Revision as of 07:40, 6 November 2009

A FAIR Analysis of:
Criticism of Mormonism/Books

A work by author: Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson

Index of Claims in Chapter 9: The Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price

by Michael W. Fordham

There are two things that are key to understanding prophecy: One is an understanding of what prophecy actually is, and second is the interpretation of the specific prophecy itself. Before I respond to the specific allegations by Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson of false prophecy that they say are contained in the Doctrine and Covenants, let's make sure we understand what we are talking about. Therefore, let's examine these two keys of understanding prophecy. What is Prophecy?

It is essential that the reader understand just what prophesy is, and what it is not. McKeever and Johnson do not define for us what they believe to be actual prophecy, which means they could reject any and all utterances of a prophetic nature by the prophet Joseph Smith without having to justify their argument. Since the term "prophecy" is used in connection with Joseph Smith as a prophet, yet McKeever and Johnson repeatedly use the term "prediction" (2/3 of the time they refer to sections 84 & 87 of the D&C as prediction rather than prophecy), we need to ask; is a prophecy the same thing as a prediction?

prophecy n., pl. -cies. 1. the foretelling or prediction of what is to come. 2. something that is declared by a prophet, esp. a divinely inspired prediction, instruction, or exhortation. 3. any prediction or forecast. 4. the action, function, or faculty of a prophet.1

prediction n. 1. the act of predicting. 2. an instance of this; something predicted; prophecy.2

The first "key" in understanding prophecy is that prophecy is by "divine inspiration."3 A prediction differs from a prophecy in that there is no divine inspiration in predictions. A prediction is a "best guess" or a "personal opinion" based upon the information available at the time. So, if Joseph Smith only made "predictions" as McKeever and Johnson repeatedly say,4 then no "divine" word is involved, and they have no argument of false prophesy, and we can disregard anything they say against Joseph Smith, prophecy, the Doctrine and Covenants, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in this matter. Now, I am not naïve, neither are the readers of this article, so it is important to understand that I am not attempting to use a "technical" cop-out to claim the two sections of the Doctrine and Covenants used by these critics are not really prophecy. In fact, while Section 84 is more along the lines of instruction than prophecy, for purposes of this discussion, I can fully agree with McKeever and Johnson that these two sections are prophetic statements made by Joseph Smith. However, I disagree with their interpretations and understanding of history. I only use this as an example to point out the lack of attention to detail, and serious scholarship, used by critics who seem to be more than willing to use their own definitions, not to mention ignoring the actual text, context, and evidence, that would support the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith, Jr. This is important in that it gives us an indication of their true motives.

The term "prophesy" can be used in conjunction with false prophets as well as true prophets. So how do we tell the difference? A false prophet is not necessarily one who makes false prophecies. A prophet is a teacher. A false prophet is one who teaches false doctrine. A true prophet is one who teaches true doctrine. So how does Joseph Smith fit this description? Keeping the words of Christ in mind, when he said to his apostles concerning others who were casting out evil spirits, we find a clue in Mark 9:38-40.

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbade him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part.

Anyone who has read the scriptures brought forth by and through Joseph Smith will readily see that he was not against Christ. Anyone who has read other, non-scriptural, writings and sermons of Joseph Smith will readily see that he was not against Christ. Anyone who has read the writings of those who personally knew Joseph Smith will readily see that he was not against Christ. Anyone who knows the historical fact that Joseph Smith gave his life for his belief in, and devotion to, the Savior knows that he was not against Christ. Since Joseph Smith was not against the Savior, then he was "on our part," as Christ said. So why then, are men like McKeever and Johnson, who proclaim themselves Christians, who claim to follow Christ, so eager to malign Joseph Smith? Most critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints frequently judge Joseph Smith's prophecies with a standard that is just as damaging to Biblical prophecies, thereby showing a double standard of interpretation. They seem willing to allow any possible explanation and exception for Biblical prophecies, but none for those of Joseph Smith. Critics don't seem to realize that the standards they use to judge Joseph Smith can also be used to attack the Biblical prophets and Jesus Christ. In fact, McKeever and Johnson give a perfect example of this, which I will point out shortly. The Rules of Interpreting Prophecy

The second "key" of understanding prophecy is the interpretation of prophecy. In determining whether or not a prophecy has come true, there are many factors to consider. Anyone who takes time to study prophecy in the Bible would know that there are some rules of prophetic interpretation to keep in mind when understanding prophecy. Michael T. Griffith has given a list of these rules.

1. Almost all prophecy is conditional to one degree or another, even if this is not stated in the prophecy itself (which is often the case).
2. In many cases human actions and choices can alter, postpone, or prevent the fulfillment of prophecy.
3. A prophecy is not always telling us what will happen, but what could happen under certain circumstances.
4. A prophet can misunderstand the timetable for a prophecy's fulfillment (this, of course, does not invalidate the prophecy itself).
5. A prophet can be mistaken about certain details of a prophecy but correct with regard to its central message.
6. A prophecy can apply to more than one occurrence or time period, i.e., it can have dual application.
7. A prophecy's fulfillment can be intended to take place in the spirit world or during the millennium, even if this is not stated in the prophecy itself.
8. The fulfillment of prophecy can go unobserved and/or unrecorded.
9. A prophecy can contain rhetorical overstatements. For example, a prophecy might read that "every single house" in a certain town will be "leveled to the ground," when what is really meant is that the town will suffer heavy destruction.
10. Such terms and expressions as "soon," "quickly," "in a little while," "shortly," etc., are often given from the Lord's perspective of time--so that "soon," for example, might turn out to be a very long time by our reckoning.
11. The text of a prophecy can undergo alteration to the point that it no longer reflects the original intent of the prophecy.5

Much has been written about Biblical prophecies that appear not to have come to pass, thus showing them false. However, if the rules of prophetic interpretation are employed, the Bible can be shown not to have any false prophecies. One example that would cause critics to exclaim a false prophecy in the Bible if they used the same standard of interpretation as they do with Joseph Smith, can be found in 2 Kings 20:1-7.

Here the prophet Isaiah visited Hezekiah, who was "sick unto death," and said to him, "Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order; for thou shalt die, and not live." Hezekiah, in prayer, reminded the Lord of all of his good works. The Lord, then, responded mercifully to his plea. He changed his mind and instructed Isaiah to go back to Hezekiah and tell him that his prayers had been heard; the Lord would heal him and he would live for fifteen more years. Was Isaiah any less a prophet of God because the Lord told him something would happen, and it didn't, for whatever reason?6

According to the way McKeever and Johnson interpret the prophecies in the Doctrine and Covenants, the illness Hezekiah had should have killed him, and rather quickly since he was "sick unto death." However, he lived another 15 years. Thus, according to the apparent rules by which they interpret prophecy, Isaiah was a false prophet. They would so judge Joseph Smith, and as we shall see, they do. However, by observing the rules of interpretation and correct context, the circumstances of this particular prophecy changed. Hezekiah pleaded with the Lord, and the Lord was merciful. In addition, we do not know what kind of sickness he had. Maybe the original intent of Isaiah's words was that Hezekiah would die, but not right away. The Bible does not word it to that effect, but then, we do not have the original manuscripts which to compare and see. So, according to rule number 2, this is not a false prophecy.

I do not believe the Bible contains any false prophecies. It is only a matter of interpretation. Also, I do not wish to dwell on several Biblical examples since this is not a study of the prophetic statements in the Bible. The point is, there are more Biblical prophecies that appear, without investigation, not to have been fulfilled, but for the purpose of this discussion, it is not necessary to detail them, only to show that while upholding any and all Biblical prophecies, McKeever and Johnson use a double standard in interpreting Joseph Smith's prophecies.

General Comments

I find it interesting that McKeever and Johnson do not seem very interested in specifics as they only make general comments. This is usually indicative that the authors are not interested in serious research, disregard evidence, and are willing to accept any explanation, true or not, that would dismiss the prophecy or prophet they do not accept. First, I'll respond to some of their general comments, then I'll be specific about why they are just plain wrong about their accusations of false prophecy.

McKeever & Johnson: Although there are several questionable predictions made in the Doctrine and Covenants…

I can't help but wonder what these "several questionable predictions" are.7 Notice that M&J claim there are "several" and only regard them as "predictions," not prophecy.

McKeever & Johnson: …two that seem to stand out from the rest come from sections 84 and 87.

If these are the two that "stand out," then by all means let's examine them. However, if these two are vindicated as authentic prophecy, then M&J should recognize, by their own statement, that the "several" other reasons they have against these other "predictions" would have even less ground upon which to disregard the prophecies of Joseph Smith. That being the case, I wonder if McKeever and Johnson would be willing to concede to even the possibility of divine inspiration (prophecy) attributed to Joseph Smith.

McKeever & Johnson: The writings from those who lived at the time of Smith's revelation show that the Mormons were anticipating the imminent construction of this building.

Yes they did. But what does this prove? The people, who were living at the time of Christ, fully expected Christ to return during their lifetimes. Since that did not happen, does that invalidate what Jesus said? According to McKeever and Johnson it should. Luckily, as Latter-day Saints, we do not use a double standard, and therefore we are willing to analyze the prophetic utterances of Joseph Smith the same way we do those of Jesus Christ and other prophets.

McKeever & Johnson: Despite the fact that the Saints were forced to leave the area around a year after the prediction was given, they still hoped to return and see the prophecy come to fruition.

Actually, we still do.

McKeever & Johnson: . . . Joseph Fielding Smith, later conceded that the prophecy could not come to pass in the way many earlier Saints had believed it would.

Joseph Fielding Smith "conceded" nothing. Joseph Smith said so himself. My rebuttal on this section contains a more complete record of what Joseph Smith actually said. This is ignored by McKeever and Johnson, as well as the rest of our critics.

McKeever & Johnson: Mormon historian Richard S. Van Wagoner noted Smith's "prophetic failures" regarding Zion and the return of Christ led Sidney Rigdon, Smith's right-hand man, to eventually lose faith in the LDS prophet.

Actually, Sidney Rigdon became disassociated with the church when he was not chosen to be the leader after the murder of Joseph and Hyrum. Since Joseph Smith made no false prophecies, it had nothing to do Joseph Smith's "prophetic failures." In addition, critics such as McKeever and Johnson ignore the statements Joseph Smith made concerning the Saints being driven out of Missouri, going to the Rocky Mountains, and that the Center Place of Zion (Missouri) would not be settled until another time. I will cover this material later in this chapter.

And so it goes. McKeever and Johnson have no real argument. They have to invent history, ignore facts, and use a double standard in order to refute Joseph Smith. Specific Comments Concerning Section 84

Now that we have a general background and understanding of what we are talking about, and a general idea of how McKeever and Johnson argue against Joseph Smith's prophecies, let's look specifically at sections 84 and 87 of the Doctrine and Covenants and see if they contain false prophecy, or if Joseph Smith is vindicated as a prophet, seer, and revelator.

There are two objections McKeever and Johnson give as to why they disregard section 84 as prophecy. First, is the term "this generation," and second is the fact that the Saints were forced out of the area, which, according to critics in general, indicates establishing Zion at that time and building the temple was not really God-ordained and thus it is a false prophecy. There are major flaws with both of these conclusions.

The basic argument McKeever and Johnson use to claim D&C 84 contains false prophecy is that it states, "this generation" will not pass until a temple is built on that site. Since this revelation was given in 1832, and no one is alive today from then, they, along with like-minded critics, are quick to classify section 84 as a false prophecy. They also claim that since Joseph Smith uttered it, he must be a false prophet. This is the perfect example I mentioned of a double standard of interpretation critics use against Joseph Smith, for Jesus Christ used the very same terminology. Let's look at what Jesus himself said to the people of his day concerning prophecies of His second coming. Matthew 24:34 quotes Christ as saying, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." Luke 21:32 repeats this prophecy.

What are "all these things," and have they come to pass?

  1. Many shall come in Christ's name, deceiving many (Matthew 24:5, Luke 21:8)
  2. Wars and rumours of wars (Matthew 24:6, Luke 21:9-10)
  3. Famines (Matthew 24:7, Luke 21:11)
  4. Pestilences (Mathew 24:7, Luke 21:11)
  5. Earthquakes (Matthew 24:7, Luke 21:11)
  6. Apostles killed (Matthew 24:9, Luke 21:16)
  7. Many shall be offended (Matthew 24:10)
  8. Many shall be betrayed (Matthew 24:10)
  9. Men will hate one another (Matthew 24:10)
 10. False prophets will deceive many (Matthew 24:11)
 11. Iniquity shall abound (Matthew 24:12)
 12. Love of many shall wax cold (Matthew 24:12)
 13. Gospel shall be preached in all the world (Matthew 24:14)
 14. Distress of nations (Luke 21:25)
 15. Men's hearts will fail them because of fear (Luke 21:11)
 16. Sun shall be darkened (Matthew 24:29, Luke 21:25)
 17. Moon shall not give her light (Matthew 24:29, Luke 21:25)
 18. Stars shall fall from heaven (Matthew 24:29, Luke 21:25)
 19. Sign of the Son of man shall appear (Matthew 24:30, Luke 21:27)

Some of "these things" occurred during Christ's time period. Some have continued since then. Some have escalated into our time. Some have not occurred yet. So we must ask, since Joseph Smith is charged with false prophecy concerning "this generation," did Jesus Christ utter a false prophecy? Absolutely not! But, according to McKeever and Johnson's rules of interpretation, he did, because "this generation" passed away without "all these things" being fulfilled. So, if Joseph Smith uttered a false prophecy about "this generation" so did Christ. I have never read anything from anyone who is a critic of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that attacks Jesus Christ, or the Bible, for making a prophecy of "this generation" which has not yet occurred. Yet it has been many centuries longer from the time of Christ until now, than it has been from the 1830's till today. It should be noted that D&C 84 does not say the "people now living," it says "this generation." The word "generation" has different meanings. According to scripture, the word "generation" can have reference to a time frame, a people, or even a dispensation. Without specific wording which would indicate exactly what the word "generation" means, it is dishonest to accuse one (Joseph Smith) of false prophecy, while accepting another (Jesus Christ) when both use it in a general form.

The main problem critics have in interpreting D&C 84 is timing. They cannot understand that when the scriptures use words such as "this generation," "a little season," "nigh," "soon to come," "quickly," and "in due time," it can mean several years, or even centuries. They have no problem with accepting a long time when the Bible makes these statements, but they refuse to interpret Joseph Smith with the same standard. To criticize such terminology is to claim the Bible false. The four hundred years of Israel's Egyptian captivity was a "little season" to the Lord. All the scriptural terms of time (nigh, shortly come to pass, at the doors, about to be, soon to be, in due time, not many days, a little season, near, close at hand, time will come, not many years, and generation) are not specific in numbers of years. Most of them are conditional. To say that "next generation" as used in the Bible can mean thousands of years, and turn around and say these very same words mean only a hundred years when used in the Doctrine and Covenants is hypocritical. Scripture comes from one source, God. His prophets write as they are inspired by the Holy Ghost. The Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Bible use the same terms, with the same meaning, because they come from the same source. You cannot interpret one in one way, and another in a different way. When the Lord wants something accomplished, it will be done, in the Lords time.

McKeever and Johnson, along with our other critics, obviously think they know the timetable of the Lord. Perhaps it would be advantageous for critics to apply Biblical principles when it comes to understanding the time and seasons of the Lord. Perhaps McKeever and Johnson should read the Bible with regards to this matter of "next generation." After all, as it states in the Bible:And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.8

Even if we look at the prophecy in D&C 84 as if the term "this generation" does mean a time frame of about 100 - 120 years (just to give M&J the benefit of the doubt), it still does not mean it is a false prophecy by LDS terms. D&C 124:49 states, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of man to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept their offerings." The Latter-Day Saints were driven out of the area by the mobs that violently persecuted them. In light of this scripture, the mobs are responsible for the temple not being built, not the LDS or God. But then, "this generation" could be referring to Latter-Day Saints as a whole, and not only are we still here, but we are growing in number.

McKeever and Johnson only quote verses 4 and 5 of D&C 84. They must not think anything else in the section is of enough significance to show a false prophecy, for they don't spend any time examining the rest of it. D&C 84 is a revelation on priesthood, as it pertains to temple ordinances. That being the case, there are a few other verses which are significant in understanding this particular temple as revealed in this section. Since McKeever and Johnson are concerned that the temple was not built, and is not even yet built, we need to understand if they, and the Lord, have the same understanding of events that were, and are to happen concerning this temple. These other verses give us a clue as to when this temple needs to be completed. First, however, we need to understand the pattern that the Lord uses in revealing doctrine to mankind. It is important to examine the time line of events to see the pattern the Lord had in mind (Obviously Mckeever and Johnson did not examine church history and started with the premise that Joseph Smith was a false prophet.) The Lord does not reveal things all at one. He does so one step at a time as indicated in Isaiah 28:9-13:

Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little...

Not only was this the pattern in the Old Testament days, it was the pattern during Christ's time as well, as noted in the following scriptures:

   * I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.9
   * For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
   * For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
   * But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.10

This pattern continues. Thus things were revealed to Joseph Smith one step at a time. So what was the pattern for temple building as revealed to Joseph Smith?

The authority of the priesthood was necessary to perform the ordinances of the temple. Continuing with section 84, we learn that the ordinances are directly connected with priesthood authority.

Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.

And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh11

How did the priesthood authority come about for these temple ordinances? If you are familiar with LDS Church history (which McKeever and Johnson don't seem to be), remember that the gospel, the doctrines and ordinances, were not revealed all at once. They were revealed from 1820 through 1844 to the Prophet Joseph Smith, line upon line, precept upon precept. After Joseph was murdered, other prophets have been given further directions from the Lord. Just as a new member learns of the gospel one step at a time, so did the early Saints. There was a gradual revealing of the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel. And, the doctrines came first, then the ordinances. So let's look at the pattern by which the doctrines and ordinances were revealed. In December 1832 the Lord stated the following in relation to building the Kirtland Temple:

Organize yourselves; prepare every needful thing; and establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God12

A few months later, in May of 1833, the Lord provided specific instructions on the construction of the Kirtland Temple.13 It is important to understand; that this instruction is in keeping with the pattern the Lord has used throughout all time, as He has instructed His prophets in the building and making of many things. The Lord gave instructions on building Noah's Ark (Genesis 6). The Lord gave instructions on how the Tabernacle was to be built (Exodus 26). The Lord gave instructions on how the Ark of the Covenant was to be built (Exodus 25). The Lord gave instructions on the making of candlesticks (Numbers 8). The Lord gave instruction in the building of altars (Joshua 22). The Lord gave instructions for the building of temples (1 Chronicles 28). The fact that the Lord gave instructions on the building of the Kirtland Temple14 is strong evidence of the divine call of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God.

The Kirtland Temple was dedicated on March 27, 1836; however, it was not built with the same purpose as temples today are. This was a "preparatory" temple. It wasn't until this temple was built that the keys of the priesthood could be restored.

PURPOSE OF KIRTLAND TEMPLE. The Kirtland Temple holds a peculiar place in the annals of temple building. It is not like other temples. It was built primarily for the restoration of keys of authority. In the receiving of these keys the fulness of gospel ordinances is revealed. The keys of salvation and exaltation for both the living and the dead were given within its sacred walls. An endowment, such as was necessary at the time, was also given. This was not as complete as the endowment later revealed.

In the Kirtland Temple there was no provision made for the salvation of the dead. It had no baptismal font, for it was only a preparatory temple. It had no provision for the endowment ordinances which were later revealed. It was a temple, however, and fully answered the purpose of its creation.15

The purpose of the Kirtland Temple was fulfilled on April 3, 1836 when the priesthood keys were restored.16 These keys were restored by Jesus Christ (Keys of Resurrection), Moses (Keys of the Gathering of Israel), Elias (Keys of the Blessings of Abraham), and Elijah (Keys of Sealing).

According to the principle of "line upon line, precept upon precept," construction could now begin on a temple in which these priesthood keys could be used. On April 6, 1841, construction of the Nauvoo Temple began. As most of the Saints left Nauvoo under threat of mob violence in early February 1846, a special crew stayed behind and completed the temple. Three months later the building was considered complete and was publicly dedicated on May 1, 1846. Thus we see the first edifice was for the restoration of priesthood peys, and the second edifice was for the application of those keys for the living. The next temple that was completed was the St. George Temple, in which endowments for the dead began.17 "The first endowments for the dead in this dispensation were performed in the St. George Temple. Endowments for the living were performed in Nauvoo."18

The line upon line, and precept upon precept, which the Lord revealed was;

  1. Kirtland Temple for the priesthood keys
  2. Nauvoo Temple for the full ordinances for the living
  3. St. George Temple for the ordinances for the dead

So we see that the Lord works the same today as He did yesterday. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."19 So how does this temple in Missouri that Joseph Smith spoke of fit in with the process of temple building? This temple is to be the "chief temple."

The center place! Let Israel gather to the stakes of Zion in all nations. Let every land be a Zion to those appointed to dwell there. Let the fulness of the gospel be for all the saints in all nations. Let no blessing be denied them. Let temples arise wherein the fulness of the ordinances of the Lord's house may be administered. But still there is a center place, a place where the chief temple shall stand, a place to which the Lord shall come, a place whence the law shall go forth to govern all the earth in that day when the Second David reigns personally upon the earth. And that center place is what men now call Independence in Jackson County, Missouri, but which in a day to come will be the Zion of our God and the City of Holiness of his people.20

How can this temple be the "chief" temple without others? Since it is to be the chief temple, and since the Lord has revealed construction plans for His tabernacles and temples in the past, it would only be logical to assume that the Lord would reveal the pattern in which this temple is to be built.

This is only a faint outline of some of our views in relation to these things, and hence we talk of returning to Jackson county to build the most magnificent temple that ever was formed on the earth and the most splendid city that was ever erected; yea, cities, if you please. The architectural designs of those splendid edifices, cities, walls, gardens, bowers, streets, &c., will be under the direction of the Lord, who will control and manage all the matters; and the people, from the President down, will all be under the guidance and direction of the Lord in all the pursuits of human life, until eventually they will be enabled to erect cities that will be fit to be caught up--that when Zion descends from above, Zion will also ascend from beneath, and be prepared to associate with those from above.21

D&C 84 also mentions a specific purpose for this temple in Missouri.

Therefore, as I said concerning the sons of Moses-for the sons of Moses and also the sons of Aaron shall offer an acceptable offering and sacrifice in the house of the Lord, which house shall be built unto the Lord in this generation, upon the consecrated spot as I have appointed22

This offering is a book listing the generations of the human race from Adam down through the centuries until the last person. The keys that Elijah held were the sealing keys.23 The keys that Elijah gave to Joseph Smith in the Kirtland temple were for the sealing of families in the eternities.24 This is the acceptable sacrifice, which will be by the Sons of Levi.

Behold, the great day of the Lord is at hand; and who can abide the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appeareth? For he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap; and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Let us, therefore, as a church and a people, and as Latter-day Saints, offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness; and let us present in his holy temple, when it is finished, a book containing the records of our dead, which shall be worthy of all acceptation.25

McKeever and Johnson bring up another point on why they feel this is a false prophecy.

McKeever & Johnson: Despite the fact that the Saints were forced to leave the area around a year after the prediction was given, they still hoped to return and see the prophecy come to fruition.

Why would God give instructions for the building a temple if He knew the Saints would be driven out of Missouri? God changed His mind because the Saints were not obedient. The Lord can change His mind depending on the obedience, or disobedience, of His children.

Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you.26

The Lord can change His mind while His command is in the process of being obeyed.

And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as he was destroying, the LORD beheld, and he repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD stood by the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.27

Not only does the Lord change things in His own wisdom, He will also change His mind if a prophet can convince Him that the change is warranted (at least within the prophet's understanding):

And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people:

Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?

Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people.

Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.

And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.28

The Lord can even change His mind about the commands He has given. For example, what the Lord directed concerning circumcision changed.

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.29

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.30

The Law of what could and could not be eaten was changed.

Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

This chapter in Leviticus gives a list of what not to eat. It specifically mentions the camel, coney, hare, swine, eagle, ossifrage, ospray, vulture, raven, owl, hawk, cuckow, cormorant, swan, pelican, eagle, stork, heron, lapwing, bat, weasel, mouse, tortoise, ferret, chameleon, lizard, snail, and mole. Yet the Lord saw fit to change it.31

Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.32

As circumstances change, what the Lord has directed will change also. The temple in Jackson County Missouri, the center place of Zion, the chief temple, did not have the necessity of being the first temple built. It has a specific purpose, which event will occur yet in the future. In December of 1990, plans were announced by the First Presidency of the Church to build a temple in St. Louis, Missouri. President Gordon B. Hinckley presided in the groundbreaking for this temple on October 30, 1993. The temple was dedicated in June of 1997. This temple marked the 50th operating temple and the first temple in Missouri. Although this is not the temple that is being discussed here, it is significant that temple building is taking place in Missouri.

Building the Foundation, Not the Completion

Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Mormonism 101/Chapter 9"

Revision as of 07:40, 6 November 2009

Index of Claims in Chapter 9: The Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price

General Comments

Building the Foundation, Not the Completion

Our Friends

Follow Us

Donate to FAIR

Main navigation

Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Mormonism 101/Chapter 9"

Revision as of 07:40, 6 November 2009

Index of Claims in Chapter 9: The Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price

General Comments

Building the Foundation, Not the Completion

Footer

Our Friends

Follow Us

Donate to FAIR