![FairMormon Logo](https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_fair_logo_primary.png)
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) (→“Sacred Remembrance” as Divine Regard) |
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) (→“Sacred Remembrance” as Divine Regard) |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
<blockquote>Several critics have pointed to D&C 117:12-15 as a “false prophecy” because Oliver Granger’s name is unfamiliar to most Latter-day Saints despite the fact that the Lord said “that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever” (verse 12). It seems unlikely that the memory of any mortal can be called “sacred,” so the words “sacred remembrance” most likely refer to the fact that the Lord would remember him. After all, the verse begins with the Lord saying, “I remember my servant Oliver Granger.”<ref>John Tvedtnes, “The Nature of Prophets and Prophecy,” <https://www.fairmormon.org/archive/publications/the-nature-of-prophets-and-prophecy-2> (13 May 2020).</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>Several critics have pointed to D&C 117:12-15 as a “false prophecy” because Oliver Granger’s name is unfamiliar to most Latter-day Saints despite the fact that the Lord said “that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever” (verse 12). It seems unlikely that the memory of any mortal can be called “sacred,” so the words “sacred remembrance” most likely refer to the fact that the Lord would remember him. After all, the verse begins with the Lord saying, “I remember my servant Oliver Granger.”<ref>John Tvedtnes, “The Nature of Prophets and Prophecy,” <https://www.fairmormon.org/archive/publications/the-nature-of-prophets-and-prophecy-2> (13 May 2020).</ref></blockquote> | ||
− | Latter-day Saint | + | Latter-day Saint theologian and apologist Robert S. Boylan has added scriptures from the Bible as evidence for the strength of Tvedtnes’ argument of interpreting this verse as divine remembrance instead of human rememberance. “Indeed,” Boylan writes, “often Yahweh in the Old Testament is said to ‘remember’ things such as his covenant with people, showing this concept of divine remembrance. For a good discussion, see Joachim Jeremias, ''The Eucharistic Words of Jesus'', especially his analysis of αναμνησις ("remembrance/memory") in Luke 22 and 1 Cor 11. |
With respect to αναμησις, the term appears five times in the [Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament done anciently)]. Four of these five instances are within the sense of priestly sacrifice; the exception is Wisdom of Solomon 16:6. The NRSV translates the verse as follows: | With respect to αναμησις, the term appears five times in the [Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament done anciently)]. Four of these five instances are within the sense of priestly sacrifice; the exception is Wisdom of Solomon 16:6. The NRSV translates the verse as follows: |
Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, received a revelation on 8 July 1838 “concerning the immediate duties of William Marks, Newel K. Whitney, and Oliver Granger.”[1] This revelation is now canonized as section 117 of the Doctrine and Covenants, a book considered to be holy scripture by the Church. The revelation “[contains] directions and instructions to three men—William Marks, Newel K. Whitney, and Oliver Granger.”[2] The revelation was written in Far West, Missouri and was addressed as a letter to the three men, all living at the time around Kirtland, Ohio. “The Lord made clear that Marks and Whitney were to relocate to Missouri before winter (117:1-2). Once in Missouri they would preside over the Saints in their respective callings…To expedite their move, the Lord instructed that Oliver Granger be dispatched to Kirtland to act as an agent for the First Presidency in settling some of their business affairs…Oliver Granger labored to resolve the Church’s unpaid debts in Kirtland until his death in August 1841. He succeeded in settling the affairs of the First Presidency to the satisfaction of their creditors. One of them wrote, 'Oliver Granger’s management in the arrangement of the unfinished business of people that have moved to Far West, in redeeming their pledges and thereby sustaining their integrity, has been truly praiseworthy, and has entirely him to my highest esteem, and every grateful recollection.’”[3]
Concerning Oliver Granger specifically, the Lord declares in verses 12 and 13 of the revelation. that:
Critics of the Church have claimed that this represents an example of a false prophecy by Joseph Smith since, today, members do not hold any sort of special occasion for remembering Oliver’s assistance to the First Presidency (the top leadership of the Church). This is one of the several ways in which critics of the Church attempt to demonstrate that Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God.
This article will seek to refute this criticism.
This response will approach the criticism from a couple of different potential interpretative angles for these verses since a couple seem possible on exegetical grounds.
The first interpretive possibility is that “sacred remembrance” refers to humans remembering Granger. If this is true of the revelation, then canonizing this revelation holds Granger’s name available to all members of the Church today so that people, including our critics, will learn about him and his contributions to building up the Church. Communities of worship, and especially Jews and Christians, have used the canon as a means of collective remembrance and shared value for hundreds of years. This possibility fulfills the revelation’s injunction to hold Oliver Granger in sacred rememberance.
The second interpretive possibility is that “sacred remembrance” refers to divine remembrance and regard for Granger’s efforts. Indeed, following the approach of Latter-day Saint scholar and apologist John Tvedtnes, Latter-day Saints might interpret this verse as the Lord being the one to hold Granger in "sacred rememberance."
Tvedtnes writes:
Several critics have pointed to D&C 117:12-15 as a “false prophecy” because Oliver Granger’s name is unfamiliar to most Latter-day Saints despite the fact that the Lord said “that his name shall be had in sacred remembrance from generation to generation, forever and ever” (verse 12). It seems unlikely that the memory of any mortal can be called “sacred,” so the words “sacred remembrance” most likely refer to the fact that the Lord would remember him. After all, the verse begins with the Lord saying, “I remember my servant Oliver Granger.”[4]
Latter-day Saint theologian and apologist Robert S. Boylan has added scriptures from the Bible as evidence for the strength of Tvedtnes’ argument of interpreting this verse as divine remembrance instead of human rememberance. “Indeed,” Boylan writes, “often Yahweh in the Old Testament is said to ‘remember’ things such as his covenant with people, showing this concept of divine remembrance. For a good discussion, see Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, especially his analysis of αναμνησις ("remembrance/memory") in Luke 22 and 1 Cor 11.
With respect to αναμησις, the term appears five times in the [Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament done anciently)]. Four of these five instances are within the sense of priestly sacrifice; the exception is Wisdom of Solomon 16:6. The NRSV translates the verse as follows:
The other instances of this term in the [Septuagint] are Leviticus 24:7; Numbers 10:10; Psalms 38:1 [Septuagint version, 37:1] and 70:1 [Septuagint version, 69:1]), translating the Hebrew terms אַזְכָּרָה (Lev 24:7); זִכָּרוֹן (Num 10:10) and הַזְכִּיר (Psa 38:1; 70:1). The NRSV captures the original language text rather well:
All of these are instances wherein God is 'reminded' of His covenant via sacrifice.
Additional passages supporting the ‘divine remembrance’ concept include:
The evidence discussed above can be summed up with the words of the Psalmist:
All of this strongly supports Tvedtnes’ reading of D&C 117:12.
However, [a former member of the Church] attempted to respond to Tvedtnes’ reading of this verse...On the meaning of 'sacred remembrance,' he wrote the following:
Firstly, the impression that [he] is trying to give (that all instances of ‘[sacred] remembrance’ refers to human, not divine, remembrance) is fallacious. Note D&C 127:9, dated September 1, 1842:
Furthermore, it ignores the biblical evidence of God ‘remembering’ things, as discussed previously, language which did influence early Latter-day Saints.
Finally, [his] argument suffers from a structural fallacy, that of the excluded middle. If one maps out his argument, it would go something like this:
To those familiar with formal logic, the fallacy is evident: the fallacy of undistributed middle. This means that the predicates in both the major and minor premises do not exhaust all the occurrences of ‘[sacred] remembrance,' and would not necessitate the interpretation of ‘human remembrance’ as [he] argues for. At best, it could refer to human remembrance, but the evidence discussed in this study shows that this is not the most exegetically sound reading.”[5]
Readers are free to choose between either interpretive option. The latter has obviously been the most followed and the one done in most detail, but either option seems appropriate as a response to this rather short-sighted argument made by critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Notes
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now