|
This response was written in 1985. Worldwide
military activities since that time have rendered the discussion on wars incomplete.
This reply is used by permission from John A. Tvedtnes of FARMS. We are unaware of any response by Mr.
Baer.
A REPLY TO DICK BAER
By John A. Tvedtnes
On October 10, 1981, Dick Baer, of Bakersfield, California, finished
compiling a 35-page "letter" to his "Family and Friends," in which he
indicated his reasons for believing Joseph Smith to be a false prophet. At the
conclusion of the document, he wrote (last para., p. 34): "I believe it is the
duty of everyone who reads this letter to point out where I have made mistakes in my
research." What follows is an attempt to do this.
Some Doctrinal Problems
Most of the Baer letter was designed to give evidence that Joseph
Smith was a false prophet. However, before addressing that issue, it seems
appropriate to discuss some of doctrinal issues brought up by Mr. Baer.
Baer notes (page 1, para. 8) that his god is not the "god of
Mormonism" and proceeds to describe the deity in terms developed in traditional
Christian theology. The Bible often speaks of God as a "man" in form, with
body parts. If Baer is correct, how is this to be explained? Ezekiel and others saw
and described God as a man (Ezek. 1:26-28; Exod. 33:18-23; cf. Isa. 6:1; Amos 9:1; Exod.
24:9-11, etc.). Baer, I presume, is either unaware of these descriptions or does not
believe them to be literal. If, in fact, the body parts attributed to God in the
Bible are metaphorical only, then perhaps John 4:24 (which Baer cites) is also to be
explained metaphorically. (Where does one draw the line?) Paul speaks of the
Roman saints as being "not in the flesh, but in the Spirit" (Romans 8:9), though
they had bodies. He also says that the resurrected body is spiritual (1 Cor.
15:42-44f). Yet the resurrected Christ had a "body of flesh and bones"
(Luke 24:39). If the Godhead consists of three beings in one, then where does the
body of Christ fit in? If God is "unchangeable" in all ways, how can one
explain that he became mortal in the person of Jesus? Further, in order to include
the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as one God, then, based on John 17:20-23, we must also
include the apostles of Jesus' time in this godhead, for Jesus prayed that they might be
one with him as he is with the Father.
Baer criticizes (page 2, penultimate para.) the change of
"white and delightsome" to read "pure and delightsome" in 2 Ne 30:6.
The change, however, is justified by other scriptural passages in which "white"
clearly means "pure." E.g., Dan. 12:10, "Many shall be purified, and made
white..." See also "pure, faire, and white, having been cleansed by the blood of
the Lamb..." (Morm
p.2
on 9:6; cf Al 13:12), referring to the time of the judgment (also
Jac 3:8). It is also important to note that the next verse in the passage under question
(2 Ne 30:7), speaking of the Jews, says that "as many as shall believe in Christ
shall also become a delightsome people." Since the Jews are not dark-skinned (a fact
which Joseph Smith must have known), it would appear that skin color is not meant here.
Mr. Baer also misquotes the passage in 2 Ne 30:6, saying that it
indicates the Lamanites would change "in a few generations after accepting the
gospel." The Book of Mormon passage actually says that this would happen after
"[not] many generations." Despite Mr. Baer's concern, there is still time for
the Lamanites to be converted. To date, the Church has not initiated any serious efforts
at converting Lamanites or Indians (and the terms are not always synonymous).
Conditional Nature of Prophecy
Baer establishes a test for false prophets (page 1, last para.),
based on the one given by Moses in Deut. 18:20-22. Ironically, the text can be used to
prove that Moses himself was a false prophet. In Num. 25:13, he said in the name of the
Lord that Phinehas, his grand nephew, would hold the priesthood eternally. But if Heb.
7:11-12 is correct, the Aaronic priesthood is not eternal. By the same standard, Jonah's
prophecy that Nineveh would be destroyed failed.
There are other such examples. E.g., Isaiah told king Hezekiah,
"Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not
live." (2 Kings 20:1) But after the king pleaded with the Lord, the prophet delivered
a new message, saying that 15 years would be added to his life. The Lord told Moses that
he would destroy the Israelites and make of Moses a greater nation than they. When Moses
protested that this would be wrong, the Lord changed his mind (Num. 14:11-20).
The fact of the matter is that all prophecy depends on the
faithfulness (or unfaithfulness) of those involved. In the case of Nineveh, the Lord
revoked his threatened destruction of the city because they repented. By the same token,
he can revoke promises of good if people sin. The Lord himself explained this principle
through the prophet Jeremiah:
"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
p.3
repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them."
(Jer. 18:7-10)
Jeremiah himself illustrated the principle of conditional prophecy
when he told king Zedekiah, in the name of the Lord, that he would not go captive into
Babylon if he followed the prophet's instructions; otherwise, he would be taken captive
and Jerusalem would be destroyed (Jer. 38:17-23).
Concerning the men of Keilah, the Lord said to David, "They
will deliver thee up [to Saul]" (1 Sam. 23:12), but this didn't happen because David
fled from the city (vss. 13-14)! Two centuries later, the prophet Elisha told King Joash
to smite on the ground with his arrows. The king did so three times. The prophet then said
that he should have smitten five or six times in order to consume Syria (2 Kings
13:18-19). Obviously, the actions of men play a role in the fulfillment of prophecy.
Near the end of his document (p. 34, para. 5-6), Baer gives another
test for false prophets. However, the two Isaiah quotes he lists do not refer to Joseph
Smith or to false prophets in general, but to false prophets of Isaiah's time. They
were not intended as "tests" of true prophets, but only as statements of fact
concerning individuals then living. They should be read in context.
Baer Breaks His Own Rules
I think what bothers me most about Baer's approach is that he does
not follow his own rules. He states that a man may be considered a false prophet if what
he says in the name of the Lord "has not come to pass and can not come to pass."
But he is very subjective in determining what "can not come to pass" and, in
fact, merely lumps everything not yet accomplished into the category of false prophecy. To
make matters worse, he counts the years since the giving of the prophecy and decides that
the time has passed for accepting the declaration as a true revelation from God. Of the 53
items included in Baer's list, 12 of them were included because he felt the time had past
for their fulfillment. This is more than unfair. It is, at best, blindness and, at worst,
dishonesty. It ignores the fact that many biblical prophecies - which are much older than
those of Joseph Smith - have yet to be fulfilled, even when they indicate that the event
will occur "soon." Examples of these are given below.
Baer's approach to prophecies whose time he believes has passed will
remind Latter-day Saints of the unbelievers in the Book of Mormon "who began to say
that the time was past for the words to be fulfilled" (3 Ne 1:5). But since Mr. Baer
does not believe in the Book of Mormon, it would be more appropriate to quote from
p.4
the Bible on the same issue. Isaiah (5:19) wrote of those who would
say, "Let him [the Lord] make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let
the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!"
Baer also breaks his own rule in that he includes, in his list of
Joseph Smith's "false prophecies" items which are not at all prophetic in
nature. Some of them are commandments from God, while others are expressly said to be
"counsel." When the individual(s) to whom the commandment was addressed did not
follow through, Baer takes this as evidence that the "prophecy" was false.
This same methodology can be used to prove the falseness of the
biblical prophets. E.g., the Lord said through Elisha that the combined armies of Israel,
Judah and Edom would "smite every fenced city" of Moab and that he would
"deliver the Moabites also into your hand." But one city, Kir-hareseth, was not
taken. When Mesha, the Moabite king, sacrificed his son on the city wall, the Israelites
left and went home. The "prophecy" was not fulfilled because the Israelites
would not cooperate with the Lord's wishes!
Earlier, The Lord commanded Elijah to anoint Hazael king of Assyria
and Jehu king of Israel and Elisha as prophet in his stead (1 Kings 19:15-16). Elijah did,
indeed, call Elisha (1 Kings 19:19-21). But it was Elisha who sent one of the prophets to
anoint Jehu (2 Kings 9:1-10), and Elisha himself announced to Hazael that he would be king
(2 Kings 8:7-13). I.e., Elijah did not accomplish two of the three tasks assigned to him.
Does this make him a false prophet? In the LDS view, he did the right thing by designating
his successor, who followed through on unfinished business.
In the same manner, some of the things which the Lord commanded the
early Latter-day Saints to accomplish (e.g., settle in Zion) will be fulfilled by their
descendants and successors. Likewise, the blessings pronounced on each of the tribes of
Israel by Jacob (Gen. 48-49) and Moses (Deut. 33) are to be understood as blessings for
their future generations, not for the men to whom the words were addressed.
In this latter respect, Baer reminds me of the Missourians who read
D&C 118:5-6 as a "prophecy" rather than a commandment. The revelation, given
in August of 1838, instructed the Twelve to leave on mission from Far West the following
April 26. After the Saints were driven from the state, a Missouri mob swore that this
would never happen and threatened to be on hand on April 26, 1839, to prevent it. This,
they thought, would prove Joseph Smith a false prophet. A group of Latter-day Saint
leaders met at Quincy to decide whether they should obey the commandment, and some
(including Joseph Smith's father) argued that the Lord would
p.5
forgive them for not going to Far West, since their enemies would
surely kill them. It was agreed, however, that they would go anyway, and a group of
apostles and elders began their journey. Along they way, they met up with others of the
Twelve and, by the time they reached Far West just after midnight on the appointed day,
seven of the Twelve were present - enough to form a quorum to conduct business. Some of
the brethren called to the Twelve by the same revelation which sent them back to Far West
were ordained on the site and a meeting was held at which the mission was planned. The
group adjourned before the mob arrived. But even had they not met, this would not have
made Joseph Smith a false prophet, for they were following a commandment, not trying to
fulfill a prophecy.
On page 35 (para. 1), Mr. Baer pleads with his readers to not call
him a liar. I shall therefore refrain from doing so, hoping that he is at least sincere.
But sincerity alone is not sufficient to find the truth. Clearly, Mr. Baer has
misunderstood a number of things. The inclusion of nonprophetic utterances as "false
prophecies" betrays a basic problem, which may be:
- an ignorance of facts (to quote his para. 4, p. 35, a
"decision [based] on incomplete and inaccurate information."
- a deliberate attempt to deceive (which he denies)
- a forgetting of the criteria for "prophecy"
which he himself established at the outset of the paper
- an emotion which overrides rational analysis ("My
mind is made up: don't confuse me with the facts!").
I personally believe that it is the latter - as I believe that many
Latter-day Saints (perhaps most) react in the same manner. Hopefully, this response to Mr.
Baer's letter will be read as a sincere and rational critique, with a view to defusing
criticism founded on emotion and an incomplete examination of the facts of LDS history and
of the contents of the Bible.
The Prophecies
In the commentary below, we list the prophecies attributed to Joseph
Smith according to the numbers assigned to them in Mr. Baer's paper. (Baer has two items
numbered "3" in his list; I have here called them "3a" and
"3b" for convenience.) Some of these, however, are not prophecies at all, as we
shall see, and should not be included in such a list. Of the 53 items in Baer's list, 19
are not prophecies by the definition given by Baer (i.e., they lack one or both of these
elements: prophetic in
p.6
nature and uttered in the name of the Lord).
Thirteen of the items on the list are from secondary sources. This
is ironic since, in one case (No. 40), Baer rejects the validity of the utterance because
its source is secondary, while accepting the others. His reason is clear: the one he
rejected was fulfilled! Interestingly, he could have quoted that particular prophecy from
the History of the Church rather than a journal, and the same is true of another
item he includes in the list (No. 16) which is actually a variant of a revelation found in
the Doctrine & Covenants. Had Baer quoted the one from D&C, however, he would not
have been able to find fault with it, as he did with the version found in Parley P.
Pratt's journal.
I object to using secondary sources in a study of this nature, for
the simple reason that they may not reflect the exact words of Joseph Smith and hence one
cannot know if they fit the criteria for "prophecy" set up in Deut. 18. This
does not mean that they are totally useless, only that they should not be included in a
list of alleged "false prophecies" unless a more "official" version
can be examined. Therefore, I will discount journal accounts unless they come from Joseph
Smith's diary.
| 1. |
Baer presumes to define the words "about to be" in JS-H
1:40-41, saying that 158 years exceeds the set time. In response, I recommend reading Isa.
55:8, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither your ways my ways, saith the
Lord." God's reckoning of time cannot be compared to man. Peter wrote that "one
day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet.
3:8). "Soon" from God's viewpoint is not the same as it is in ours. "Man
that is born of a woman is of few days" (Job 14:1), yet some live more than a
century.
|
|
The Bible has a number of prophecies of things which the prophets
said would happen "soon" but which did not, in fact, occur for a century or
more. E.g., Isaiah, in his prophecy concerning the destruction of Babylon (Isa. 13:1,
19-20) wrote that "the day of the Lord is at hand" (Isa. 13:6). Yet
Babylon was not even conquered until 539 BC, a century and a half after Isaiah, while its
destruction came even later.
|
| |
Isaiah had also prophesied concerning the actions of Assyria
against Israel and Judah: "Be not afraid of the Assyrian: he shall smite thee with a
rod, and shall lift up his staff against thee, after the manner of Egypt. For yet a little
while, and the indignation shall cease, and mine anger in their destruction."
(Isa. 10:24-25) Israel was taken captive by Assyria in 722 BC and the Assyrian king
Sennacherib attacked Judah in 701 BC. But it was not until |
p.7
|
605 BC - a century later - that Assyria was defeated by a coalition
of the Babylonians and Medes. I.e., the prophet's "little while" meant more than
a century!
|
|
Zephaniah, writing of the destruction of Judah, wrote that
"the day of the Lord is at hand" (1:7) and that "the great day of the Lord
is near, it is near, and it hasteth greatly" (1:14). This was written in the days of
King Josiah (1:1), nearly a century before Judah was taken captive by the Babylonians.
Joel used similar words, saying, "the day of the Lord is at hand" (1:15) and
"the day of the Lord cometh, for it is nigh at hand" (2:1).
|
|
The New Testament Apostles used similar terminology. Jesus showed
John "things which must shortly come to pass" (Rev. 1:1; cf. 22:6 and
note 22:7 which says, "Behold, I come quickly."). After nearly two
millennia, most of the things which John saw in the vision have not come to pass despite
the fact that Jesus said they would occur "shortly." (Note also Rev. 12:12,
where John wrote that the devil has "but a short time" until he is bound when
the millennium begins: cf. Rom. 16:20.)
|
|
James wrote, "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming
of the Lord... Be ye also patient...for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh...behold, the
judge standeth before the door." (James 5:7-9) Yet Jesus has not yet come to
judge and reign. Peter was even stronger than James when he wrote, "But the end of
all things is at hand." (1 Pet. 4:7) Obviously, "all things" have
not yet ended, despite the two millennia which have passed since these words were written.
|
| 2. |
Now it may be that Peter was not referring to the destruction of
the last days. If so, then we must consider that Joseph Smith may also not have been
referring to what Baer (or anyone else) believed he meant. In fact, were we to apply
Baer's standard to Jesus, we would have to conclude that Christ himself was a false
prophet, for he cited the same passage in Joel quoted to Joseph Smith by Moroni, in Matt.
24:29, saying that some of those then alive would not die before its fulfillment (Matt.
24:34).
|
|
Unlike Mr. Baer, I would not presume to judge when a certain work
has been "frustrated." I have full confidence that the Lord will see his will
accomplished in the end, even though mortal men may fight against it. In reality, however,
D&C 3:3 has specific reference to the Lord's purpose in bringing forth the Book of
Mormon (see comments in No. 5 below).
|
|
As for the conversion of the Lamanites, it is still possible for
them to be converted. But D&C 3:16-20 is not, as Baer |
p. 8
|
contends, a prophecy that the Lamanites will be converted. It says
that the testimony of the Book of Mormon writers will come to the Nephites, Lamanites,
etc. (vs. 18), and that the "purpose" is to bring the Lamanites to
believe and repent (vss. 19-20). Though this is its purpose, it does not prophesy that
they will accept it!
|
| 3a. |
This is from a secondary source, David Whitmer, who wrote his
account in 1887, many years after the events he described, at a time when he was very
hostile toward the Church. It should therefore be deleted from the list. In this same
item, Baer calls B. H. Roberts an "Apostle", though he was not a member of the
Twelve but a president of the Seventy. The error may have been committed out of ignorance;
if not, then it looks like a deliberate attempt to bolster Mr. Baer's comments by quoting
a high "authority."
|
| 3b. |
Again, we must deal with God's definition of "soon" or
"nigh", rather than man's. As noted in No. 1 above, Christ himself spoke to his
disciples two millennia ago of things to pass within that generation, which have not yet
occurred.
|
| 4. |
Mr. Baer gets caught up in popular LDS definitions of the word
"gospel", rather than determining what the Lord told Joseph Smith and others the
term meant. McConkie notwithstanding (when did he have authority to get doctrinal
revelations for the Church?), the term "gospel" refers to the atonement of Jesus
Christ and the means whereby we can take advantage of it, specifically the first
principles and ordinances of the gospel. (The real definition of the term
"gospel" is discussed in No. 51, below.) More to the point of Baer's statements,
however, I am not convinced that the "it" to which the nations should bow is the
gospel. But even so, there is still time for fulfillment in the Lord's calendar.
|
| 5. |
Baer's extension of D&C 3:3 to mean that "any work
that is frustrated is not from God but from men" is unwarranted, in view of the
reading of that passage, even if his statement were to be true. In the overall scheme,
God's work is not frustrated. But men do not always do that which God wishes, so his will
is not always accomplished at the time he designates. We still look forward to the
fulfillment of the prophecies regarding Missouri.
|
| 6. |
Baer's contention that D&C 62:1, 6, 9 was not fulfilled is
based on his definition of the Missouri Latter-day Saints as "faithful." This is
ironic, since he does not believe them to have been faithful to God. More importantly, the
Lord made it clear in other revelations that they were not faithful (D&C 101:1-2;
103:4; 105:9). |
p. 9
| 7. |
Baer wrote, "Being as it is reported by a Mormon (Rich) we can
assume that it is an undisputed statement of Joseph Smith." However, he declines to
credit the "Mormon" source for No. 40, which he rejects as authentic. Secondary
sources, even from Latter-day Saints, are useful investigative tools, but they cannot be
used to prove the falsity of prophecies unless we can be sure that the wording is
precisely that of Joseph Smith. Since Journal accounts are generally written after the
fact (e.g., at the end of the day) and are usually not reviewed by the person who made the
statement, their accuracy is questionable.
|
|
Even so, we can comment on this item. The term "Zion" is
not always used in Joseph Smith's revelations to denote a geographical location in
Missouri. In Moses 7:18-19, Zion refers to people and to the city in which they lived -
not in Missouri. The term sometimes refers to the faithful of the Church. In any event,
the flourishing of Zion in Missouri is still future.
|
| 8. |
There is a difference between "respecting" a person and
"respecting" a person's actions. God had no "respect" to Cain and his
offering because he was wicked. In fact, this statement comes from the Bible itself (Gen.
4:5). If it is true and, using Baer's standard of Judgment, then the apostle Peter was a
liar, for it was he - not Joseph Smith - who first said that God was "no respecter of
persons" (Acts 10:34; repeated in 1 Pet. 1:17).
|
|
I don't see Baer's point concerning D&C 124:102. It's like
asking why God sent Moses to free Israel from Egypt rather than Joshua or Caleb or Aaron
or Dathan or Abiram or....Well, you get the idea. But I don't get his.
|
|
If Mr. Baer had done his homework, he would know that D&C 1:37 didn't
refer to everything in the "Doctrine & Covenants", since the revelation was
given as a preface, not to that volume, but to the "Book of Commandments" (see
vs. 6), published in 1833. Let's at least be historically accurate if we're trying to
prove some historical points.
|
| 9. |
The fulfillment of D&C 133:17, 26-30 is yet future. Again, Baer
has a hang-up about the century and a half which have passed. Many of Joseph's prophecies
- as many in the Bible - refer not to yesterday or even today, but to the time of the end,
when Christ comes. There are yet other things to happen before that great event.
|
| 10. |
Technically speaking, at least part of this should not be included
in a list of "false prophecies", since it is a commandment and not a prophecy
(vs. 7a). The revelation in |
p. 10
|
D&C 71 was addressed to Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon (vs. 1).
It was not addressed to the 20th-century Latter-day Saints. It does not apply to me any
more than the Lord's commandment to Noah to build an ark applies to Mr. Baer. Besides, the
revelation doesn't say when the shame of the "enemies" is to be made manifest.
How about Judgment day, when the Lord tells them, "Depart from me, ye cursed"
(Matt. 25:41)? In vs. 10, the Lord said that those who spoke against Joseph Smith and
Sidney Rigdon "shall be confounded in mine own due time." Clearly, there
would be no better time than when they appear before the judgment bar!
|
|
The expression "no weapon that is formed against thee shall
prosper" is a quote from Isa. 54:17. Isaiah's statement was addressed to the kingdom
of Judah, which was defeated by Babylon in 586 BC, when its capital, Jerusalem, was
destroyed. If Mr. Baer prefers to consider this as a prophecy of Judah's (or Israel's)
future, rather than of the time period of Isaiah, then we must consider how he would have
reacted had he lived "147 years" after Isaiah. Would he have complained that the
prophecy was false because Judah had been taken captive? If that prophecy is future, with
intervening periods of hardship for the Jews, then why cannot promises made to Joseph
Smith be future? Why should we apply different standards to Joseph Smith than those
applied to Isaiah and other biblical prophets? Or would Mr. Baer consider the Old
Testament prophets to also be false? In such a case, would it not also be necessary to
question the validity of Moses' calling (and even of his test of false prophets in Deut.
18)? Well, we can see where that would lead!
|
| 11. |
Verses 3-5 and 31 could be read as commandments instead of
prophecies. Why Baer finds a problem in the fact that the Independence temple lot was
dedicated "more tha[n] one year previous to receiving this revelation" is beyond
me. Verse 3 of the cited revelation (D&C 84) indicates that it had already been
"dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun." So where's the contradiction? In
D&C 84:4, we again have the same problem with the use of the term "this
generation" found in Jesus' prophecy in Matt. 24:34, which also refers to events
which have not yet been accomplished. I don't pretend to know exactly what is meant, but
may I suggest that there are people from Jesus' time (and Joseph Smith's) who are still
alive, including John the Revelator and the three Nephite disciples, not to mention Enoch,
Melchizedek, Elijah and others. (Interestingly, the prophecy in D&C 84:5 was fulfilled
at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple in March, 1836, according to the journals of many
then present.) |
p. 11
|
Mr. Baer's comments become typical of anti-Mormon writings when he
quotes part of Joseph Fielding Smith's "answer" on this subject, noting only
that part which suits his purpose and not dealing with the "answer" itself.
(Brother Smith notes his belief that the prophecy was to be fulfilled during the
generation which would gather in the future to Zion in Missouri.) His conclusion that the
LDS Church has encountered "another point of failure" because the temple
property in Independence is owned by the Temple Lot group is premature, since we
anticipate that, at some point, the Lord will rectify that situation. And his conclusion
that D&C 84:114-115 has proven false because there are but few Mormons in New York
City, Albany and Boston, and yet they have not been destroyed, is based on Mr. Baer's
mortal interpretation of time. There is still time for fulfillment in the Lord's calendar.
|
|
He also feels the necessity of continually reminding us that
"all you need is one false prophecy to have a false prophet" - a statement based
on, but not directly stated in, Deut. 18:20-22. I.e., if Joseph Smith was right on 99
points but wrong (or judged to be wrong by virtue of the fact that the prophecy was not
and "cannot" be fulfilled), on only one point, he must, by Mr. Baer's standards,
be a false prophet! So, to follow his example, I repeat that, if one applies the same
standards to the biblical prophets (including Jesus) which Mr. Baer applies to Joseph
Smith, we would have to conclude that many of them (and perhaps all) were also false
prophets.
|
|
This brings us to an examination of what is really
"false" and what merely appears to be "unreasonable" to the human
mind. I refer to the fact that the prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah "contradicted"
each other concerning an essential point, and yet were both right! Ezekiel had prophesied
that king Zedekiah would go to Babylon but never see it (Ezek. 12:13), while his
contemporary Jeremiah prophesied that Hezekiah would be taken captive to Babylon (Jer.
32:5). To their contemporaries, this must have been as confusing as Joseph Smith's
statements sometimes are to Mr. Baer. But, in the end, the prophets proved true, for
Zedekiah indeed went captive into Babylon, but did not see the city, for he had been
blinded (2 Kings 25:7). Thus, we see that prophecies "impossible" of fulfillment
have, in the course of time, proven true. Can we not give Joseph Smith the same benefit of
a doubt, and not try to "reason away" whatever doesn't fit our pet peeves?
|
| 12. |
To paraphrase Shakespeare, "Methinks the gentleman doth
protest too much!" Mr. Baer stresses the fact that "the state of South Carolina
was already in a state of rebellion at the time. It's not much to prophesy about something
that |
p. 12
|
is already happening." His definition of "prophesy"
is quite different from mine. D&C 87:1 does not necessarily imply that the rebellion
was yet future: if it is describing a contemporary event, then the part about South
Carolina makes no pretension to be prophetic, only to describe a current situation. On the
other hand, if it is prophetic, then we must note that it was, indeed, at South Carolina
that the first Civil War shots were fired on Fort Sumpter in 1861. Could not the earlier
rebellion in South Carolina have prompted the revelation? Most of Joseph Smith's
revelations (perhaps all of them) did, in fact, come in response to questions he asked of
the Lord.
|
|
In a subsequent statement dated to 1843, Joseph Smith repeated the
prophecy that war between the states would start at South Carolina. He added that a voice
had told him this in 1832, while he was engaged in prayer (D&C 130:1213). It is likely
that he was praying about the current rebellion in South Carolina. Of interest to us is
that he continued to believe civil war would result, even after the 1832/3 crisis had been
"solved." I.e., in 1843, he saw that war as still future. Had he been a
phony, he could have simply torn up the 1832 revelation, which had not yet been published
(and was not published until after his death, appearing in the 1851 Pearl of Great
Price and in the 1876 D&C; Sect. 130 was first published in the Deseret News
of July 9, 1856).
|
|
Since the Civil War did start in South Carolina, we must give
Joseph Smith at least one of the 20 "points" Mr. Baer counts, even if it is
"coincidental." But we must note that his examination of other points is based
on some false assumptions. First, vs. 3 does not say that the Civil War would "result
in war being poured out upon all nations." Rather, it states that the Civil War was
the start of a series of wars, not necessarily related one to another. The prophesied
sequence and its fulfilment can be outlined as follows:
|
| |
1. Civil War between the
northern and southern states. |
1861-1865 |
|
2. South calls on Great
Britain for help. |
This occurred during the Civil War.
Assistance was prevented by Pres. Lincoln's blockade. When, in 1863, the British tried to
take Alaska (recently purchased from Russia), the Czar sent a fleet to stop them. |
p. 13
| |
3. Great Britain calls on
"other nations" to defend itself against "other nations." |
From the context, it is obvious that
Britain was not trying to defend itself against the Union army, but against "other
nations"; hence there is no connection with the Civil War, only that this event
follows it. The British called for assistance against other nations during World Wars I
(1914-1918) and II (1939-1945). |
|
4. "Then war shall be
poured out upon all nations." |
Nearly universal war did not, in fact,
come until the two world wars, so this is in its proper sequence. For a partial list of
wars since 1865, see below. |
|
5. The "slaves"
rise up against their masters, who are "marshaled and disciplined for war."
|
This does not necessarily happen after
war is poured out upon all nations, but "after many days." If referring to the
Civil War era, we must note that most slaves did not revolt, though some certainly did. It
may be, however, that the prophecy refers to a later "rising up" of those who
were "slaves" at the time of the revelation. In this case, it could refer to the
civil rights movement, which gained momentum during the time the U.S. was at war in
Vietnam. Or it could be a still future event. Brigham Young stated that the revelation
(D&C 87) was received "when the brethren were reflecting and reasoning with
regard to African slavery on this continent, and the slavery of the children of men
throughout the world." (JD 8:58, May 1860) |
|
6. The "remnants who are
left on the land" will vex the Gentiles. |
If this refers to the "remnant of
Israel" of the Book of Mormon, then it would be the Lamanites. But it could be
something else. |
|
7. Other events (vss. 6-8).
|
These are yet future and are to be
performed in the Lord's time, not according to man's calendar. |
| |
The Civil War is seen in D&C 87 as the beginning of the great
international wars which are to plague the earth in the last days, but not their cause, as
Mr. Baer misreads. |
p. 14
| |
Since 1865, we have had almost continual war in various parts of
the world. Here is an incomplete listing of some of these wars: |
| |
1863-67 |
French invasion of Mexico, war to regain Mexican independence
|
|
1864 |
Austro-Prussian invasion of Denmark |
|
1865-70 |
Paraguayan War (Argentina, Brazil & Uruguay invaded and slew or
chased 3/4 of the Paraguayan population) |
|
1865-76 |
Russo-Turkestan War |
|
1866 |
Seven Weeks War (Austria defeated by Prussia & Italy) |
|
1870-71 |
Franco-Prussian War |
|
1873-74 |
French conquest of Tonkin (North Vietnam) |
|
1874 |
British conquest of Ashanti Kingdom (Ghana) |
|
1874-79 |
Egyptian-Ethiopian War |
|
1877-78 |
Russo-Ottoman (Turkish) War |
|
1879-84 |
War of the Pacific (Chile vs. Peru & Bolivia) |
|
1882 |
Italian conquest of Eritrea (northern Ethiopia) |
|
1882 |
British conquest of Egypt |
|
1883-96 |
French conquest of Madagascar |
|
1885 |
Serbo-Bulgarian War |
|
1885 |
Revolt of the Mahdi in Sudan (against Great Britain) |
|
1885-86 |
British conquest of Burma |
|
1885-98 |
French conquest of most of West Africa |
|
1894-95 |
Chino-Japan War |
|
1895-96 |
Italo-Ethiopian War |
|
1896-98 |
British conquest of Sudan |
|
1897 |
Greco-Turkish War |
|
1898 |
Spanish-American War |
|
1898-1902 |
Philippine Rebellion (against US occupation) |
|
1899-1902 |
Boer War (British conquest of South Africa) |
|
1900-01 |
Boxer Rebellion (USA, Russia, Great Britain, France & Germany
vs. Chinese) |
|
1903 |
Panamanian Revolt (against Colombia) |
|
1904-05 |
Russo-Japan War |
|
1905 |
Egypto-turkish War |
|
1906-09 |
American invasion of Cuba |
|
1907 |
French conquest of Morocco |
|
1907 |
Japanese conquest of Korea |
|
1908 |
Austro-Turkish War |
|
1911-12 |
Chinese Civil War (against Manchu emperor) |
|
1911-17 |
Russian conquest of Persia (Iran) |
|
1912-13 |
First Balkan War |
|
1913 |
Second Balkan War |
|
1914 |
American invasion of Mexico during Mexican Civil War |
|
1914-19 |
World War I |
|
1915 |
American invasion of Haiti |
|
1916 |
American invasion of Mexico |
|
1916 |
American invasion of Dominican Republic |
|
1916 |
Irish revolt against Great Britain |
|
1916-28 |
Chinese Civil War |
|
1917 |
Bolshevik Revolution in Russia |
|
1918-20 |
Russian Civil War (Reds vs. Whites) |
|
1920-23 |
Greek invasion of Turkey |
p. 15
| |
1922 |
Turkish revolt against Sultan, led by Ataturk |
|
1931 |
Spanish Revolt against King Alfonso XIII |
|
1931-33 |
Japanese invasion of Manchuria |
|
1932-35 |
Chaco War (Paraguay vs. Bolivia) |
|
1934-36 |
Italo-Ethiopian War |
|
1936-39 |
Spanish Civil War |
|
1937-45 |
Japanese invasion of China |
|
1938 |
German invasion/annexation of Austria |
|
1939 |
Germany, having been ceded the Sudetenland, conquered the rest of
Czechoslovakia |
|
1939 |
Italian conquest of Albania |
|
1939-45 |
World War II |
|
1945-49 |
Indonesian War of Independence (against Netherlands)\ |
|
1945-54 |
Malaya War (Great Britain vs. Communists) |
|
1945-54 |
Indochina War (France vs. Vietnamese) |
|
1946-49 |
Greek Civil War |
|
1946-49 |
Communist Revolution in China |
|
1947-49 |
Indian Civil War (Muslims vs. Hindus) |
|
1947-49 |
Kashmir War (India vs. Pakistan) |
|
1947 |
Indian insurgencies (Sikhs & other separatists) |
|
1948-49 |
Israeli War of Independence |
|
1948 |
Burma insurgencies (Communists & 3 separatist groups) |
|
1948-52 |
Huk insurgency in Philippines |
|
1950-53 |
Korean Conflict |
|
1950-59 |
Chinese conquest of Tibet |
|
1950 |
Yemen War (North vs. South Yemen) |
|
1952-53 |
Mau Mau uprising in Kenya (against British) |
|
1954-58 |
Quemoy-Matsu conflict (Nationalist vs. Communist China) |
|
1954-62 |
Algerian War of Independence (against France) |
|
1955-59 |
EOKA insurgency in Cyprus (against British) |
|
1955 |
Sudanese government fights blacks in south |
|
1956 |
Hungarian Revolt (unsuccessful) |
|
1956 |
Sinai/Suez Conflict |
|
1956-59 |
Cuban Civil War (Castro vs. Batista) |
|
1958 |
US troops sent to Lebanon |
|
1959-62 |
China-India (Himalayas) War |
|
1959-64 |
Watusi-Hutu war in Rwandu-Burundi |
|
1959-74 |
PAIGC insurgency in Portuguese Guinea |
|
1959-75 |
Pathet Lao insurgency in Laos |
|
1960-67 |
Revolts in the Congo (provinces of Katanga and Kasai) |
|
1960-67 |
Revolt in Venezuela |
|
1960- |
Basque insurgency in Spain |
|
1960- |
Terrorist insurgency in Colombia |
|
1961 |
Bay of Pigs Invasion (US-backed Cuban troops in Cuba) |
|
1961 |
Goa War (Indian forcible seizure of 3 Portuguese colonies) |
|
1961 |
Kuwait War (Great Britain vs. Iraq) |
|
1961-76 |
Angola War of Independence (against Portugal) |
|
1962 |
West New Guinea War (Netherlands vs. Indonesia) |
|
1962- |
Eritrean secession in Ethiopia |
|
1962- |
Ogaden War (Ethiopia vs. Somalia) |
|
1963 |
Algeria-Morocco War |
|
1963-65 |
Malaysian War (Malaysia & Great Britain vs. Indonesia) |
p. 16
| |
1964 |
Cyprus Civil War (Turks vs. Greeks) |
|
1964 |
Zanzibar Civil War (Blacks vs. Arabs) |
|
1964-73 |
Vietnam War (USA) |
|
1964-75 |
Mozambique War of Independence (against Portugal) |
|
1964-76 |
Insurgency in Oman |
|
1964- |
CPT (Communist) insurgency in Thailand |
|
1964- |
Insurgency in Brazil |
|
1965 |
Rebellion in Dominican Republic put down by Dominicans, with
assistance from USA and Organization of American States |
|
1965 |
Pakistan-India War |
|
1965 |
Rebellion in Peru |
|
1965-66 |
Communist insurgency in Indonesia |
|
1965- |
Chad War (Libya vs. Chad & France) |
|
1965-79 |
Civil War in Rhodesia |
|
1966- |
Namibia War SWAPO insurgency against South Africa) |
|
1967 |
Six-Day War Israel vs. Arabs) |
|
1967-70 |
Nigerian Civil War (Biafra Secession) |
|
1967- |
Guatemala insurgency (left-wing allied with Mayans against
government and right-wing) |
|
1968 |
Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia |
|
1969 |
Soccer War (El Salvador vs. Honduras) |
|
1969- |
IRA war in Northern Ireland (Catholics vs. Protestants) |
|
1970 |
Polish uprising suppressed by Soviets |
|
1970 |
Insurgency in Honduras |
|
1970 |
Insurgency in Guinea |
|
1970-75 |
Communist (Khmer Rouge) conquest of Cambodia |
|
1970- |
ANC insurgency in South Africa |
|
1970- |
Left-wing terrorist insurgency in Germany |
|
1971 |
Bangladesh War of Independence (with India) against Pakistan
|
|
1971- |
Palestinian insurgencies in West Bank & Gaza Strip, controlled
by Israel |
|
1972 |
State of war begun in 1937 between China and Japan ends |
|
1972- |
Separatist insurgency in Pakistan |
|
1972- |
Philippines government fights insurgencies by Muslim MNLF &
Communist NPA |
|
1973 |
Chile Civil War |
|
1973-74 |
Yom Kippur War (Israel vs. Egypt & Syria) |
|
1974 |
Civil War in Cyprus, Turkish invasion |
|
1974- |
Left-wing & right-wing separatist insurgencies in Turkey
|
|
1975 |
North Vietnam conquest of South Vietnam (end of a conflict begun in
1959) |
|
1975 |
Moroccan invasion of Spanish Sahara |
|
1975- |
Lebanon Civil War |
|
1975- |
Insurgency of UNITA and other factions in Angola |
|
1975- |
East Timor War (Indonesia vs. FRETILIN guerrillas) |
|
1975- |
NLF guerrilla insurgency against Laos & Viet-Nam |
|
1975- |
CPM (Communist) insurgency in Malaysia |
|
1975- |
West Sahara War (Polisario Front vs. Morocco) |
|
1976- |
Left-wing & right-wing insurgencies in Argentina |
|
1976- |
Sunni guerilla insurgency in Syria |
|
1977-78 |
Katanga secession in Zaire (government aided by France and Belgium)
|
|
1977 |
Right-wing and left-wing insurgencies in El Salvador |
|
1978 |
Afghanistan Communist Revolution |
|
1978-79 |
Islamic Revolution against the Shah of Iran |
|
1978- |
MRM guerrilla insurgency in Mozambique |
p. 17
| |
1979 |
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (fighting continues today) |
|
1979 |
Sino-Viet War |
|
1979- |
Cambodian guerrilla insurgency against Viet-Nam & Samrin
government |
|
1979- |
Kurdish & other separatist insurgencies in Iraq |
|
1979- |
Shiite guerrilla insurgency in Iraq |
|
1980- |
Iran-Iraq (Gulf) War {continues today) |
|
1980- |
Maoist guerrilla insurgency in Peru |
|
1980- |
Rebellion in Zimbabwe |
|
1981- |
Right-wing guerrilla insurgency (allied with Miskito Indians) in
Nicaragua |
|
1981- |
Rebellion in Uganda |
|
1982 |
Falkland Islands War (Great Britain vs. Argentina) |
|
1982-85 |
Israeli invasion & occupation of southern Lebanon |
|
1983 |
American invasion of Grenada |
| 13. |
This prophecy has actually been fulfilled several times. E.g., when
Krakatoa exploded in 1883, the atmosphere was filled with dust and ash which obscured the
sun and turned the moon blood-red. There was darkness at noon over a 240-mile radius. A
similar darkness covered a 500-mile radius when Tamborain volcano in Sumbawa exploded in
1815. The same phenomenon happened more recently with the explosion of Mt. St. Helens in
the USA. If the "stars" are meteorites, then they, too, have fallen in great
showers (e.g., the great "falling of the stars" on November 13, 1833, seen by
tens of thousands of people all over what was then the United States). If, however, they
are real stars, then perhaps this cannot even happen, since this would destroy the
universe. If the reference is to real stars, then we must consider that Christ, who first
uttered this prophecy (Matt. 24:29), is a false prophet along with Joseph Smith. Perhaps
we should also add Joel, whose prophecy in 2:10, 2832; 3:15 was paraphrased by Christ, and
Peter, who cited Joel 2:28-32 (Acts 2:17-21). Isaiah used similar wording when he spoke of
the coming attack on Babylon by the Medes (see vs. 17) and Persians (which occurred in 539
BC):
|
|
"For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall
not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not
cause her light to shine." (Isa. 13:10; see also vs. 13) Note vs. 9, "Behold,
the day of the Lord cometh..." (In Isa. 24:23, he speaks of the moon being confounded
and the sun ashamed when the Lord reigns in Jerusalem.)
|
|
Christ said that there were some living in his day who would not
die before the fulfilment of the prophecy in Joel! Peter said that it was fulfilled on the
day of Pentecost! To John (Rev. 6:12-17), the event was yet future. (He based his writing
on Isa. 13:9-13; 2:10 and Hos. 10:8; cf. Luke 23:30.) Obviously, the expression "not
many days" cannot be taken as literally as Mr. Baer does (he counts the exact |
p. 18
|
number of days up to the time of his "letter").
Prophecies are accomplished in God's time, not man's.
|
| 14. |
Again, we must caution that God's time is not the same as man's. If
Joseph Smith was wrong about "those now living" seeing the fulfilment of these
things, then why should we not apply the same standard to Jesus Christ, who said the same
of people in his day concerning prophecies which have not yet happened? Joseph Smith
handled this latter by saying that Jesus was referring to the "generation" in
which the signs would begin (JS-M 1:34); unfortunately, Mr. Baer's beliefs would probably
make him hesitate to accept this statement from a "false prophet", so he is left
with the quandary of either believing Jesus to have falsely prophesied or of accepting at
least one teaching from Joseph Smith. But, from another point-of-view, we know that there
are people who were alive in Jesus day (and also in Joseph's) who have not died: I refer,
of course, to John the Revelator and the three Nephite disciples.
|
|
On page 10, Mr. Baer says that the Ten Tribes will not return from
the north country. Several Biblical prophets said that they would! E.g., Isa. 49:12; Jer.
3:18; 23:7-8, 31:8. (Even in the New Testament, James addressed his epistle "to the
twelve tribes, which are scattered abroad"1:1.) If Mr. Baer is right, then these,
too, were false prophets. I believe that they were true prophets and that it is Mr. Baer
who is mistaken.
|
| 15. |
The promises cited here by Mr. Baer are quotes from the Bible. He
notes the portion drawn from Isa. 40:31. The rest comes from Prov. 3:7-8: "Be not
wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. It shall be health to thy
navel, and marrow to thy bones." Were Baer to treat this passage with the same
standards applied to Joseph Smith, he would have to conclude that the Bible is false.
|
|
Why Mr. Baer believes (page 11) that Joseph Smith's calling is
suspect because he quotes earlier prophets is beyond me. In the Bible, prophets quote
other prophets, even when placing the words in the mouth of God. E.g., Isa. 2:2-4 is also
found in Mic. 4:1-3, with no credit line indicating that it is a quote. The following
items are virtually identical in Obadiah and Jeremiah, one of which (presumably Jeremiah)
quoted from the other without giving credit to his predecessor: |
Obadiah 1: |
|
Jeremiah 49: |
1-4 |
|
14-16 |
5-6 |
|
9-10 |
8 |
|
7 |
p. 19
| |
We also noted (No. 13, above) the use of passages from Isaiah and
Hosea in the book of Revelation, where John, like Joseph Smith, did not credit the
original source. The problem, again, is that Mr. Baer applies to Joseph Smith a standard
which he does not apply to the Biblical prophets.
|
|
Mr. Baer is too "literal" concerning words like
"all." If he were to be as literal with the Bible (2 Kings 19:35; Isa. 37:36),
he would note that, though the angel of the Lord struck "all" of the Assyrians
besieging Jerusalem, yet some of them managed to return home, including their king,
Sennacherib.
|
|
At first, Mr. Baer assumes that the words "destroying
angel" in D&C 89:21 mean death. "The destroyer" was much more than that
in Exod. 12 (to which D&C 89:21 specifically refers), where we read that only
the firstborn were struck, and only for certain reasons. Why take the words out of context
and redefine them? Later, Mr. Baer considers that the "destroying angel" is
nuclear fallout. This is a very specific cause of death, but is it the one referred to in
D&C 89:21? |
|
Baer again calls B. H. Roberts an "Apostle", apparently
to provide authority for what he is going to cite. But Roberts was not a member of the
Quorum of the Twelve; he was the First President of the Seventy. The question of Roberts'
treatment of Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews has been taken up by a number of
people, who have shown that the kinds of criticism leveled by Baer are totally
unjustified. E.g., see the following: |
John W. Welch, "B. H. Roberts: Seeker After Truth",
Ensign, Mar 1986, & bibliography.
John W. Welch, "Finding Answers to B. H. Roberts' Questions,
and `An Unparallel'", a
FARMS preliminary report, 1985.
John W. Welch & Truman G. Madsen, "Did B. H. Roberts Lose
Faith in the Book of
Mormon?", a FARMS preliminary report, 1985.
Truman G. Madsen, "B. H. Roberts & the Book of
Mormon", BYU Studies 19 (Summer
1979), pp. 427-45.
Spencer J. Palmer & William L. Knecht, "View of the
Hebrews: Substitute for Inspiration?",
BYU Studies 5 (Winter 1964), pp. 105-113.
Ariel L. Crowley, "Analysis of Ethan Smith's View of the
Hebrews': A Comparison with the
Book of Mormon", in About the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret News
Press, 1961).
William Riley, "A Comparison of Passages from Isaiah &
Other Old Testament Prophets in
Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon" (MA Thesis, BYU,
1971).
p. 20
| 16. |
Parley P. Pratt gave an abbreviated version of the revelation,
which is found in D&C 97:19-20. In the original, we find that the words in question
are what "the nations of the Gentiles shall say" of Zion at some point in the
future. Quoting a secondary version which is more susceptible to interpretation as a
"false prophecy" seems, dishonest. But perhaps Mr. Baer has a different
explanation for his motives which he would care to share with us.
|
| 17. |
148 years is not "a little season" according to Mr. Baer.
But it is a very little season by the Lord's reckoning of time. Moreover, the term is
actually a quote from the Bible, specifically from Rev. 6:11, where the martyrs are told
that they will "rest yet for a little season." The statement is made
after the opening of the fifth seal and prior to the occurrence of the many events
scheduled for the sixth and seventh seals before the promise is fulfilled.
|
|
The reference to Isa. 9:16 is out-of-place, for that passage deals
with a political leader, and the destruction is from another political power. Here,
too, is where we may turn Mr. Baer's "logic" against him. Joseph Smith was not
"hewn down and cast into the fire." If we take things literally, as Mr. Baer
does when it serves his purpose, then Jesus was himself a false prophet, if Joseph Smith
was one, for the prophesied hewing and casting did not take place. And if we prefer not to
take this literally, then we have to ask why other things have to be taken literally!
|
| 18. |
This cannot be a "false prophecy", for it does not fit
the criterion set up by Deut. 18 and stressed by Mr. Baer at the beginning of his paper.
I.e., it was not uttered in the name of the Lord, and therefore does not even pretend to
be prophetic. Indeed, Joseph clearly wrote, "this is my counsel." He does
the same thing Paul did when he distinguished his own opinion from the commandments given
by Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor. 7:10, 12, 25, 40). Mr. Baer is grasping at straws to include among
his list of "false prophecies" opinions expressed by Joseph Smith. Again, we are
reminded that "a prophet is a prophet only when acting as such."
|
| 19. |
D&C 101:17 is termed a "false prophecy" by Mr. Baer
because the people were, in fact, removed from Missouri (he writes, "They were moved
out of her place."). But the verse itself does not say that the people would not be
moved, only that ZION (in this case, the place so denominated) would not be moved. The
same verse specifically says that the people were scattered! I'm afraid Mr. Baer reads
whatever he wants to into the revelations of Joseph Smith. Is it intellectual dishonesty?
outright deception? ignorance? blinded by Satan? all of the above? |
p. 21
| 20. |
Baer says that this cannot be fulfilled because "Mormons will
never achieve anything until they are righteous and that will NEVER happen."
He adds, "This prophecy can never be fulfilled because the Mormons will never become
righteous." D&C 103:5 does not ask us to be "righteous", however, only
to "hearken...unto the counsel" of the Lord. Latter-day Saints are well aware
that no one can be righteous without the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Mr. Baer goes
overboard in offering his opinions as "evidence." Were we to use his type of
"logic", we would have to conclude that no one can ever love Christ because
Jesus himself said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments." (John 14:15; see also
vs. 21) Mr. Baer appears to believe that it is impossible for mortals to keep the Lord's
commandments, despite the fact that we have been commanded to do so, even in the Bible.
Moreover, he has clearly misunderstood the mission of Zion's Camp.
|
| 21. |
This is not a "prophecy" at all, but "counsel,
and a commandment" which was not obeyed. It cannot, therefore, be honestly
included in a list of prophecies, true or false. Again, Mr. Baer leaves his motives (or
abilities to understand) open to question by including non-prophetic statements in his
list of "false prophecies." He states, "If I were to choose a single
prophecy of Joseph Smith as being false this would be it." Were he to throw away all
of the others in his list and keep only this one, his argument would be ignored by
all but the truly fanatical or mentally handicapped. (He should like that sentence: it's
the way he writes to slant his message!)
|
| 22. |
If the "destroying angel" is death (e.g., by radioactive
fallout) in D&C 89:21 (Baer's No. 15), why is the "destroyer" Orrin Porter
Rockwell in D&C 105:15? And what is the "ample evidence" that Rockwell is
the "destroyer" mentioned herein? If Joseph Smith were not a prophet, how could
he possibly think that one gunman - no matter how skilled he might be - could destroy all
of his enemies? The suggestion is ludicrous.
|
|
As for the destruction of people in Missouri, there were other
events which occurred. In 1847, a thousand troops from Missouri (most from Jackson County)
fought two battles against the Mexicans. At the battle of Sacramento, where they were
outnumbered four-to-one, most perished. Ironically, the unit was commanded by General
Alexander W. Doniphan, who had saved Joseph Smith's life when he was a prisoner in
Missouri. Doniphan survived.
|
|
In the spring of 1855, some 5,000 Missouri "border
ruffians" went into neighboring Kansas, took over the polling stations |
p. 22
|
and cast illegal votes, in an attempt to ensure that slavery would
be permitted in the new state. John Brown and other abolitionists fought back. Many people
from both Kansas and Missouri died violently and suffered horribly during this period, and
the episode of "bleeding Kansas" became one of the events leading to the Civil
War. Of the 30,000 Missouri troops who fought in that war (on both sides of the fence),
about 27,000 died!
|
|
During the Civil War, Quantrell and his raiders wreaked much havoc
in Missouri, attacking Union army groups and civilians who would not support the raiders.
During 1860-61, many west Missouri homes and farms were destroyed by the guerrillas and
Union troops - mostly by Quantrell's men. In an effort to capture the guerrilla group and
discourage local assistance to them, a force of Union soldiers arrested all residents of
Independence during the spring of 1862 and destroyed much property. On August 25, 1863,
Brigadier General Thomas Ewing issued General Order No. 11, which ordered the evacuation
of much of Jackson and other counties within 15 days. Residents who could not prove their
loyalty to the Union were to be completely removed from the military district (which
encompassed Kansas and Missouri). Grains and hay were to be turned over to the military
and any not surrendered was to be burned. Large numbers of people lost their homes and
properties.
|
|
The problem did not end with the war, however. Several bandit gangs
which arose from the Quantrell raiders (e.g., the James and Dalton brothers) and plagued
much of Missouri, including Jackson County.
|
|
But we should note that vs. 15 does not say that the enemies of the
Mormons would be destroyed, but "mine enemies", i.e., the Lord's enemies. This
could mean that the prophecy's fulfilment is yet future.
|
| 23. |
This is not a prophecy, but a commandment (Joseph Smith termed it
"counsel" in the passage quoted), which was not obeyed. As such, it does not fit
the criteria of Deuteronomy 18, upon which Mr. Baer based his list. We cannot expect that
every time someone - including Latter-day Saints - refuses to obey the Lord's
instructions, this constitutes a failed prophecy. The Old Testament is replete with
commandments which individuals and groups disobeyed. Yet Mr. Baer would probably not want
to admit that the Old Testament comprised false prophecies.
|
| 24. |
The "147 years" are, as usual, irrelevant, since God's
concept of time does not correspond to Mr. Baer's. Indeed, the statement quoted in D&C
106:4 resembles the one in Rev. 22:20, where John quotes Jesus as saying, "Surely I
come |
p. 23
|
quickly." (Cf. also Rev. 3:11 & 22:7, where he says,
"Behold, I come quickly.") The 147 years are nothing compared to the nearly two
millennia since John wrote those words. And yet Mr. Baer does not claim that John or Jesus
were false prophets!
|
| 25. |
This quotation comprises a statement by Joseph Smith, but one which he did
not claim was a prophecy. It does not, therefore, fit the criteria of Deut. 18. The only
thing made known "by vision and by the Holy Spirit" was that a meeting should be
called. [See also
The Alleged 56-Year Second Coming Prophecy by Joseph Smith:
An Analysis by Malin Jacobs.]
|
|
It is true, however, that Joseph Smith thought that the Lord would
come in 1890. The background for this belief is rooted in the fact that William Miller,
founder of the Adventist movement, had predicted, as early as 1831, that Christ would
return to the earth on April 3, 1843. He based this theory on calculations he had made
from the books of Daniel and Revelation. On February 12, 1843, Joseph Smith was visited by
7 or 8 young men from New York City. He spoke to them of Miller's prediction:
|
|
"I showed them the fallacy of Mr. Miller's data concerning the
coming of Christ and the end of the world, or as it is commonly called, Millerism, and
preached them quite a sermon; that error was in the Bible, or the translation of the
Bible; that Miller was in want of correct information on the subject, and that he was not
so much to blame as the translators. I told them the prophecies must all be fulfilled; the
sun must be darkened and the moon turned into blood, and many more things take place
before Christ would come." (HC 5:272, Feb 12, 1843)
|
|
On February 28 of the same year, Joseph wrote a letter to the
editor of the Times & Seasons, in reply to a notice in the Chicago Express
that one Hyrum Redding had seen the sign of the Son of Man predicted in Matthew 24:
|
|
"But I shall use my right and declare that...he has not seen
the sign of the Son of Man, as foretold by Jesus; neither has any man, nor will any man,
until after the sun shall have been darkened and the moon bathed in blood; for the Lord
hath not shown me any such sign... Therefore hear this, O earth: The Lord will not come to
reign over the righteous, in this world, in 1843, nor until everything for the Bridegroom
is ready." (HC 5:290-291)
|
|
When the day predicted by Miller arrived (April 3, 1843), Joseph
recorded in his journal: "Miller's day of judgment has arrived, but it is too
pleasant for false prophets." (HC 5:326) Three days later, at a conference held on
the floor of the temple (then under construction), he said: |
p. 24
| |
"Were I going to prophesy, I would say the end [of the world]
would not come in 1844, 5, or 6, or in forty years. There are those of the rising
generation who shall not taste death till Christ come. I was once praying earnestly upon
this subject, and a voice said unto me, My son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five
years of age, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man." I was left to draw my own
conclusions concerning this; and I took the liberty to conclude that if I did live to that
time, He would make His appearance. But I do not say whether He will make His appearance
or I shall go where He is. I prophesy in the name of the Lord God, and let it be written -
the Son of Man will not come in the clouds of heaven till I am eighty-five years
old." (Part of this is quoted by Baer.)
|
|
Joseph then read from Revelation 14:6-7, "And Hosea, 6th
chapter, After two days, etc. - 2,500 years; which brings it to 1890. The coming of the
Son of Man never will be - never can be till the judgments spoken of for this hour are
poured out: which judgments are commenced..." (HC 5:336) He then listed the things
which had to occur before Christ would return - including the rebuilding of Jerusalem and
its temple, the healing of the Dead Sea, darkening of the sun and moon, earthquakes, etc.
(HC 5:337).
|
|
It is clear that Joseph assumed that the Lord might come in
1890 - but certainly not before that time - because of the declaration the voice had made
to him. His prayer to know the time of the Lord's coming was probably in response to the
excitement over William Miller's calculations current in 1843. Joseph Smith's first public
mention of the declaration of the voice was given in a meeting held at Ramus on April 2,
1843 (the day before the expected fulfilment of Miller's prophecy), and it was later
included in the Doctrine and Covenants (see HC 5:324): |
|
"I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the
coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following: Joseph, my son, if
thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of
Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter. I was left thus,
without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the
millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face. I
believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time." (D&C
130:14-17)
|
|
Since Joseph did not live to the age of 85, the "if"
portion of the statement clearly shows that it was conditional. Moreover, Joseph was not
told that the Lord would return in |
p. 25
| |
glory in 1890, only that he would see him at that time if he was
yet alive. I.e., the Lord did not answer Joseph's question directly, for the very reason
that Mr. Baer points out, that no one knows the time of his coming - not even Joseph
Smith.
|
|
One might enquire about the likelihood that the Lord would
"trick" Joseph Smith thus, making him think that he would see the Lord in 1890
when, in fact, Joseph would die in 1844. The question is mooted by a similar situation in
the Bible. Isaiah came to King Ahaz in the name of the Lord and told him that Ephraim
(head of the northern kingdom of Israel) would be broken "within threescore and five
years" (Isa. 7:8). Ahaz reigned in Judah from 734 to 728 BC. Sixty-five years later
would be 689-663 BC. In actual fact, however, Israel was taken captive in 722 BC, just six
years after Ahaz's death, when his son Hezekiah was king of Judah.
|
|
Joseph made an assumption based on what the Lord told him, but it
was only an assumption, and it was unwarranted. But this assumption guided some of his
other declarations. This does not make him a false prophet, only a mortal who - like the
rest of us - often let preconceived notions govern his thoughts. He was perfectly willing
(and able) to change direction when the Lord contradicted any of his preconceptions. An
example of this is the nature of God.
|
| |
Joseph Smith came from a traditional Protestant environment, in
which there was firm belief in the trinity of the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed, which
teaches that there are three persons in one god and that they are all made of the same
substance (spirit). These beliefs are only slightly modified in the Lectures on Faith,
prepared in 1834 for the School of the Prophets and published in the Doctrine &
Covenants in 1835 (originally, the lectures were the "doctrine", while
the "covenants" were the revelations received by Joseph Smith). Lecture 5
contains the following statements:
|
|
"There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless,
governing and supreme power... They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a
personage of spirit... The son... a personage of tabernacle... possessing the same mind
with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit..." (1835 D&C, pp. 52-53)
|
|
"Q. How many personages are there in the Godhead?
A. Two: the Father and the Son." (p. 55)
|
|
"Q. What is the son?
A. First, he is a personage of tabernacle." (p. 56; the previous page indicates that
the Father is "a
|
p. 26
|
personage of glory and power")
|
|
"Q. Do the Father and the Son possess the same mind?
A. They do...
Q. What is this mind?
A. The Holy Spirit." (p. 57)
|
|
Joseph had already seen the Father and the Son during their visit
in 1820, so he was aware that there were two "personages." He knew from the
Bible (Luke 24) that the Son had a body of flesh and bones. But he evidently continued to
believe - in the absence of revealed information to the contrary - that the Father was a
spirit only and that the Holy Ghost was merely the "mind" which united the
Father and the Son. All this was to change when new information was received. On April 2,
1843, Joseph declared that "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as
man's; the Son also: but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a
personage of spirit." (D&C 130:22) With this statement, it was seen that the
Father, like the Son, has a body, and that the Holy Ghost is a "personage."
|
| 26. |
This is from a secondary source, so one wonders why Mr. Baer
includes it, since he excludes another of this nature (No. 40) when it supports Joseph
Smith's role as a true prophet. However, we can comment on the fulfilment of the prophecy.
|
|
It doesn't take "mental gymnastics" to accept this as a
fulfilled prophecy, only a better knowledge of history than Mr. Baer displays. The Jews
did not return in 1948, as he states, but were already there in large numbers prior to
that time. A brief summary of the history of the return is given here: |
| |
1800 |
There were about 10,000 Jews in Palestine,
by estimates of the time.
|
|
1823 |
During his visit to Joseph Smith, on the night of September 21,
Moroni indicated that the time for the gathering of Israel was near.
|
|
1836 |
On April 3, Moses restored to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the
keys of the gathering of Israel.
|
|
1839 |
Sir Moses Montefiore, in meetings held in London, mooted the idea
of an autonomous Jewish state. There was support from some prominent British statesmen.
Montefiore entered into negotiations with Muhammad Ali, ruler of Egypt and Palestine, to
gain a charter for Jewish settlement in Palestine. The attempt failed when Muhammad Ali
fell from power in 1841, deposed by the Turks. |
p. 27
| |
1840 |
The first Hebrew printing press, which had been set up in Safed in
1831, was moved to Jerusalem. In this year, there were several proposals for Jewish
immigration to Palestine. Rev. Wilson Filson Marsh published an article in Der Orient,
proposing that a Jewish state be set up as a buffer between Egypt and Turkey. Abraham
Benisch (who became editor of the London Jewish Chronicle) sent a memorandum to the
Foreign Office, detailing plans for Jewish settlement in Palestine. The idea received
public approval from several British notables.
|
|
1841 |
On October 24, Orson Hyde dedicated the land of Palestine for the
return of the Jews, from atop the Mount of Olives.
|
|
1852 |
Judah Alkali wrote and distributed pamphlets in London, encouraging
Jewish return to Palestine.
|
|
1854 |
Sir Moses Montefiore and others established the Jewish Hospital in
Jerusalem.
|
|
1861 |
The Jewish population of Jerusalem had grown too large for the Old
City. As a consequence, the first Jewish quarter (Mishkenot Shaananim) outside the city
walls was built, under sponsorship of Sir Moses Montefiore. The first land expressly
sought for agricultural purposes was purchased by Jews at Moza, where settlement began in
1873.
|
|
1863 |
The first Hebrew journal began publication in Jerusalem.
|
|
1869 |
With continued expansion of the Jewish population of Jerusalem, the
suburb of Nahalot Shiva was established.
|
|
1870 |
The Jewish Mikveh Israel Agricultural School was opened near Jaffa,
to teach immigrating Jews how to be farmers.
|
|
1872 |
Continued growth in the Jewish population of Jerusalem necessitated
the establishment of another suburb, Mea Shearim.
|
|
1873 |
Because Orson Hyde, in 1841, had not had any witnesses to his
dedication of the Holy Land (John E. Page had not kept his promise to accompany him to
Jerusalem), Brigham Young had decided to send another group to dedicate the land. In
February of 1873, this group, headed by Pres. George A. Smith, rededicated the land for
the return of the Jews, in a tent erected atop the Mount of Olives.
|
|
1878 |
The first Palestinian Jewish agricultural settlement (Petah Tikvah}
was founded.
|
|
1880 |
By this year, Jews had become the majority of the population of
Palestine's then-largest city, Jerusalem. Ben-Yehudah arrived in Palestine and revived the
Hebrew language as the official tongue of the local Jewish population. |
p. 28
| |
1882 |
The Bilu and Hibbat Zion movements were formed in Russia and began
promoting settlement in Palestine. This was the year of the "First Aliyah
(immigration), when thousands fled Russia and Rumania and settled in Palestine. The first
all-Jewish Palestinian town (Rishon le-Zion) was established.
|
|
1894 |
The increasing Jewish population of Jerusalem made it
necessary to found another settlement (Yemin Moshe) outside the city walls.
|
|
1897 |
The first Zionist Congress was convened in Basel, Switzerland,
under the leadership of Theodor Herzl. Plans for the resettlement of Jews in Palestine
were made.
|
|
1898 |
On May 8, 1898, Anthon H. Lund of the Quorum of the Twelve
rededicated the Holy Land from atop the Mount of Olives.
|
|
1902 |
Francis M. Lyman and others visited the Holy Land and rededicated
it. Two prayers were offered on March 4, one atop the Mount of Olives and the other in
Elder Lyman's hotel room. On March 16, another prayer was offered atop Mount Carmel in
Haifa.
|
|
1905 |
The "Second Aliyah" (immigration) brought thousands of
Jews from Russia to Palestine, following an abortive Socialist revolution in their
homeland.
|
|
1909 |
The first kibbutz or collective farm (Deganiah) was established on
the southern shore of the Sea of Galilee, by the Jewish National Fund. That same year,
Tel-Aviv (now the world's largest all-Jewish city) was founded just north of Jaffa.
|
|
1914 |
At the outbreak of World War I, there were 85,000 Jews in
Palestine.
|
|
1917 |
At the instigation of Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, the British
foreign office issued a white paper (the "Balfour Declaration") favoring the
establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
|
|
1919 |
The Emir Feisal, son of Emir Hussein and the chief Arab delegate to
the Paris Peace Conference, met on January 3 with the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann and an
agreement was drawn up for the establishment of Palestine as a Jewish state.
|
|
1919-23 |
The "Third Aliyah" (immigration) brought many thousands
of Jews of the Hehazlutz movement from Russia, Poland and Galicia to Palestine.
|
|
1920 |
The Haganah was organized as a Jewish army to protect the
Palestinian Jews from Arab attacks: in 1948, it became the Israel Defense Forces. In
December of 1920, the Histadrut - the Jewish labor union, still active in Israel - was
founded.
|
|
1921 |
On November 3, Elders David O. McKay and Hugh J. Cannon, of the
Quorum of the Twelve, rededicated the Holy Land. There were widespread Arab riots and
attacks on Palestinian Jewish settlements, in protest over Jewish immigration. |
p. 29
|
1922 |
In response to Arab riots and demands, the British issued a white
paper which temporarily halted Jewish immigration to Palestine. |
|
1924-28 |
The "Fourth Aliyah" (immigration) brought thousands of
Jews from Poland. |
|
1925 |
Official opening of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, on April 1.
|
|
1927 |
On Octobert 18, James E. Talmage, of the Quorum of the Twelve,
rededicated the Holy Land from atop Mount Carmel. By this year, the Palestinian Jewish
community was large enough to demand - and receive permission from the British mandage
government to organize its own National Council. |
|
1929 |
Widespread Arab riots and attacks on Palestinian Jewish settlements
took place, in protest over Jewish immigration. There were already 160,000 Jews in the
country. |
|
1933 |
In May, Elder John A. Widtsoe, of the Quorum of Twelve, rededicated
the Holy Land from atop the Mount of Olives. There were more widespread Arab riots and
attacks on Palestinian Jewish settlements, in protest over Jewish immigration. |
|
1933-36 |
The "Fifth Aliyah" (immigration) brought some 164,267
"letal" immigrants from Nazi Germany to Palestine. Many others slipped in
illegally. |
|
1936 |
By the spring of this year, there were nearly 400,000 Jews in
Palestine, comprising 30% of the total population. |
|
1936-38 |
Widespread Arab riots and attacks on Palestinian Jewish
settlements, in protest over Jewish immigration. |
|
1939 |
At the outbreak of World War II, the Jewish population of Palestine
had reached half a million. |
As can be readily seen from the list, "Zionist" activity
increased significantly after the restoration of the keys of the gathering in 1836. In his
1841 prayer, Orson Hyde asked the Lord to inspire the Jews to return home and to inspire
the heads of nations to assist them in this. This is exactly what happened. In 1950, Orson
Hyde was honored by the World Zionist Organization for his work in preparing for the
return of the Jews and in 1979, a park in his honor was dedicated outside Jerusalem, at
the instigation of the Israeli government and the municipality of Jerusalem. Inside the
park is a large plaque containing his prayer in both Hebrew and English. The present
author translated that prayer into Hebrew and it was originally hand-printed on parchment
for presentation to President Harold B. Lee, when he came to Israel in September, 1972. At
3:00 AM (Jerusalem time) on the day before President Lee's departure, Mayor Teddy Kolleck
of Jerusalem received a call from David Kennedy, who reminded him
p. 30
of a conversation they had had a few years previous concerning Orson
Hyde. Kolleck had suggested, at that time, that there should be a monument to Orson Hyde
in Jerusalem. Now was the time to discuss it. The mayor presented the idea to President
Lee and the Orson Hyde Park was under way. In December of 1972, David Galbraith and I
called on Mayor Kolleck to give him a copy of the English/Hebrew prayer on imitation
parchment (a photocopy of the original, which also formed the basis for the monument).
When Mr. Kolleck unrolled the scroll, he began reading the Hebrew side, then switched to
the English. After just a moment, he stopped and |
