Having seen, now, that continuous revelation is necessary for the
guidance of men unto eternal salvation, and also that God through his
ancient prophets has promised to manifest Himself preparatory to the
foundation of the kingdom of the Son of God upon the earth, it becomes
necessary to enquire into the evidences that present themselves of the
truth of the claims of Joseph Smith, the Prophet. Did God speak through
him, or, was he an enthusiast, an impostor? This question concerns
every human being.
With a voice like that of the angel whom John saw in his visions on
Patmos, Joseph proclaims in the name of the Lord:
"Hearken, O, ye people of My Church, saith the voice of Him who dwells
on high, and whose eyes are upon all men, yea, verily I say, hearken ye
people from afar, and ye that are upon the islands of the sea, listen
together. For verily _the voice of the Lord is unto all men"_ (Doc. and
Cov. sec. i, 1, 2).
For centuries past the world had cherished the thought that the voice
of the Lord should no more be heard, when suddenly, thunderlike, a
messenger appeared, heralding from one end of heaven to mother the
above quoted intelligence. God has spoken.
To the chosen seed these were, indeed, tidings of great joy, but the
world at large, influenced, as the Jews formerly were, by priests and
rabbis, denounced the messenger as a bold imposter. He offered the
strongest proof a man ever can offer as a demonstration of the truth of
his message; he gave his life, sealing his testimony with his blood.
Yet a sceptical world refused to believe, refused, to a large extent,
even to investigate.
{396} What was, then, the nature of his message? That the day of the
Lord is at hand; that the inhabitants of the earth must repent of their
sins and false doctrines, and turn unto God; that those who would obey
should be made happy in the kingdom of the Son of God, but on all
disobedient souls fearful judgments would speedily fall. To prepare for
the coming of Christ was the message sent from God to man through His
servant, the Prophet Joseph. That was the nature of the message.
It will be perceived that this is in full harmony with the sacred
writ, and its very nature should be a sufficient proof of its divine
origin. If it harmonizes with the Bible, how can it be false? How can
those who believe the one reject the other? Is not that the very same
contradiction as that of which the Jews were guilty who believed the
sacred writings of the Old Testament at the same time they rejected
Christ? Clearly, when the Bible is first proved to be true, everything
that is in perfect harmony with the Bible must be true, too. In such
relation to the Bible stands the divine message of which we are
speaking.
This is a subject that must not be treated lightly. The highest
interests are here at stake--interests dearer than life itself, which
lasts but a moment. If God has spoken to this generation, woe, woe, woe
unto those who wilfully shut their ears and harden their hearts against
the word of God! The antediluvian world was drowned by a flood because
the people did not heed the warning voice. The cities of the plain were
wrapped in flames and buried in a sulphurous tomb because they rejected
the message of God. Jerusalem fell because she did not know the time
of her visitation. And how can the present world escape a similar fate
under similar circumstances?
With these lessons of past ages before us, let every honest soul
investigate the evidences of the truth of this message of the latter
days. An honest investigation is the very least that can be demanded
for a subject of this vast importance.
The attention of theological students who are familiar with the
evidences of the truth of Christianity is particularly called to the
line of thought here offered, as it is proposed to show that the
message delivered by Joseph Smith is supported by the same evidence as
the message delivered by former prophets or apostles. Christianity and
"Mormonism" must stand or fall together. If the evidence here presented
is sufficient for the one, it is sufficient for both.
{397} RETROSPECTIVE EVIDENCE.
The books of the Old Testament abound with predictions foretelling the
work of Christ on earth. It is distinctly predicted that a deliverer
should come, "the seed of woman;" he should spring out of the people
of Abraham; a new covenant would be made; the deliverer would be
despised, put to death, and yet reign for ever and ever. Such wonderful
predictions run like a string through the Old Testament, and are always
pointed to as an evidence of the truth of Christianity. This is what
is sometimes called retrospective evidence. Christ himself points to
these predictions as such evidence. "Ought not Christ to have suffered
these things, and to enter His glory? Beginning with Moses and all
the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things
concerning himself." (Luke xxiv, 26, 27. Compare John v, 46, 47.)
But the same prophets foretell with equal clearness the grand work
in which the Latter-day Saints are now engaged, as will appear on
investigation of the following passages.
Isaiah has many remarkable predictions, some of which were fulfilled
shortly after their delivery. Syria and Israel, for instance, were to
be conquered by Assyria, before the infant son of the prophet could say
"my father" (Isaiah viii, 4). The glory of Kedar was to fail in one
year (xxi, 6), that of Moab in three years (xvi, 14), that of Ephraim
in sixty-five years (vii, 8), that of Tyre in seventy years (xxiii,
15). Other predictions relate to more distant times. Thus that portion
of his book which is contained in chapter xl to lxiv embraces the
whole period from the Babylonian captivity to the end of the Christian
dispensation.
In this portion of the book the prophet predicts the deliverance of the
Jews by Cyrus (xliv, 28; xlv, 1-5, xlvii); the return to Judea (xliv,
28), the coming, suffering and glory of the Messiah, the downfall of
idolatry, the rejection of Christ by the Jews, and their consequent
rejection by God; also their final conversion and recovery (lii, 3;
lxii; lxv).
Speaking of this last event, the final gathering of the Jews--an event
which is about to be fulfilled in our own time--the prophet (chapter
lv) says that there should be a people or a nation, previously unknown
to the Jews, who should be willing to join the Jews in their worship of
God Almighty. "Behold, thou shalt call a people which thou didst not
know; and a people which did not know thee shall run to thee for the
sake of Jehovah, thy God, and for the sake of the Holy One in Israel,
for he hath glorified thee."
{398} Could language more clearly convey that at the time of the final
restoration of the Jews there should exist another people, too, who
would share with the Jews the glory in store for them? In the next
chapter (lxvi, 6-8) this other people is more clearly described: "And
the sons of the stranger who follow Jehovah in order to serve Him, and
to love Jehovah's name * * * those I will bring to My holy mountain,
and they shall rejoice in My house." These predictions are very clear,
and it is a literal fulfillment thereof that the Saints are called out
of all nations of the earth so that they may form that one nation here
spoken of, and the latter part of Isaiah's predictions are as literally
verified as that part which relates to former events.
Among the predictions of the prophet Micah we notice the invasion
of Shalmaneser (i, 6-8), and Sennacherib (i, 9-16), the dispersion
of Israel (v, 7-8) the destruction of Jerusalem (iii, 12). He also
foretells the gathering of Israel and the exaltation of Christ over all
nations. Speaking of the gathering of Israel, he says that a forerunner
should first come, and this forerunner is described as a people with
a leader at their head and Jehovah as their guide, alluding to Israel
in the wilderness, where Moses was their prophet, Jehovah going before
them. Thus saith Micah ii, 12, 13: "Certainly I will gather thee,
Jacob, and bring together the rest of Israel. * * The forerunner (or
rather the one who 'breaks' the way) goes before them; * * * the prince
goes before them and Jehovah leads." In chapter iv. the prophet more
fully describes what should happen before the gathering of Jacob: "At
the end of the days the mountain of the house of Jehovah shall be
established upon the top of the mountains, * * and the nations shall
run thereto. * * * In the same days said Jehovah, shall I gather the
remnant." Read chapter iv, 1-10 carefully. It predicts unmistakably
that at the time of the final delivery of the Jews there should exist
a people gathered among the mountains in order to serve the Lord, a
people endowed with wisdom to exercise judgment in the affairs of the
nations of the world, and yet be a peaceful, agricultural people, who
had thrown away their swords for peaceful occupations. This prediction
is as clear as any ever given concerning Christ and His work, and it
is fulfilled in the gatherings of the Saints. If prophetic evidence is
required, God has given it to us.
Let us turn to Jeremiah, who flourished a hundred years later.
{399} The chronological arrangement of the predictions of this prophet,
as has been already remarked, is not very plain, but passages relating
to the first salvation of Israel are easily recognized. Chapter iii,
15-18, are among these. Here the prophet in words that cannot be
mistaken says that the house of Judah shall go to the house of Israel,
and "they shall come together from the land of the north to the land
which I have given your fathers."
That this prediction does not relate to the deliverance from Babylon
is evident from the fact that the prophet says: "the house of Judah
shall walk with the house of Israel." The house of Israel must then
already be gathered, or else the house of Judah could not go with them.
At the return from Babylon Judah took the lead, and the Israelites
who returned had to come to Judah. Judah took the lead. Here is a
deliverance and return predicted in which Israel takes the lead. Israel
must consequently be gathered as well as Judah and previous to Judah.
Compare this with the message delivered through Joseph the Prophet, and
the evidence is both strong and conclusive.
No less clear is Daniel. In his second chapter, this great prophet
predicts coming events with the clearness of history. Four kingdoms
are described: The Babylonian, under the dynasty of Nebuchadnezzar;
the Medo-Persian, the Grecian and the Roman. The last named is divided
into ten, all of which in their composition carry the seed of their
dissolution. Iron (political power) and clay (man-invented religion)
mixed together, was their inheritance from Rome, and the cause of their
weakness. But in the days of these ten kingdoms the kingdom of heaven
is founded, a stone cut out without hands of man yet of miraculous
origin; mighty as a mountain, and finally, superior to the finest
metals, the most splendid earthly thrones.
That this prediction was not fulfilled at the time of Christ is clear
from two facts: First, that Christ came before the dissolution of the
Roman empire; and, secondly, that Christ did not found a kingdom at all
when He was here. Only by the most lamentable perversion of Scripture
can this passage be made to apply to the first coming of Christ. It
must apply to His second coming or have no meaning at all. But to His
second coming it applies. Then His kingdom will fill all the earth, but
the stone must first roll, and, while so doing, grow until it becomes
fit to perform the work assigned to it.
In chapter seven the prophet treats of the same subject. {400} The four
kingdoms are represented by four beasts, and the ten kingdoms by ten
horns; three of the horns or kingdoms are subdued by a little horn,
the papal, anti-Christian power, which exercises its tyrannical reign,
and overcomes the Saints for a period of one thousand two hundred and
sixty years. Here, too, the time is fully defined, showing beyond the
possibility of doubt that the restoration of the Kingdom of God belongs
to this century, counting from the appearance of the little horn, the
papal power.
Thus the ancient prophets have spoken of the time in which we live, and
their predictions are irrefutable evidence of the truth of the message
accepted by the Latter-day Saints.
Let us add one more testimony. John, the great prophet of the New
Testament, while on Patmos, has a vision in which the Turkish conquest
is shown (chapter ix). Four angels, bound in the great river Euphrates,
are let loose to spread war and desolation upon the earth for a period
of about four hundred years (Rev. ix, 15). Their great numbers are
described, their armors, their national colors, their power to hurt
an idolatrous "Christian" world, tormenting those who had abandoned
the worship of God for the worship of Saints and images. After this
(chapter x) a messenger appears with a little book, signifying that the
Spirit of prophecy should again be manifested before "many people, and
nations, and tongues and kings" (Rev. x, 1-11). How very clear is this
prediction as to the great event of our time. In reading the vision we
feel that John saw the youthful Prophet Joseph with the little book
in his hand, and heard his mighty voice declaring that the fulness of
times had come. "And the angel (or messenger) which I saw stand upon
the sea and upon the earth (embracing both hemispheres) lifted up his
hands to heaven and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever * * * *
that there shall be time no longer, but in the days of the voice of the
seventh angel * * * * the mystery of God should be finished" (x, 5-7).
Is not this the very essence of the message delivered by Joseph the
Prophet?
With such frequency and with such clearness the Spirit of prophecy in
all past ages foretells the work in which the Latter-day Saints are
now engaged. If Christ can point to predictions as an evidence of His
divine mission; if Christians can point to prophecy as an evidence
of the truth of Christianity, why are not these predictions, these
prophecies, equally infallible evidence of the truth of the divine
mission of Joseph Smith? How one can be accepted and the other rejected
I fail to see.
{401} PROSPECTIVE EVIDENCE.
Our Lord refers more than once to prophecies delivered by Himself as
evidence of His divine mission: "And now I have told you before it came
to pass, that when it is come to pass ye might believe." (John xiv,
29.) This kind of evidence has been called prospective. When we read,
for instance, the prophecy of our Lord announcing the destruction of
Jerusalem, compare the prediction with the description of the fearful
event given by Joseph, and see how literally everything was fulfilled,
we can understand what strong evidence the prophecy is of the divine
mission of the Lord. Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh are all witnesses
of the truth of the word of God, and their testimony is unanimously
accepted by everyone who is able to trace the finger of God. The
conclusion is this, that when a man foretells an event which no human
wisdom could foresee, the occurrence of such an event is a sure proof
that God spoke through that man. So God Himself reasons: "Who hath
declared this from ancient times? Have not I, the Lord?" (Isaiah, xlv,
20-22.)
If we apply this rule to the message delivered through Joseph Smith, we
unavoidably reach the same conclusion. We are forced by the most plain
logic to acknowledge his divine mission.
The following is offered for consideration: In the Book of Doctrine
and Covenants many predictions are given concerning the Saints, some
of which have already been fulfilled, while others are still awaiting
fulfillment.
In 1830, when the Church was still in her earliest infancy, it was
predicted: "Zion shall rejoice upon the hills and flourish before the
final salvation of Israel" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec xxxv, 24, 25).
This remarkable prediction is often repeated, and finally, in the year
1838, at Far West, Missouri, it is again announced: "Therefore, will I
not make solitary places to bud and to blossom, and to bring forth in
abundance, said the Lord? Is there not room enough upon the mountains?"
(Doctrine and Covenants, sec. cxvii, 7, 8.)
From the very foundation of the Church the Spirit of God, through the
prophet, thus announces in no uncertain way that Zion, the Saints,
should move to "the hills," "the mountains," "the solitary places,"
and there be prosperous, "blossom" gloriously. It must be remembered
that these predictions were delivered at a time when no human wisdom
could foresee such an event. When the Church was founded in 1830,
there was no possibility--speaking from a mere human {402} point of
view--of foreseeing her removal to the hills, much less that she would
be removed and prosper in the "hills." Nor is there in the whole
history of mankind anything analogous to this exodus of the Church. The
probability, speaking from a human point of view, when the Church was
founded, was either that she would be favored by the world and remain
where she was, or that she would be crushed on the spot by an immense
hostility. Either of these two occurrences might have been considered
probable at the time; but none of them was predicted. The Church
should blossom in the hills. Has not this prediction, delivered half
a century ago, been remarkably fulfilled? Who can travel through the
valleys of the mountains to-day, among fragrant gardens and orchards,
and notice the friendly, peaceful homes that everywhere smile upon the
stranger, or observe the condition of the Saints, without seeing that
the predictions have come literally true? Zion now blossoms in the
mountains.
The fulfillment of these predictions has not been brought about by
man, otherwise than in this way that ungodly men, without their own
knowledge, were the instruments. The Saints were driven from place to
place. They went not with a _calculation_ to fulfill prophecy, but
because they could not help themselves. In the same way the Jews and
the Romans fulfilled the predictions of our Lord.
Anyone who will honestly consider these facts will see that the events
prominent in the history of the Latter-day Saints indelibly mark Joseph
Smith as a prophet of God.
Other predictions delivered by Joseph the Prophet concern the nations
of the earth. In 1832 the following prediction was given: "For after
your testimony cometh the testimony of earthquakes, that shall cause
groanings in the midst of her, and man shall fall upon the ground, and
shall not be able to stand. And also cometh the testimony of the voice
of thunderings, and the voice of lightings, and the voice of tempests,
and the voice of the waves of the sea, heaving themselves beyond their
bounds. And all things shall be in commotion; and, surely, men's hearts
shall fail them; for fear shall come upon all men." (Doctrine and
Covenants, sec. lxxvii, lxxxix, xci).
True, this prediction has not yet in all its details been fulfilled;
still, the events of the last ten years fully indicate that the time
is drawing near when the "testimony of thunders" shall roll over
the earth. I refer to numerous calamities which the last years have
witnessed. Earthquakes, floods, {403} storms, fires, conflagrations,
wars, anarchy have filled the newspapers with horrible reading matter.
We need only remember the earthquake in Charleston, the overflow of the
Yellow River in China, the conflagration of several theatres, the riots
in Chicago. So noted have these years been for calamities of every
description that astrologers have pointed out that they were caused
by certain planets which, during the past years, have had a peculiar
position in relation to each other and to the earth. Be this as it may,
the fact remains that we live in a time of visitation--a visitation
already foretold by Joseph the Prophet. Here, again, we see his words
verified, and he himself vindicated as a prophet of God.
Another prediction, the fulfillment of which is written in letters of
blood on the pages of the history of the American nation, cannot be
contradicted. In 1832 God declared through Joseph Smith: "Behold the
Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the
Southern States shall call on other nations, even the nation of Great
Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations,
in order to defend themselves, and thus war shall be poured out upon
all nations." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. lxxxvii, 3). Concerning
this war, it was foretold that it should terminate in "death and misery
to many, many souls." Also the place where the first shot was to be
fired was foretold: "Verily, thus saith the Lord, concerning the wars
that will shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of South
Carolina." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. lxxxvii, 1; cxxx, 12, 13.)
These minute predictions were given at a time when people generally
did not believe it possible for the United States to engage in a war
with each other. Those acquainted with the sentiments that prevailed
in America at that time, all agree in this. Nay, even when the report
reached the Northern States that their Southern brethren had actually
commenced the tragedy, it was hard for the Northern States to believe
it. There was no possibility at the time of Joseph for human sagacity
to foresee this war. Yet the despised prophet predicted it with a
clearness not surpassed by Isaiah or Daniel.
Did it come true? Did the war break out in South Carolina? Was the
slave question the _casus belli_? Did the Southern States apply to
other nations for help? Every particular came true, and the world knows
it, even if it fails to acknowledge that all had been predicted years
before it happened.
{404} It would be a reasonable supposition that the literal fulfillment
of a prediction like this should be proof enough of the divine mission
of the prophet. Or, what is required of a true prophet? Is not that
enough that his predictions are proved to be true? In the case of
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, John, nothing more is required. When we see
that their predictions have come true we grant that they were true
prophets. Must we, then, reverse every rule of logic in the case of
Joseph Smith? Must we say his predictions have been fulfilled; _ergo_
he was a _false_ prophet? The absurdity of this is too great to need
refutation.
We know that an objection has been raised that the prediction of the
war did not come true in every particular--that the war was confined to
the United States, and was not poured out upon all nations.
To this objection we answer that, in one sense, it was poured out upon
all nations. The population of the United States consists, as is well
known, of people from almost every nation under the sun, and England,
Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, all were represented in the
armies of that war. All contributed to the death list in that long and
fearful combat. How much misery, how much sorrow, how many tears did
that war cause far beyond the borders of the great republic, when aged
mothers and fathers, and sisters and brothers in the old countries
received the intelligence that a son or a brother was wounded or dead?
If we will consider this in all its consequences we will soon find that
the expression, "War shall be poured out upon all nations" is no idle
figure of speech. It is a stern fact. Thousands beyond the rolling
waves of the ocean drank the bitter cup filled with the curse of that
war. Understood in this way, the prediction is literally fulfilled in
all its details.
But it must also be remembered that we have not yet reached the last
scene of the drama. It is a grave question with some clear-seeing
politicians to-day whether the slave question has yet reached its final
solution. If it has not, we may yet see the prediction in question
fulfilled in every particular.
The prediction itself plainly states that some time would elapse
between the fulfillment of its various parts. Verse 3, D&C 87,
foretells that the war should be caused by the division of the United
States into two great parties, and that the Southern States should
call upon Great Britain; "and thus war should be poured out upon all
nations." Then verse 4 {405} explains that this should be continued
"after _many days_," thereby that the slaves (the negroes) should rise
up, and also the remnant (the Indians), and new wars, new bloodshed
take place. The prophecy thus clearly marks two divisions, the events
of which are separated from each other by a period of _many_ days, or
years; for days in the prophetic language are always understood to mean
years. Thus the prediction itself is plain. It foretells the so-called
War of the Rebellion, its subsequent result as well as its causes. It
further intimates that the question out of which it arose should be
settled for many years, but that again the flames of war should be
kindled and spread wider than before. The first part of this prediction
has been fulfilled. The second belongs to the future.
Having thus removed the objection made to the prediction, it may not
be out of place to show that this way of putting close together, in
prophetical sentences, events which are in time far separated from each
other, is common to prophetical writers. In this respect the Prophet
Joseph resembles the ancient prophets, a fact which ought not to be the
ground of objection.
Isaiah, speaking of the mission of Christ (chapter lxi, 1-3), says:
"The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me * * to proclaim the year of
acceptance of Jehovah and the day of vengeance of our God." Christ,
in reading and expounding this text in Nazareth, reads to the middle
of the verse, closes the books and exclaims: "To-day this scripture
is fulfilled in your ears." (Luke iv, 21.) Indeed, with the coming
of Christ the year of acceptance of Jehovah had come. The first
part of the verse was fulfilled, but the second portion--the day of
vengeance--was not yet. Thousands of years lie between the first part
of this verse and the second.
So the Prophet Joel, in his second chapter, verses 28-32, foretells
in one sentence the wonders of the day of Pentecost (compares Acts
ii, 16-21) and the great day of Jehovah, when no one can escape the
judgments to come except those who take their refuge upon Mount Zion
and in Jerusalem, events which are separated from each other by
thousands of years.
The objection to the prediction of Joseph Smith is therefore no
objection at all, unless the ancient prophets must be rejected on
the same ground. On the contrary, an honest investigation leads to
the discovery that the very language of prophecy as delivered by the
Prophet of this dispensation is in harmony with ancient prophecies,
that they flow from one and the same source--the Spirit of God.
{406} DIRECT EVIDENCE.
With "direct evidence," theologians mean such evidence as is supplied
by the miracles of the Lord and his servants.
It is true that miracles are often appealed to as evidence of the
divine mission of Christ. Nicodemus says: "No man can do these miracles
that thou doest except God be with him" (John iii, 2). Christ Himself
supports this view. "I have greater witness than that of John; for
the work which the Father has given me to finish, the same works that
I do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me" (John v, 36).
"Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, or else
believe me for the very works' sake" (John xiv, 11). Also: "But that
ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins
(He says to the sick of palsy), I say unto thee, 'Arise, and take up
thy bed, and go thy way unto thine house'" (Mark ii, 10, 11). Here,
clearly, miracles are furnished as evidence of Christ's divine mission.
But it must be remembered that the performance of miracles is not
always a proof of divine authority. The Egyptian magicians worked
several miracles, it seems, in the sight of Pharaoh, thereby turning
his heart away _from_ God. The disciples of the Pharisees at the time
of Christ also performed miracles. They charged Christ with the crime
of being connected with the powers of darkness, and that He by such aid
cast out demons; to which charge Christ with holy indignation, replies:
"If I cast out demons with the aid of Beelzebub, by whom do _your
children_ cast out demons?" So that miracles were by no means something
which Christ claimed as his exclusive prerogative. It has also been
clearly foretold that anti-Christ should claim miraculous powers and
thereby deceive many. "His coming is after the workings of Satan with
all power and signs and lying wonders" (II Thess. ii, 9). "And he doeth
great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the
earth in the sight of men and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by
the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of
the beast" (Rev. xiii, 13, 14). From these passages it is clear that
caution is needed in accepting this kind of evidence. Miracles may be
evidence of the presence of God or the presence of anti-Christ.
Nor is the performance of miracles always necessary to prove divine
authority. A man may be sent from God in order to fulfill a very
important mission without having to {407} prove this by miracles. Thus
John the Baptist had a very important mission. He came to "prepare the
way" for the appearance of Christ, yet it is not known that he proved
his mission by miracles.
It is true that Christ and His Apostles after Him worked many striking
miracles, even the raising of the dead, but these miracles were, after
all, not so frequent as has sometimes been imagined. Those men of
God did not touch everything with supernatural power, healing every
sick person they saw, raising every dead one, changing the common day
occurrences of life into scenes matching the stories of the "Arabian
Nights." Not at all. Their miracles were comparatively scarce; they
were exceptional occurrences. Thus when Paul was incarcerated in Rome,
the cold prison walls forming but a poor shelter for his body during
the winter, and his resources probably being exhausted, he asked
Timothy kindly to bring with him the cloak which Paul had forgotten
at Troas, at the house of one of the brethren, called Carpus. (II
Tim., iv, 13). The passage is as prosaic as it could possibly be, and
has nothing supernatural about it. Still more, in the same chapter
we hear Paul diligently plead with Timothy to come to Rome to him,
for he was now alone. All except Luke had forsaken him, and among
other misfortunes was this--that he had had to leave Trophimus sick
at Miletum. "Erastus abode at Corinth, but Trophimus have I left
at Miletum, sick" (II Tim. iv, 20). Sick? Why did not the great
Apostle cure him instead of leaving him sick? If the Apostles had
been such miracle-makers as modern fancy has represented them to be,
an occurrence of this nature would have been impossible. But this is
not the only one recorded. Timothy, one of Paul's converts and fellow
laborers, is always spoken of in terms of high praise, and he is a
noble instance of eminent gifts and grace in one young in years. This
favorite of the apostle was sick, however, and in his letter Paul
therefor exhorts him to be careful about his health: "Drink no longer
water but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often
infirmities" (I Tim. v, 23). Let those who have overestimated the
frequency of miracles at the time of the first Christian churches,
consider this passage well, and they will be likely to see their
mistake. Here was a prominent man of the church, himself possessing
great spiritual gifts, constantly suffering from "infirmities." Here
is the great "Apostle of the Gentiles," whose power always was great,
advising that prominent man to use a little medicine. {408} Why did he
not promise him a miracle? Why? That we do not know, but this we do
know, that miracles were never by God strewn round, "plenty as black
berries."
Anyone who will study the miracles of our Lord and his apostles,
will find that they were always performed for the glory of God, and
conveyed a lesson necessary and appropriate. Although individuals were
thereby benefited, yet this was not the only or ultimate aim. Christ,
for instance, heals with a touch a man whom the law had pronounced
unclean, and whom no Jew would touch. He shows by His miracles that
he is the Lord over disease, over demons, over physical nature, over
brute creatures, in order that we may have confidence in Him in all
things. We see him forgiving sins, answering prayers, direct (Mat. ix,
20-22), intercessory (23-26), united (27-31), and even unuttered
(32-33). The same characteristics may be observed in the miracles of
the apostles. They were never performed for selfish purposes, nor
for the gratification of curiosity, never for the sake of show. The
epistles explain that miraculous gifts, including prophecy, were given
to confirm the truth of the Gospel, promote its rapid dissemination,
and edify the churches.
Such miracles, then, are from God, and may be relied upon as evidence
of the truth of those revelations which they are intended to prove.
Two questions now become appropriate in our investigation: Did
miraculous manifestations follow the message of Joseph the Prophet,
and, if so, were these miraculous manifestations of such a nature as to
warrant the conclusion that he had his power from God? Let us see.
In the year 1830 the Lord declared through His prophet: "And it shall
come to pass that there shall be a great work in the land, even among
the Gentiles * * * for I am God and mine arm is not shortened; and I
will show miracles, signs and wonders, unto all those who believe on
my name; and who shall ask it in my name in faith they shall cast out
devils (demons); they I shall heal the sick; they shall cause the blind
to receive their sight, the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak, and
the lame to walk. The time speedily cometh when great things are to be
shown forth unto the children of men" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec.
xxxv 7-10.) Here we have an unmistakably clear promise that miracles
should attend the message of our Prophet; and this promise is repeated
at other times. But was this promise also kept? Were those "great
things" shown unto the children of men? Or was the promise a false one?
{409} How could it be false? This was one of the very first promises
given. When we remember how rapidly the Church spread in those early
days, no other conclusion is possible than this: that the promise given
was also kept to the very letter. Men are not so foolish as to follow a
man who promises "great things" and never keeps his promises. This the
ministers of the world have learnt, wherefore they wisely abstain from
promising any "great things" before the millennium, possibly. It is
always convenient to have a future to draw on during present poverty.
But here is a man who, contrary to most ministers of the world,
declares in the name of the Lord that the time had now come for the
manifestations of "great things." Thousands heard this and believed,
in itself a sure proof that "great things" really were shown. The sick
were healed, the blind received their sight, the deaf heard, the dumb
spake and the lame walked.
At the time of Joseph it was generally accepted, even among the
enemies, as a fact that the Prophet performed many great miracles. We
remember a romance from that time wherein Joseph is represented as
raising a dead lady. Of course, the author of this romance explains
it as humbug, the apparent death being caused by a dose of morphine
or something else. Other authors ascribe the works of the Prophet to
magnetism. Joseph Smith, they say, knew the mysteries of magnetism and
understood how to turn them to good account. These efforts on the part
of the enemies to explain or account for the miracles of the prophet
are a proof as sure as any one can desire that he showed those "great
things" which he promised to show in the name of the Lord. Had there
been nothing, the enemies would have nothing to account for. "He did
it through magnetism" is the modern expression for: "He did it through
Beelzebub." Had Joseph been an impostor, how easily that could have
been exposed. Here he promises that the sick should be healed by faith.
Yet no attempt has been made to prove that the promise was never kept,
only that he kept it through magnetism! The enemies well knew that such
works followed the testimony of Joseph the Prophet, works for which
they could not account in the usual way.
As an instance of how commonly the enemies believed in Joseph's power,
the following well-known incident may be referred to. A man once
came to the Prophet and asked him to show a miracle. It was not the
Prophet's way to make "show" of such works; wherefore he positively
refused. But the man grew impertinent and abusive, and talked lightly
of {410} the work of God. Finally the prophet said in a voice which
penetrated the soul of the miracle-seeking visitor: "You want a
miracle. Tell me what you want. Do you want to be struck blind, deaf
or dumb? In the name of the Lord God I tell you, you shall have it."
Upon this the man left the presence of the prophet in a hurry. Now,
why did not this man stay and have a fair trial? Joseph promised him a
miracle. Why did he not wait and get it? Simply for the reason that he
dared not. In common with all who knew Joseph, he was too well aware of
the power of God through the Prophet. The enemies themselves are thus
testifying to the fact that miracles attended this Prophet.
Orson Pratt in his work has recorded a number of cases of wonderful
healing.
Nor are we referred exclusively to dead witnesses. There are still
living men and women in Utah and elsewhere who were personally
acquainted with the Prophet, and they are willing to testify, to the
last of the great works they have seen with their eyes and heard with
their ears, performed by the Prophet. Moreover, great works still
continue. To deny, therefore, that miraculous manifestations followed
the message of Joseph the Prophet is to deny facts.
These miracles, on the closest investigation, will all be found to
partake of the nature of genuine Scriptural miracles. Their aim is the
glory of God, as they are always ascribed to Him alone, not to the
power of man. Nor are they performed in order to glorify any one man,
or set of men. They are performed as a confirmation of faith, not to
produce faith.
These points are important and instructive. While the miracles of the
Catholic Church appear to be either silly nonsense or worked in support
of some notoriously false doctrine, in order to gain proselytes, or
otherwise exhibit their spurious origin, the miraculous manifestations
following the Church of Christ exhibit no such marks. Their origin is
divine, and they bear the divine in arks in themselves. Like God's
works in nature, these miracles must be closely studied in order to be
known in all their beauty. The indifferent pass them by without notice.
There is nothing to "show" in them. But this is one proof of their
divine origin. Man always works in a "showy" way when left to himself;
God's ways are "in the deep."
I have pointed out that true miracles are referred to as evidence of a
divine mission. We have proof that such miracles attended the message
of Joseph the Prophet. The conclusion {411} is therefore given. He was
a man sent from God, and his message was divine.
When applied to Christianity no one doubts the correctness of the
conclusion, if he believes in miracles at all; but if the promises are
granted and the conclusion accepted in the case of Christianity, what
a fearful corruption of mind there must be in a man who can deny both
premises and conclusion when the rule is applied to test the claims of
Joseph the Prophet. Surely, in order to be consistent, we must either
accept or reject both. A third we do not see.
The evidence thus far considered is external and direct, appealing
to our senses. Another class of evidence remains which has been
called internal. Applied to Christianity this kind of evidence is
thus explained: If Christianity is not of divine origin, it must be
a cunningly devised fable. Which is the most probable supposition?
Internal evidence tries to answer that question.
The same process of reasoning by which this question is answered when
applied to Christianity can also be applied to the message brought
by Joseph the Prophet. If this message is not from God it must be
from man; it must be forged in order to deceive and must be termed
the greatest fraud of the century. It is either a divine truth or a
diabolical lie. _Tertium non est_. Which is the more likely supposition?
In order to decide this question we must consider the moral precepts
given by the messenger, his own character, and the character of those
who receive it and profess to follow its precepts. For it is very clear
that any message which in itself is "good" and which also produces good
results in the hearts and lives of men, is not likely to be from the
evil one. What is good is from God. Was Joseph the Prophet a good man?
Did he inculcate holy principles unto his fellow-men? Does the gospel
he preached tend to make men holy? If so, his message must be from God.