Circle
Why do Mormons emphasize more the alleged prophet status of Joseph Smith himself than that of the alleged prophetic authenticity of the contents of the Book of Mormon as a book of divine teachings?
Profile photo for Ray Farmer
Ray Farmer
, Jealous of and Zealous for the Book of Mormon
Answered Mar 4
It is clear to the careful scholar that the theological systems of Joseph Smith and the the Book of Mormon are irreconcilable. Therefore, there are two approaches that a believer in the Book of Mormon must take.
The most common is that the Book of Mormon contains many human errors. Furthermore, the revelations in the Book of Mormon are incomplete. They promote the idea that the prophets in the Book of Mormon were writing with a considerable amount of ignorance regarding the fullness of the Gospel and early apostolic church fathers. Others will declare that, because of linguistics and ignorance of cultural considerations, clarifications by Living Oracles are required. Hence, this approach will value the words of Living Oracles over the plain and precious truths presented in the Book of Mormon. As Brigham Young stated, next to Living Oracles, the Book of Mormon and Bible mean nothing to him. Joseph S. agreed and the modern Church has confirmed by publication of that sentiment over and over to this very day.
Modern Prophet More important the Scripture
Living Oracles Even More Important Than Scriptures ___________________________________________________ Ezra Taft Benson We are admonished to “seek out of the best books words of wisdom” (D&C 88:118). Surely these books must include the scriptures. Alongside them must be the words of the Presidents of the Church. The Lord said of the President of the Church, “His word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth” (D&C 21:5). These books make up what has been referred to as “the Lord’s library”—namely the standard works and the various volumes that contain the words of the different Presidents of the Church. Of the latter volumes, that which would be of greatest importance to you would be the words of the current President of the Church, for his words are directed to our day and our needs. ( Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson , p.137-138) Wilford Woodruff I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living oracles and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: “You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.” When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, “Brother Brigham I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the written oracles and the written word of God.” Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: “There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day.” “And now,” said he, “when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the [p.23]writing in the books.” That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: “Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.” (Conference Report, October 1897, p.22)
https://emp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/quotes/Modern%20Prophet%20More%20important%20the%20Scripture.html
These are those who emphasize the Words of Joseph Smith over the Book of Mormon and reject the plain and precious parts restored in it when they conflict with the precepts taught by Living Oracles.
Another Approach
There are, however, those who believe in the Book of Mormon and Bible as the standard against which all doctrine. They take seriously and as absolute truth this teaching:
2 Nephi 3:12 Wherefore, the fruit of thy loins shall write [Book of Mormon]; and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write [Bible]; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins [Book of Mormon], and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah [Bible], shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.
In other words, one may receive teachings from anyone with readiness of heart, but that they should search these two books to see if those things are so.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
So, those who live by this second approach will courageously accept or reject the teachings of the Living Oracles as the Bible and Book of Mormon requires.
This second group of saints are very, very rare.
Interesting Quotes
Here are some citations of various scholars that demonstrate why the two theological systems developed separately and contradictory.
Early Mormons rarely quoted from the book in their speeches and writings; in one nineteenth-century LDS periodical, Elders’ Journal, the Bible was cited forty times more often than the Book of Mormon. Although early Mormons believed that the book was an authentically ancient record and that its miraculous appearance signaled that they were living in the “latter days,” they didn’t strongly emphasize its teachings. When the book was cited, it was usually to support the belief that the LDS Church was the restoration of Israel. It wasn’t until 1961 that a year-long course in the Book of Mormon became required for freshman students at Brigham Young University, and it was the 1980’s before the Book of Mormon was cited regularly in General Conference talks by church leaders. (LDS author Jana Reiss)
Joseph Smith did not refer to passages from the book in his writings or sermons, nor was it cited very often by early church leaders. (LDS Professor Grant Hardy)
It has often been pointed out, however, that those beliefs most commonly associated with Mormonism are nowhere to be found in that text. Those expecting an exposition of peculiarly Mormon doctrine will be disappointed. (LDS Professor Terryl L. Givens)
Despite the effort that went into the translation, Joseph Smith did not make the book the foundation of the church. (LDS Professor Richard L. Bushman)
The book under consideration bears no necessary relation to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They could exist quite independently of each other. The book is not the product of the Church, for it was in existence before the Church was. (Book of Mormon Scholar J.N. Washburn)
Studies of Latter-day Saint sermons and curriculum from the earliest period of church history well into the 20th century demonstrate surprisingly little use of the Book of Mormon to establish doctrines or as a text from which to preach. Many Saints were converted by reading it, but, thereafter, they tended to overlook its specific content. (LDS Professor Daniel Peterson)
28 views
Profile photo for Ray Farmer
Profile photo for David Sabatene
David Sabatene
· March 4
Ray, your posting raises more questions then answers. If Smith himself didn't quote from it much, doesn't that tell us something? Especially if so much of the religion is not rooted in the Book's teachings?! And what does it mean for those who are not LDS such as CoC, Temple Lot, etc. etc.???
Profile photo for Ray Farmer
Ray Farmer
· March 4
It simply means that J.Smith rejected the Book of Mormon doctrine and came up with a completely different system of religious thought. I think the development of that thought by the Church of J____ C_____ of Latter-day Saints apart from the Book of Mormon after so much time make it impossible to reconcile itself to the teachings of the Book of Mormon once they begin to actually read it.
I am further thinking that the efforts to distance itself from the word “Mormon” is leading up to a total laying aside of the Book of Mormon and some future date.
Profile photo for David Sabatene
David Sabatene
· March 4
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Do you mean that Joseph Smith himself didn't care to make the BoM renowned as a divine revelation and wasn't really planning a church the way Brigham Young made it, or even for that matter the way the RLDS did it?
Profile photo for Ray Farmer
Ray Farmer
· March 7
I think what happened was that the Church developed independent of the teachings of the Book of Mormon.
It would be like you read the Tale of Two Cities and were greatly impressed. Unfortunately, your wife cleaned the room and tossed the book. You decide that you would write a commentary on the Tale. You begin in earnest. After a time you complete the commentary. Your wife, who began to feel guilty, went to the dump and found your book. Now it is plainly seen that your commentary is full of contradictions to the book. You added things and in many instances contradicted what Dickens wrote. Now you have a problem. The book and your commentary are like two different works. You may attempt to claim you did research and you know what Dickens was hinting at. You may claim that your literary acumen has added great and wonderful parts that were missing or should have been written in it but weren’t. Whatever you do, you have to claim that the book and commentary are the same, but one would be better off ignoring the book. Just hold up the Tale, unopened, claim it is a great classic, but convince people to just stick with the commentary.
The Book of Mormon was almost completely ignored, as the quotes supplied above would indicate. During this time, the church developed doctrine independent of the Book of Mormon. Hence, not only were ideas incorporated that were foreign to the Book of Mormon, but actually contradict it. Worse, in the promotion of the Church, other churches were attacked for believing teachings similar, if not exactly, as taught in the Book of Mormon. With the reemergence of the Book of Mormon, the problem has come to the forefront. It has become obvious that one cannot believe in both the Church and the Book of Mormon. They each present an entirely different theological system from the other. Hence, you see all the Quora attacks on the Book of Mormon not only from those who reject it but also by those who claim its divinity!
As stated above, I predict that the Church will dump the Book of Mormon. They would have if it wasn’t a great missionary tool.
The Book of Mormon touches the hearts of the children of God. It rings true, has familiar doctrines and the Holy Ghost bears testimony of it to the honest truth seeker. Missionaries point out that that is the Holy Ghost testifying of the Book of Mormon. But here is the trick. They claim that if the Book of Mormon is true, Joseph Smith was a prophet (which doesn’t follow). However, the tension begins when one points out that Joseph Smith taught contrary doctrines. Although the Holy Ghost bore testimony that the Book of Mormon as the item that is true, they confuse the honest in heart.
Mr. Zenif: It appears that the Book of Mormon teaches against Joseph Smith’s teaching.
Elder Nehor: Well, you know that Joseph was a prophet, right?
Mr. Zenif: How can I be sure he was?
Elder Nehor: Did the Holy Ghost tell you the Book of Mormon is true?
Mr. Zenif: Yes.
Elder Nehor: Then Joseph was a prophet. What he said must be true rather than the Book of Mormon.
Mr. Zenif: But the Spirit told me the Book of Mormon is true.
Elder Nehor: Then Joseph was a prophet.
Mr. Zenif: Maybe Joseph was a true translator, but not a prophet since he taught things contradictory to the Book of Mormon.
Elder Nehor: Are you a hater? Do you think you can better interpret the teachings of the Book of Mormon than a Living Prophet?
Mr. Zenif: I suppose not. Is there a living prophet?
Elder Nehor: Yes there is. President Nelson.
Mr. Zenif: How can I know he is a true prophet?
Elder Nehor: He is the current leader of the Church that the Prophet Joseph restored. He got his authority through Joseph Smith.
Mr. Zenif: So. Let me see if I got this. The Book of Mormon is true. So Joseph Smith is a Prophet, even though he contradicted the true book. So he restored the Church of which Nelson is now the leader. But Nelson contradicts the true book, too. Why should I believe he is a true prophet?
Elder Nehor: Do you believe the Book of Mormon is true?
Mr. Zenif: Yes.
Elder Nehor: If your heart wasn’t so darkened you would realize that if the Book of Mormon is true, then President Nelson is a prophet. See?