One of the most common images in Western and Eastern religions alike is of God as a parent and of human beings as God’s children. Billions pray to God as their parent, invoke the brotherhood and sisterhood of all people to promote peace, and reach out to the weary and troubled out of deep conviction that each of God’s children has great worth. But people of different faiths understand the parent-child relationship between God and humans in significantly different ways. Some understand the phrase “child of God” as an honorary title reserved only for those who believe in God and accept His guidance as they might accept a father’s. Many see parent-child descriptions of God’s relationship to humanity as metaphors to express His love for His creations and their dependence on His sustenance and protection. Latter-day Saints see all people as children of God in a full and complete sense; they consider every person divine in origin, nature, and potential. Each has an eternal core and is “a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents.”1 Each possesses seeds of divinity and must choose whether to live in harmony or tension with that divinity. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people may “progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny.”2 Just as a child can develop the attributes of his or her parents over time, the divine nature that humans inherit can be developed to become like their Heavenly Father's. The desire to nurture the divinity in His children is one of God’s attributes that most inspires, motivates, and humbles members of the Church.
    [Show full text]
  • The Source of God's Authority: One Argument
    THE SOURCE OF GOD’S AUTHORITY: ONE ARGUMENT FOR AN UNAMBIGUOUS DOCTRINE OF PREEXISTENCE Roger Terry The famous couplet coined by Lorenzo Snow in 1840, “As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be,”1 rears its head every now and then, inspiring both awe and some confusion among rank-and-file Latter-day Saints while causing at least a degree of discomfort for Church leaders and spokespeople who are trying to make Mormonism more palatable for our mainstream Christian friends and critics. Some observers have even suggested that the Church is intentionally downplaying this doctrine.2 Nevertheless, the couplet found its way into the 2013 Melchizedek Priest- hood/Relief Society manual Teaching of Presidents of the Church: Lorenzo Snow, and this distinctive doctrine also appeared prominently in previous manuals containing the teachings of Brigham Young and Joseph Smith.3 1. In Eliza R. Snow Smith, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1884), 46; see also “The Grand Destiny of Man,” Deseret Evening News, Jul. 20, 1901, 22. 2. See, for instance, Armand Mauss, “Rethinking Retrenchment: Course Cor- rections in the Ongoing Campaign for Respectability,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 44, no. 4 (2011): 6–7. 3. See Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Lorenzo Snow (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2012), 83; Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1997), 30; Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2007), 40.
    [Show full text]
  • The King Follett Discourse: a Newly Amalgamated Text
    BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 18 Issue 2 Article 7 4-1-1978 The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text Stan Larson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Recommended Citation Larson, Stan (1978) "The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 18 : Iss. 2 , Article 7. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol18/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Larson: The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text the king follett discourse A newly amalgamated text stan larson the king follett discourse of 7 april 1844 perhaps the most significant sermon delivered by the prophet joseph smith was pre- served in manuscript form by thomas bullock william clayton willard richards and wilford woodruff 1 thomas bullocks account is the longest and there are in- dications that it was written down at the very time that joseph smith was speaking bullock was able to keep up as well as he did because he used a personal kind of shorthand with many ab- breviated words there are a few places where his pen ran out of ink and because he had to dip his pen he lost a few words as jo- seph continued speaking but picked up again a few phrases later for example in one place bullock recorded when we find to know how
    [Show full text]
  • The Eternal Progression Argument Against Mormonism
    Eleutheria Volume 3 Issue 1 Volume 3, Issue 1 Article 3 December 2014 The Eternal Progression Argument against Mormonism Jonathan R. Pruitt Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/eleu Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Pruitt, Jonathan R.. 2014. "The Eternal Progression Argument against Mormonism." Eleutheria 3, (1). https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/eleu/vol3/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Divinity at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Eleutheria by an authorized editor of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Eternal Progression Argument against Mormonism Abstract This paper argues that Mormon cosmology plus the Mormon view of the origin of human persons results in an undercutting defeater for Mormonism. The approach is modeled after Plantinga’s evolutionary argument against naturalism. The first step is ot show that Mormon cosmology is relevantly like naturalism. The second step is to show that the origin of human persons ins relevantly similar to naturalistic evolution so that it faces the same kind of defeaters as the conjunction of naturalism and naturalistic evolution. Keywords Epistemology, Mormonism, Apologetics Cover Page Footnote Pursing PhD in Theology from LUBTS This article is available in Eleutheria: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/eleu/vol3/iss1/3 Eleutheria 3:1 Fall (2014) 20-34 INTRODUCTION Alvin Plantinga has argued that “the conjunction of naturalism with the belief that we human beings have evolved in conformity with current evolutionary doctrine..
    [Show full text]
  • Lorenzo Snow's Couplet
    JETS 49/3 (September 2006) 549–68 LORENZO SNOW’S COUPLET: “AS MAN NOW IS, GOD ONCE WAS; AS GOD NOW IS, MAN MAY BE”: “NO FUNCTIONING PLACE IN PRESENT-DAY MORMON DOCTRINE?” A RESPONSE TO RICHARD MOUW ronald v. huggins* Man may become as God himself! Let those who disagree howl as they may! Robert L. Millet and Joseph Fielding McConkie1 i. richard mouw’s tabernacle apology During his appearance with Ravi Zacharias in the Mormon Tabernacle on November 14, 2004, Fuller Seminary President Richard Mouw apologized on behalf of evangelicals for “bearing false witness” against Mormons. When challenged about his remarks, Mouw sent out an e-mail identifying places where he felt evangelicals had misrepresented Mormon teaching. Among these was the claim that “Mormonism teaches that God was once a human being like us, and we can become gods just like God is now,”2 a belief, Mouw goes on to assure us, that has “no functioning place in present-day Mormon doctrine.” As anyone familiar with Mormonism will immediately recognize, Mouw’s words allude to the famous couplet coined by the fifth LDS Church President Lorenzo Snow: As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be.3 Is Mouw correct in saying that the teaching contained in this couplet no longer has any functioning place in present-day Mormonism? In trying to answer this question, we must begin by looking at where Snow’s couplet came from and why it caught on as an important summary of the Mormon doctrinal system. * Ronald Huggins is associate professor of historical and theological studies at Salt Lake Theo- logical Seminary, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Mormonism: a Very Short Introduction John G
    BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 48 | Issue 3 Article 18 7-2009 Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction John G. Turner Richard L. Bushman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Recommended Citation Turner, John G. and Bushman, Richard L. (2009) "Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 48 : Iss. 3 , Article 18. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol48/iss3/18 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Turner and Bushman: Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction Richard Lyman Bushman. Mormonism: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, !""# Reviewed by John G. Turner ombining history, theology, and contemporary observations, C Richard L. Bushman has cra$ed an engaging introduction to Mor- monism, aimed primarily at outsiders to Latter-day Saint traditions and related movements. Anticipating skeptical non-Mormon readers, Bushman centers his book on several fundamental questions, including “How can twenty-%rst-century Americans believe in a prophet who translated golden plates and claimed constant revelations?” and “How can a religion that runs against the grain of modern secularism evoke such strong loyalties?” (xiii). Bushman’s latest work may indeed be “very short,” but it simultane- ously provides eloquent and sophisticated answers to such questions. Although he discusses post-Manifesto polygamists and the movement that became the Community of Christ, he brings to the foreground the “church headquartered in Salt Lake City” (&').
    [Show full text]
  • JOSEPH SMITH and the FIRST VERSE of the BIBLE . . . Ronald V. Huggins
    JETS 46/1 (March 2003) 29–52 JOSEPH SMITH AND THE FIRST VERSE OF THE BIBLE ronald v. huggins* i. introduction Joseph Smith as the great prophet of the latter-day restoration of origi- nal Christianity often used his prophetic gift to correct or clarify the Bible. One of the most interesting texts that we find him returning to again and again during the course of his prophetic career is Genesis 1. In the present article we will be examining Joseph Smith’s differing treatments of one of the key verses in that chapter, the very first verse of the Bible. ii. genesis 1:1 in the joseph smith translation/book of moses On 26 March 1830, scarcely two months after the Book of Mormon arrived at Egbert B. Grandin’s bookstore, Joseph Smith was in hot pursuit of his second great revelational project, the “Inspired Version,” also called the Jo- seph Smith Translation (= jst). In many ways this second project was even more ambitious than the first. According to the Book of Mormon, the Bible had gone forth, “from the Jews in purity, unto the Gentiles,” but had after- ward been corrupted, so that “many plain and precious things” were taken from it (1 Nephi 13:25 and 28). So it now fell to Joseph as latter-day prophet to put things right again by restoring the Bible to its original purity. In a prophesy given in June 1830, which now appears in a part of Mormon Scrip- ture called the Pearl of Great Price Book of Moses (= Moses) God is presented as speaking directly to Moses about the future coming of one who would re- store the Scriptures.
    [Show full text]