Joseph Smith: Mormon Prophet

Today the Mormon Church announced that they were creating a new imprint relating to the origin and growth of the church: The Church Historian’s Press. And they announced that its first project will be the Joseph Smith Papers.

From the press release:

Elder Marlin K. Jensen, Church Historian, describes the Papers project as a collection of “journals, diaries, correspondence, articles and notices. Everything of a written nature Joseph Smith generated, or over which he had oversight.”

This is key. The foundation for all historical research are the primary documents. The Joseph Smith Papers will be the “end all, be all” of primary documents relating to Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the Mormon Church.

Ronald Esplin, a general editor, said “This initiative will offer a very deep pool of primary sources for researchers to dip into. It will help lift the overall standard of scholarship as there will be greater self and peer accountability in future writings that will be produced dealing with early Mormon history.”

I look forward to buying these volumes. As you read his diaries and journals, you get to know the man in a way that you could not imagine. Nothing compares to reading Joseph Smith’s brief 1832 history. He tells about his struggles with repentance and which church to join. Then he tells about his first vocal prayer, and how God appeared him and forgave him of his sins. Then he tells in frank and simple language about receiving the Gold Plates from the angel and translating the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ.

And all of this is written in his own handwriting. Reading this brief history is like sitting in front of the fireplace with Joseph Smith and having him reminisce. There is a power that comes from reading Joseph Smith’s own story written in his own hand. It is the unfiltered truth.

This project is a rather ambitious one. It is projected to be about thirty volumes. The project’s webpage says this:

“When completed, The Joseph Smith Papers will consist of more than thirty volumes in six series: Journals, Documents, Revelations and Translations, History, Legal and Business, and Administrative. Three volumes of Joseph Smith’s journals cover the years 1832 through 1844. The Documents Series, in eleven volumes, span 1828 to 1844. Four volumes—manuscript revelation books, other early revelation manuscripts including key Joseph Smith translation manuscripts, the Book of Mormon printer’s manuscript, and published Joseph Smith-era scripture—make up the Revelations and Translations Series. Seven volumes of history encompass the period 1805 to 1844. The Legal and Business Series has three volumes that include records of cases occurring in New York/Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois. Administrative records will publish minute books and letterbooks.”

What is impressive is that the project has been endorsed by the National Historical Publications and Records Commission. This is a combination of the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval and the Underwriters Laboratories certification. Because of this endorsement, we know that the methodology of the project is up to professional standards.

Elder Jensen said that The Joseph Smith Papers was “the single most significant historical project of our generation.”

I agree.

On January 12, 1836, Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church, entertained a visitor from the east. His journal records the meeting this way:

"Brother Joseph Rose introduced to me Russell Weaver, a Christian or Unitarian preacher, so-called, from Cambray, New York. We had some little controversy on prejudice, but soon came to an understanding. He spoke of the Gospel, and said he believed it, adding that it was good tidings of great joy. I replied that it was one thing to proclaim good tidings, and another to tell what these tidings were. He waived the conversation and withdrew." (History of the Church, 2:364. Cf. Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, 156.)

Joseph Smith’s home was an open one. He frequently had boarders, and his door was open to people who were hard-up. And occasionally there were intellectual rubberneckers who would visit and cross-examine him. They were kicking his tires, so to speak, or taking him for a test drive.

This is understandable. After all, you have a young man in his twenties and thirties making audacious claims. He claimed to be a prophet, and to have seen God and angels, and then claims to have produced new scripture (the Book of Mormon). And then he organizes a new body of believers, the Mormon Church. Joseph Smith, by making such fantastic claims, was just asking to be henpecked with questions.

And, as this journal entry shows, he was up to it. But what impressed me most about the meeting was not the form of the conversation—the fact that Joseph Smith actually dialogued with people despite his busy schedule of church, family, and farming—but the content of his message.

It appears that the Reverend Russell Weaver wanted to witness to Joseph Smith. That is, he wanted to express his faith and convection about the Gospel and so forth. That is fair enough. He has his right to free speech, just like everyone else.

But its not that what he was saying or doing was bad per se; it was just redundant. Anyone who has had superficial contact with the Mormon Church knows that it is Christian. In fact, over one hundred years ago the First Presidency (the supreme governing council of the Mormon Church) issued this statement to both clarify the question and to refute critics:

"Our religion is founded on the revelations of God. The gospel we proclaim is the Gospel of Christ, restored to earth in this the dispensation of the fullness of times. The high claim of the Church is declared in its title—The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Established by divine direction, its name was prescribed by him whose Church it is—Jesus the Christ."

"The religion of this people is pure Christianity. Its creed is expressive of the duties of practical life. Its theology is based on the doctrines of the Redeemer."

"If it be true Christianity to accept Jesus Christ in person and his mission as divine; to revere him as the Son of God, the crucified and risen Lord, through whom alone mankind can attain salvation; to accept his teachings as a guide, to adopt as a standard and observe as a law the ethical code he promulgated; to comply with the requirements prescribed by him as essential to membership in his Church, namely, faith, repentance, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, if this be Christianity, then are we Christians, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian church." ("Address to the World," March 26, 1907, cited in Messages of First Presidency 4:142-155)

Questioning the Christianity of Mormons is like questioning the wetness of water.

As I said, the Reverend Russell Weaver’s witness of his faith was probably appreciated, but it was also redundant and therefore unnecessary. Joseph Smith was already a practicing Christian. But by judging how the conversation began and ended, with the issue of prejudice in the forefront and then Joseph Smith being brushed aside at the end, it seems that the good reverend may have been a bit resentful of Joseph Smith.

I have a fairly good understanding of where Joseph Smith was coming from, but I cannot say the same for the Reverend Weaver. I do not know fully what his intentions were, and we do not have the historical records to see his side of the story. All we can work from are the facts from this one journal entry. But it seems like the Reverend Wells wanted to merely “talk at” or “witness at” Joseph Smith as opposed to “talking to” and “witnessing to” the Prophet.

My point is not to criticize the Revered Wells, but to focus on what Joseph Smith said in response. Wells had his prepared speech and patter, but when Joseph Smith began to cross-examine him, the good reverend got flustered and brushed him off. When Joseph Smith said “it was one thing to proclaim good tidings, and another to tell what these tidings were,” it seemed to me that he was calling the Reverend Weaver (and by extension all of us) to get past the clichés and slogans of external religiosity, and to have a substantive, authentic spiritual life.

We all know what is right and what is wrong, and we all can get a lump in our throat at the appropriate time while reading the scriptures, and we have all the spiritual talking points memorized. In short, we can be superb superficial Christians.

That is the externalities, the form of life. But Joseph Smith wanted us also to have content to our lives. This is the internal, and therefore invisible, aspect of spiritual living. We can say that we accept Christ, but what does that mean in daily application? We go to church (or synagogue, or temple, or mosque), but if we doze-off, is it doing us any good? We can love the Gospel—the good tidings—but what exactly are those good tidings? And why are they so important?

So Joseph Smith was asking us to take the next step. In another setting, Joseph Smith said the following:

“Any many may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and be happy in that belief, and yet not obey his commandments, and at last be cut down for disobedience to the Lord's righteous requirements.” (Chapter 13: Obedience: “When the Lord Commands, Do It”, Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 158–70)

Joseph Smith was driving us on to a deeper discipleship. He asked us those hard questions, the questions that we wish people did not ask. He makes me uncomfortable in the right way. But like a spiritual drill sergeant, he keeps us going on, even after all these years.

A few years ago I was watching a webcast of a panel discussion. The moderator and one-half of the participants were experts in a certain field, plus there was a cabinet-level government official as the keynote speaker. The other half of the panel, however, included producers and actors who starred in a television drama series about the same field.

It was quite a hoot. The contrast between the two halves of the panel was startling. The real-life experts could give crisp and concise answers to the questions. On the other hand, the Television-Land half of the panel gave short answers about the character they played, or their own personal lives. But unlike the characters they portrayed in the TV show, they had no technical knowledge or insight into the field.

The lesson is this: the real-life experts were knowledgeable in their field—their life was their script; however, the actors were working without a script. The illusion I had from the show—the "willful suspension of disbelief" as it is sometimes called—was shattered. It reminded me of the ancient Greek thespians who wore the bulky masks when they acted, or the first time you see a character from a science-fiction movie out of costume. From what I understand David Prowse is a nice man—until he puts on the Darth Vader mask. Then it is all iron-fisted business.

In writing this, I am not trying to besmear actors. I am from California, so I went to school with aspiring actors. Actors have also held positions of high office. Ronald Reagan was both governor and president. Arnold Schwarzenegger is currently a governor. Both Sonny Bono and Clint Eastwood have been mayors. And Shirley Temple has been a US ambassador twice.

Also, the series in question has won several Emmys and Golden Globe awards, so the people are tops. I give them due credit for the technical and artistic aspects of the show.

What I am saying, however, is that when people—be it actors or everyday people—operate without a script, mistakes can happen.

I think that is one reason why Jesus Christ goes by the title of “the author … of our faith.” (Hebrews 12:2). He is the author of the script we are to follow. He is the “Word” (John 1:1), or the words that make up this script. He is “the Alpha and the Omega” (Revelation 1:8)—which is like saying He is the A and the Z, as the God’s Word Translation of the Bible renders this verse. So He is the letters that make up the words of the script. He is everything we are supposed to do and to be, to the smallest detail.

These small details can be big things. An ancient prophet wrote:

“By small and simple things are great things brought to pass.” (Alma 37:6)

And a modern apostle wrote:

“God's shaping personalness is felt in the details of our lives.” (Neal A. Maxwell, “Called To Serve”)

The point is that we have a plan for our lives. That plan is Christ.

Howard W. Hunter, the fourteenth president of the Mormon Church said:

"Several months ago [in 1994] an invitation was given to members of the Church as we strive to keep the commandments of God and receive the full measure of his blessings. The invitation was for all members of the Church to live with ever more attention to the life and example of the Lord Jesus Christ, emulating the love and hope and compassion he displayed. ... "

"We must know Christ better than we know him; we must remember him more often than we remember him; we must serve him more valiantly than we serve him. Then will we drink water springing up unto eternal life and will eat the bread of life."

"What manner of men and women ought we to be? Even as he is." (Howard W. Hunter, “He Invites Us to Follow Him,” Ensign, Sep 1994, 2)

Mormonism is about Christ. That is why Mormons have such a reverence for Joseph Smith. We see him as a revealer of Christ, or in other words, a restorer of this script we are to follow.

Joseph Smith wrote:

“The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.” (“Chapter 3: Jesus Christ, the Divine Redeemer of the World,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 45–56.)

Following Christ is easy. The first step is studying the script. Our script is the scriptures. In them we see both the historical data about Christ’s life, and also the doctrine, principles, and tenants of what Jesus Christ taught. The scriptures give us both the “what” and the “why” of Christ.

The next part is taking these principles—these ideas from God—and then incorporating them into our life. Actors practice and have rehearsals. Our life is one long dress rehearsal. We are practicing how to be like Christ so that in the next life we can be ready for the Great Opening Day.

It’s hard, but it’s worth it. For centuries now actors have been memorizing pages and blocks of Shakespearian text. Our call as Christians is to do the same. But we are not memorizing a text; we are memorizing Christ.

“The present is an age of progress, of change, of rapid advance, and of wonderful revolutions.”

“The very foundations of society—social, political, commercial, moral and religious—seem to be shaken as with a mighty earthquake, from center to circumference. All things tremble, creation groans, the world is in travail and pains to be delivered.”

“A new era has dawned upon our planet, and is advancing with accelerated force, with giant strides.”

These four sentences sum up the chaos and promise affecting us in the first decade of a new century and a new millennium. Surprisingly, they were not written any time recently. They were actually written in 1855 by Parley P. Pratt, an apostle in the Mormon Church and an associate of Joseph Smith.

These words were the opening sentences to his book Key To the Science of Theology. This book, which is a mixture of missionary tract and theological textbook, was written to explain why the Lord called Joseph Smith to be a prophet in this era of human history.

Parenthetically, the “Why?” questions are usually the most crucial. President Boyd K. Packer, the president of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles in the Mormon Church, advised teachers to ask “So what?” before they teach a principle. It puts the principle in context, and focuses both student and teacher on its importance.

But back to Elder Pratt’s words:

“The railroads and the steamboats, with their progressive improvements in speed, safety and convenience, are extending and multiplying the means of travel, of trade, of association and intercommunications between countries whose inhabitants have been comparatively unknown to or estranged from each other.”

“But, as if even these means were too slow for the Godlike aspirations, the mighty throes of human thought and its struggles for light and expansion, man seizes the lightning, tames and subdues it, and makes it the bearer of his thoughts and dispatches. While these things are in progress by one portion of mankind, another learns to seize and control a sunbeam, in a manner subservient to the progress of the fine arts, and by which means a man performs in a minute the work which a short time since would have employed the most active years of a lifetime.”

The same thing could be said about the Internet, household computers, cell phones, PDAs, and microwave ovens. So much is new! Those of use who grew up without all of these creature comforts and labor-saving devices can gauge how much society and even civilization has changed over the space of a few decades.

“While every science, every art is being developed; while the mind is awakened to new thoughts; while the windows of heaven are opened, as it were, and the profound depths of human intellect are stirred, moved from the foundation on all other subjects, religious knowledge seems at a standstill.”

In other words, Elder Pratt asserted that everything was keeping up with the times, except religion.

“The creeds of the fathers seem to have been cast in the mold of other ages, to be adapted to a more narrow sphere of intellectual development, and to be composed of material too much resembling cast iron; or, at least, not sufficiently elastic to expand with the expansion of mind, to grow with the growth, and advance with the progressive principles of the age.”

Those of the Nineteenth Century were experiencing what Alvin Toffler called “future shock.” Culture shock happens when a person is suddenly immersed in a foreign environment. Future shock is a similar phenomenon, except that the change is not with a culture but with technology and change in general—and too much of it.

The Industrial Age was the first instance of future shock. We had a mixture of scientists, inventors, and businessmen who revolutionized the world with electricity, phonographs, photographs, telegraphs, radio, airplanes, automobiles, and thousands of other smaller things, such as the sewing machine, frozen foods, the steam engine, and the cotton gin.

Our age—call it the Space Age, the Information Age, or the Age of “Jihad Versus McWorld”—has had a similar revolution in the area of semiconductors, microchips, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and information services. Again, talk to your grandparents about what they did with their free time before, during, and after the Great Depression and World War II. There was no Nintendo, no surfing of the Internet or cable channels, and none of our diverting distractions.

Consequently many people today are asking the same questions that they did in 1855. Why are the established religions and the traditional faiths not keeping up with the times? Is it time for another Protestant Revolution? And if so, how do we build a consensus with this “reinvented” faith?

Elder Pratt addresses this issue:

“For these reasons, perhaps more than any other, the master spirits of the age are breaking loose from the old moorings and withdrawing from established and venerated systems, by which means society is distracted, divided, broken up, thrown, as it were, into a chaos of confused, disorganized individualization, without a standard or rallying point, without a nucleus by which to concentrate or reorganize this chaotic mass, these atoms of thought.”

This is one of the fundamental questions of revolutions: how far do you go? The American Revolution, for instance, was a moderate one. The colonies were mostly self-sufficient and self-governing to begin with. And after the Peace of Paris, the United States tried to normalize relations with Great Britain as soon a possible.

The French Revolution, on the other hand, went as extreme as was humanly possible. Everything was up for grabs, heads rolled, and they even restarted the calendar to memorialize the revolution. Some historians believe that Napoleon’s rise to power helped stabilize the fringe and lunatic elements that were running amok. And the same can be said about the free-for-all and eventual rise of Stalin (at the expense of Trotsky) in the Soviet Union. Revolutions, by going too far, can be counterproductive.

Elder Pratt, then, has two theses. One, the times have changed so much that an equal revolution in religion was in order. Two, we need to have a calm and rational revolution, or things will get out of hand.

Elder Pratt then makes the case for Joseph Smith:

“One thing is certain, according to ancient prophecy, and agreeable to the general expectation of this and other ages, the day approaches which will flood the earth with the pure principles of religious knowledge; a day when none will have to teach his neighbor, saying, Know ye the Lord; for all persons shall know Him from the least to the greatest.”

“It should be a matter of serious thought and investigation—without respect to party, sect or creed, whether there should not, in the very nature of circumstances, and future Millennial hopes, be an entire remodeling, or reorganization of religious society, upon the broad basis of revealed knowledge, tangible fact, and philosophical, scientific and spiritual Truth—a universal ‘standard,’ of immutable Truth, instead of numberless systems founded on uncertainty, opinion, mere human impression or conjecture.”

We actually see a revolution going on nowadays. On one hand there are many attempts to modernize church services to accommodate politically correct trends. On the other, there is a call to orthodoxy, or even a paleo-orthodoxy, to keep the churches closely moored to their theological docks.

(Two BYU professors, Dr. Truman G. Madsen and Dr. David L. Paulsen have cataloged these trends.)

Joseph Smith supplies a third way. In his own words, he explained:

“I calculate to be one of the instruments of setting up the kingdom of Daniel by the word of the Lord, and I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.” (“Chapter 44: The Restoration of All Things: The Dispensation of the Fulness of Times,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 507–16.)

In effect, Joseph Smith said, yes there does need to be a revolution, but it has to come from outside the traditional system. As Christ said, you cannot put new wine in old bottles. As a prophet called of God, I have this new wine, and the Mormon Church is the new bottle.

But there still exists the problem of how we are to choose among so many voices? That is where truth comes in. God is the God of all truth. He loves us. He wants us to know, so He asks us to pray over these serious and complex matters. That way, we can know for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

In the conclusion to the preface, Elder Pratt affirms this idea:

“Can anything short of such a standard unite society, enlighten the world, establish real peace, brotherhood and fellowship, and put a final end to all religious ignorance, superstition, jargon, or discord? Is not a difference of opinion, or a disagreement on any given subject, a proof positive of existing ignorance, or want of light or information, on the part of the parties disagreeing? If so, the present age is certainly in the dark, or, in a great measure, ignorant on religious subjects. A knowledge of the Truth can alone bring the desired union and bid discord cease. If the Scriptures be true, it is not religious opinion which will cover the earth, and universally pervade every bosom, but it is a KNOWLEDGE, ‘The knowledge of God.’ ‘God is Truth.’ To know Him, is to know the Truth.”

Joseph Smith read in the Bible, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” (James 1:5) And he also read, “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” (Matthew 7:7). He had his prayers answered precisely because he went to the fountain of all truth—God Himself.

That promise is still in force. If we feel disjointed or disoriented by the cultural upheavals and societal earthquakes, there is a place we can go to find answers. He is always available, He is always stable, and He wants to talk to us.

Sometimes observations from philosophers just crack me up. Take, for instance, Thomas Aquinas. He was a medieval Roman Catholic philosopher and theologian, and was so adept at explaining Catholic theology that he was later called The Angelic Doctor.

Aquinas is perhaps most famous for his Five Ways, which is a discussion of the existence of God. In it he lists five different indicators that God exists. They are not proofs per se, but arguments or lines of thought that lead to the idea of God in general.

He begins his article by discussing two arguments against God. The first con argument is the argument from evil—if God is all good, then why is there evil? The second is an Ockham’s Razor argument—if we can sufficiently explain the universe in terms of space and time, plus matter and energy, plus chance, then why do we need to add God to the mix? He would be a redundant factor.

Aquinas’s response, his introductory rebuttal, is a mixture of wit and wisdom:

“On the contrary, it is said in the person of God: "I am Who I am." (Exodus 3:14) (Summa Theologica I.2.3)

In case you did not get the joke, philosopher Peter Kreeft explained:

“Note the irony and humor here: [for in Aquinas’s methodology] the "on the contrary" is usually an argument from authority; so what authority does St. Thomas appeal to on the question of whether God exists? God Himself! God cuts though our discussion about Him in the third person and announces, in the first person, "I am here!” (Kreeft, A Shorter Summa, 54-55 n.)

Aquinas understood that this title was also a testimony: God’s name is I AM because HE IS. He reminds us of the key fact of His existence every time He introduces Himself. After all, if God does not exist, then everything else in theology and religion does not matter. It would merely be intellectual daydreaming.

But as brilliant as Aquinas’s insight is, it does not go far enough. Aquinas was merely a philosopher. He lived in the 1200s, and worked within the context of a medieval setting and the Great Apostasy, and he had the Bible. But his was a second-hand understanding of the nature of God.

On the other hand, Joseph Smith, the founding prophet of the Mormon Church, had a first-hand testimony. Over his life he had many visions of and visitations from Jesus Christ:

The First Vision, 1820:

“I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!” (JS-History 1:17)

The Vision of the Degrees of Glory, 1832:

“And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives! For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father—That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God.” (D&C 76:22-24)

The Kirtland Temple, 1836:

“The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber. His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying:”

“I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father. Behold, your sins are forgiven you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice.” (D&C 110:1-5)

In the last two visitations, Joseph Smith had another person with him (Sidney Rigdon and Oliver Cowdery respectively). He thus complied with the ancient law of witnesses:

"At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." (Deuteronomy 19:15)

Keep in mind that second-hand knowledge sometimes is helpful. I trust my doctor, my mechanic, and the Geek Squad computer repairer to know things that I do no not. This is all proper, because we can get into heaven without understanding quantum chromodynamics or knowing the average rainfall in the Amazon basin. Some things are ultimately not important.

What is important, however, is having a correct idea about God. We need to know that He exists, that He loves us, and that He sent His Son to atone for our sins. And this type of spiritual understanding can be kenned by anyone.

When we start out, we always rely on others to help us through. It is perfectly appropriate for children or gospel greenhorns to lean on other people’s testimonies. One of Joseph Smith’s revelations teaches that this type of temporary “dependent faith” is actually a gift from God:

“To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.” (D&C 46:13-14)

But as we grow up, we grow into our own testimonies and stand on our own two feet, spiritually speaking.

Take Joseph Smith for instance. He began by relying upon the testimony of the apostle James, as recorded in the Bible and the faith of his father. But Joseph Smith also understood that even though a second-hand testimony can be good for beginners, it was not enough. More is needed.

He expressed his belief this way:

“Could we read and comprehend all that has been written from the days of Adam, on the relation of man to God and angels in a future state, we should know very little about it. Reading the experience of others, or the revelation given to them, can never give us a comprehensive view of our condition and true relation to God. Knowledge of these things can only be obtained by experience through the ordinances of God set forth for that purpose. Could you gaze into heaven five minutes, you would know more than you would by reading all that ever was written on the subject.” (“Chapter 36: Receiving the Ordinances and Blessings of the Temple,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 412–22.)

Mormonism is the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is also the gospel of growth. Our testimonies of God grow as we comply with truth and conform to His character. Over time, we “may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ.” (Ephesians 4:15). And this whole process begins with knowing the Great I AM, the God who really exists.

By the way, here are Aquinas’s responses to those two arguments against God. Take them for what they are worth.

As to evil, he said it existed to produce a better over-all good. As to the Ockham’s Razor argument, he said that there was teleology in nature. This means that things work towards an intelligent direction. The only way you could have things work towards a purpose was by including God in the explanation.

Aquinas then goes on to explain his Five Ways, which are five variations of the Cosmological Argument, or the observed order in the universe. This organization in the universe implies an intelligent organizer, who is God.

These ideas, of course, are not sufficient for faith unto life and salvation. But they do help clear the field. C. S. Lewis said “Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered.” (Weight of Glory, 58). We might add that even though good philosophy is not enough, it does have a proper place in revealed religion.

Members of the Mormon Church believe two things about the Book of Mormon:

1. Joseph Smith translated it by the gift and power of God.
2. It is scripture.

In our day, the story of the Book of Mormon began on September 21, 1823. Joseph Smith was seventeen, and for the past three years the heavens had been silent. Earlier he had the First Vision, where God the Father and Jesus Christ had appeared to him, and told him to join no church. He was obedient to the command, and had continued on in the normal doings of daily life. But still, the heavens had been silent.

That night, Joseph Smith could not sleep. He was kept awake by several things. The first was his situation. He had seen a vision. He knew it, and God knew it. But he was still ridiculed by the townsfolk of Palmyra. Second, he was concerned about his sins.

Joseph Smith wrote:

“I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God.”

“In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. A disposition to commit such was never in my nature. But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been. But this will not seem very strange to any one who recollects my youth, and is acquainted with my native cheery temperament.” (JS-History 1:28)

In other words, Joseph Smith’s big sin was that he was a teenager.

Nonetheless, he felt guilty about his mistakes. So that night, after his family had gone to sleep in the tiny log cabin, he stayed awake and prayed for forgiveness.

In his own words, this is what happened:

“While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor.”

“He had on a loose robe of most exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen; nor do I believe that any earthly thing could be made to appear so exceedingly white and brilliant. His hands were naked, and his arms also, a little above the wrist; so, also, were his feet naked, as were his legs, a little above the ankles. His head and neck were also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this robe, as it was open, so that I could see into his bosom.”

“Not only was his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond description, and his countenance truly like lightning. The room was exceedingly light, but not so very bright as immediately around his person. When I first looked upon him, I was afraid; but the fear soon left me.”

“He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.”

“He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants.” (JS-History 1:30-34)

The next morning, Joseph Smith went to the Hill Cumorah where the plates where buried. Joseph Smith did not immediately take the plates, but, after several years of preparation and returning to the hill on the same date, he eventually received the plates. He then translated them by the gift and power of God.

His translation was published in 1830, and is still in print. For a free copy of the Book of Mormon, click HERE.

The book itself is not mystery. The title page of the book, written by an ancient prophet, explains everything:

THE BOOK OF MORMON

AN ACCOUNT WRITTEN BY THE HAND OF MORMON UPON PLATES TAKEN FROM THE PLATES OF NEPHI

“Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites—Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile—Written by way of commandment, and also by the spirit of prophecy and of revelation—Written and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed—To come forth by the gift and power of God unto the interpretation thereof—Sealed by the hand of Moroni, and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by way of the Gentile—The interpretation thereof by the gift of God.”

“An abridgment taken from the Book of Ether also, which is a record of the people of Jared, who were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, when they were building a tower to get to heaven—Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD, manifesting himself unto all nations—And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment–seat of Christ.” (Title Page)

That is it: the Book of Mormon is an ancient book of history. It is also a witness or testament of Jesus Christ. Once you understand that the book is about Jesus Christ, everything else makes sense.

Mormons see the Book of Mormon as a compliment to the Bible, as the Old Testament compliments the New Testament. We learn of the Gospel of Jesus Christ—the principles, laws, ordinances, covenants, and the undergirding Atonement—which allows us to be like our Father in Heaven, and return to be with Him after life.

Joseph Smith said this about the Book of Mormon:

"I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book." (“Chapter 4: The Book of Mormon: Keystone of Our Religion,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 57–68.)

I keep a regular habit of reading all of the scriptures. I love them all. Even so, I feel there is something different about the Book of Mormon. It is shorter than the Bible, but is equally powerful. I think this doctrinal density is part of it.

And, unlike the Bible, its editing and compilation was overseen by prophets with authority and revelation. The Bible, on the other hand, has a looser history.

I’m not insulting the Bible. I’ve read it six times, and I have written a commentary on the book of Job. But we all know the all scripture is not of equal worth: the Beatitudes far outstrip the usefulness of “the begats.”

(For a free copy of the Bible, click HERE.)

So for me, the Book of Mormon has fulfilled its promise of being a witness of Christ and of drawing me closer to God. I know it can do the same for anyone.

Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church, was not only a prophet, but also a restorer. Through him God restored truths, priesthood powers, scripture, and a church organization whose membership now numbers thirteen million.

Those are the big things we think of when we discuss Joseph Smith. However, he was also responsible for restoring small things. For example, one of the central things he restored was an emphasis on families. This is a small thing, since it begins with merely two people who have fallen in love. This small process continues as this couple begins to have children, who begin life as the tiniest of creatures.

In saying that he revealed small things is not to say that they are trivial. But sometimes we focus on the externals or “the big things,” such as the number of temples, the size of the church membership, the prominence of Mormons in society, arts, and government, that we can miss these small things that are of equal value. After all, faith does not need to be mammoth. Faith can work perfectly well, even if it is as small as a mustard seed. (Matthew 17:20)

Another one of these small things Joseph Smith revealed was the nature of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Nowadays people have varying opinions of Mary. Some people are miffed because she does not get enough “airtime” in the scriptures as other less worthy males. They see her being trivialized because she is not as emphasized as, say, King Ahab or Goliath. On the other hand some Christian denominations see her as a “co-mediatrix” and “co-redemptrix” with Christ. She is the Queen of Heaven. Some take her up as a feminist icon—after all if Jesus is important, then his mother must be even more important. And there are various other notions.

To understand the Mormon view of Mary, the starting point is the Book of Mormon. Mormons consider this book is scripture on par with the Bible, and appreciate its teachings that reaffirm and expand upon the truths of the Bible.

Nephi, who was an ancient prophet, was given a vision of the life of Jesus Christ. One part of the vision focuses on Mary:

“And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the great city of Jerusalem, and also other cities. And I beheld the city of Nazareth; and in the city of Nazareth I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white.”

“And it came to pass that I saw the heavens open; and an angel came down and stood before me; and he said unto me: Nephi, what beholdest thou?”

“And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins.”

“And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?”

“And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.”

“And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.”

“And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!”

“And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.”

“And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!” (1 Nephi 11:13-21)

Mormons accept that the traditional understanding of Mary. Although she was mortal and not divine, she did have a special calling to bear and nurture the Savior.

By way of comparison, King Phillip II of Macedon has his son Alexander the Great tutored by the philosopher Aristotle. We of course assume that God has as much horse sense as Phillip, and would make a similar choice in selecting super-competent people when choosing the parents of the Savior of the world.

However, there is one point that is disputed nowadays: the Virgin Birth. There are two reasons for this. One is the general distaste that some people have for miracles. They see miracles as an intrusion into the natural and scientific order of things. It makes things messy and smacks of mysticism and paganism. It would set science back two millennia. And miracles can be a non-answer. “Why did such-and-such happen? God willed it.” This is sometimes called the God of the Gaps Theory.

The other reason is has to do with translation. In the King James Bible, the official bible of the Mormon Church, there is a prophecy from Isaiah that reads:

“Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)

The disputation is over the word “virgin.” The Hebrew word used in this verse is almah, which refers to a young woman of marriageable age. The people argue that if virgin in the strict sense of the word was intended, Isaiah would have used bethulah which always means virgin. So Mary was just a young girl, noting more. Joseph (or the Roman soldier Panthera) was the real father of Jesus.

The Mormon response to these questions can be resolved by the above passage from the Book of Mormon. As to miracles, the book not only reaffirms the reality of miracles, but the Book of Mormon is itself a miracle. The Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God. Consequently, Mormons believe that God guided Joseph Smith in word selection for the translation.

(You see how the atheistic scientism of the first objection facilitates the philosophic climate for the second objection.)

The critics assume that Isaiah used the word almah in the original text, and not bethulah. Mormons believe the Bible is the word of God, insofar as it is translated correctly. Joseph Smith taught:

“I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors. … Look at [Hebrews 6:1] for contradictions—‘Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection.’ If a man leaves the principles of the doctrine of Christ, how can he be saved in the principles? This is a contradiction. I don’t believe it. I will render it as it should be—‘Therefore not leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection.’ ” (“Chapter 17: The Great Plan of Salvation,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 206–16.)

So it is possible that there was textual tampering with this verse.

But back to the issue. Understanding that Christ was virgin born is the key to everything. Bruce R. McConkie, an apostle in the Mormon Church, taught:

“This matter of the divine sonship of the Lord is the heart and core of revealed religion. It is the very center of out system of worship; all things revolve around it; all things center in it. If anyone is going to investigate revealed religion, the focal point of the investigation should be this matter of the divine sonship of Christ.” (Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, 41)

The reason why is that if Christ was virgin born, then He was the Son of God. If He was the Son of God, then He could both atone and resurrect. On the other hand, if Christ was not virgin born, then He was not the Son of God, did not atone and resurrect, and then we have no religion whatsoever. Everything would collapse like a house of cards.

That is why Joseph Smith restored this truth about Mary. Although she was merely a mortal, she was chosen to be the virgin mother of Jesus Christ. And it is this connection to Christ that makes her noteworthy.

Joseph Smith was the prophet of eternal love. As the first president of the Mormon Church, he laid the framework for what members of that church believe. This includes how Mormons view romantic love.

The foundation for all that Mormons believe about love is the Atonement, or Jesus Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection. This act was the greatest act of love in eternity. It is also the foundation for all other forms of love: camaraderie, friendship, and romantic love. Since the Atonement is a miracle of cleansing, the cleaner we are, the better we can love.

Joseph Smith also taught that heaven is an extension of earthly associations:

“And that same sociality which exists among us here [in earth] will exist among us there [in heaven], only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.” (D&C 130:2)

The word “sociality” includes friends, families, and communities in general. Therefore death means nothing to a good friend, a child, or a loving spouse.

Mormon marriages are done not only for time, but also for all eternity. The reason Mormons do this goes back to the Resurrection. A man will resurrect as a man, a woman will resurrect as a woman because “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” (The Family: A Proclamation to the World, paragraph 2). Retaining our gender identities allows us to love our spouses in heaven as we have loved them on earth.

An ancient prophet once said:

“For that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world.” (Alma 34:34)

We will resurrect with the same emotions, feelings, and passions that we had while alive. So if you die loving your spouse, then you will resurrect loving your spouse. If you die loving your children, then you will resurrect loving your children. That is why Mormons spend so much time emphasizing the family. It is preparation for eternity.

Thomas S. Monson, the sixteenth president of the Mormon Church suggested three ways in which we can strengthen homes:

1. Form a pattern of prayer.

2. Have a library of learning.

3. Leave a legacy of love.

If we habituate ourselves by doing these three things, we not only will strengthen our homes in the here and now, but also bring these things with us in heaven.

There is so much to say about the Mormon view of romantic love. But we need to remember that it all began with Joseph Smith. In his letters to his wife Emma, we see that Joseph Smith was head-over-heels in love with her. It went beyond love to a burning passion.

Here are some samples:

To Emma Smith on October 13, 1832, from New York City, New York: “This day I have been walking through the most splendid part of the city of New York. The buildings are truly great and wonderful, to the astonishing of every beholder. … After beholding all that I had any desire to behold, I returned to my room to meditate and calm my mind; and behold, the thoughts of home, of Emma and Julia, rush upon my mind like a flood and I could wish for a moment to be with them. My breast is filled with all the feelings and tenderness of a parent and a husband, and could I be with you I would tell you many things. …”

“I feel as if I wanted to say something to you to comfort you in your peculiar trial and present affliction [Emma was pregnant at the time]. I hope God will give you strength that you may not faint. I pray God to soften the hearts of those around you to be kind to you and take the burden off your shoulders as much as possible and not afflict you. I feel for you, for I know your state and that others do not, but you must comfort yourself knowing that God is your friend in heaven and that you have one true and living friend on earth, your husband.”

To Emma Smith on April 4, 1839, from the jail in Liberty, Missouri: “My dear Emma, I think of you and the children continually. … I want to see little Frederick, Joseph, Julia, and Alexander, Johanna [an orphan who was living with the Smiths], and old Major [the family dog]. And as to yourself, if you want to know how much I want to see you, examine your feelings, how much you want to see me, and judge for yourself. I would gladly walk from here to you barefoot and bareheaded and half-naked to see you and think it great pleasure, and never count it toil. … I bear with fortitude all my oppression; so do those that are with me. Not one of us has flinched yet.”

To Emma Smith on November 12, 1838, from Richmond, Missouri, where he was being held prisoner: “Tell little Joseph he must be a good boy; Father loves him with a perfect love. He is the eldest and must not hurt those that are smaller than him, but comfort them. Tell little Frederick Father loves him with all his heart; he is a lovely boy. Julia is a lovely little girl. I love her also. She is a promising child. Tell her Father wants her to remember him and be a good girl. Tell all the rest that I think of them and pray for them all. … Little Alexander is on my mind continually. O my affectionate Emma, I want you to remember that I am a true and faithful friend to you and the children forever. My heart is entwined around yours forever and ever. Oh, may God bless you all, amen. I am your husband and am in bands and tribulation.” (“Chapter 20: A Heart Full of Love and Faith: The Prophet’s Letters to His Family,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 238–247.)

You see the love for his wife, his individualized love for his children, and even the love for his pet dog! That is what Mormonism does to people and also does for people.

The best expression that sums up the Mormon view of eternal love comes from Parley P. Pratt, an apostle and contemporary of Joseph Smith:

“[Joseph Smith] taught me many great and glorious principles concerning God and the heavenly order of eternity. It was at this time that I received from him the first idea of eternal family organization, and the eternal union of the sexes in those expressibly endearing relationships which none but the highly intellectual, the refined and pure in heart, know how to prize, and which are at the very foundation of everything worthy to be called happiness.”

“Till then I had learned to esteem kindred affections and sympathies as pertaining solely to this transitory state, as something from which the heart must be entirely weaned, in order to be fitted for its heavenly state.”

“It was Joseph Smith who taught me how to prize the endearing relationships of father and mother, husband and wife; of brother and sister, son and daughter.”

“It was from him that I learned that the wife of my bosom might be secured to me for time and all eternity; and that the refined sympathies and affections which endeared us to each other emanated from the fountain of divine eternal love. It was from him that I learned that we might cultivate these affections, and grow and increase in the same to all eternity; while the result of our endless union would be an offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, or the sands of the sea shore.”

“It was from him that I learned the true dignity and destiny of a son of God, clothed with an eternal priesthood, as the patriarch and sovereign of his countless offspring. It was from him that I learned that the highest dignity of womanhood was, to stand as a queen and priestess to her husband, and to reign for ever and ever as the queen mother of her numerous and still increasing offspring.”

“I had loved before, but I knew not why. But now I loved—with a pureness—an intensity of elevated, exalted feeling, which would lift my soul from the transitory things of this groveling sphere and expand it as the ocean. I felt that God was my Heavenly Father indeed; that Jesus was my brother, and that the wife of my bosom was an immortal, eternal companion; a kind ministering angel, given to me as a comfort, and a crown of glory for ever and ever. In short, I could now love with the spirit and with the understanding also.”

“Yet, at that time, my dearly beloved brother, Joseph Smith, had barely touched a single key; had merely lifted a corner of the veil and given me a single glance into eternity.” (Parley Pratt Autobiography [1985], 259-260)

That is what Mormonism is all about—helping families understand who they are, fostering eternal love, and preparing for the future day when we can stand before God as families and rejoice.

In my church this past Sunday we had a lesson from the new manual Teachings of Presidents of The Church: Joseph Smith. The class I attended was a quorum meeting, a quorum being a group of men who hold the same priesthood office. As the title of the manual indicates, we were studying the teachings and sermons of Joseph Smith, who was the first prophet of the Mormon Church. The subject was God the Eternal Father. This lesson was important because the starting point of all religion is God, His nature, perfections, and His attributes.

Going into the class I was of two minds. The better angel of my nature was looking forward to the class. I could expect a vigorous and lively review of the things that I as a Mormon believe about God.

But the darker side of me was afraid that the class would be a rote recitation of things that I already knew and believed, and nothing more.

As I saw it, there were two laws of learning in play. One law is that we learn by repetition. Practice makes perfect. The other law is an observation from Roman Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas. He said that frequent repetition can bring “weariness and confusion” to the minds of students. That is, rote repetition makes studying the gospel boring. When the lesson is done we get a mixture of two feelings: “We’ve heard this all before” and “Is this all there is?”

But I was surprised by what happened. As the lesson progressed, there was a subtle change in the quorum. Some of the other elders shared experiences from their missions. One thing they learned as missionaries was that if people had bad experiences with their earthly fathers, then that adversely affected their ability to believe in a Heavenly Father.

This real-life experience is confirmed by science. New York University psychologist Paul Vitz did a study of atheists and religious skeptics, and found a common thread. Many of them did not have a significant father figure in their lives. Voltaire, Hume, Freud, Camus, Sartre, and Nietzsche had missing or fractured fathers. On the other hand, Bonhoeffer, Chesterton, and Pascal all had strong and loving fathers. (cited in Paul Copan, That’s Just Your Interpretation, 114-155.)

That is an interesting connection. Coincidentally, the Saturday before members of the Mormon Church attended a worldwide leadership conference that focused on the family. We all agree that the family is in danger, and that men need to assume their roles as presiders, providers, and protectors. But sometimes we think of men as just managing a family, as if they were the CEOs of Family, Inc. However, it seems that there is more to fatherhood than that. As our experience and science both show, how fathers fulfill their covenants, obligations, and duties within the family affects the spirituality of the children. Fathers must be spiritual leaders.

For example, Joseph Smith’s brother said that his father, Joseph Smith Sr., took charge and set the spiritual climate for the family:

“My father’s religious habits were strictly pious and moral. … I was called upon to listen to prayers both night and morning. … My parents, father and mother, poured out their souls to God, the donor of all blessings, to keep and guard their children and keep them from sin and from all evil works. Such was the strict piety of my parents.”

“We always had family prayers since I can remember. I well remember father used to carry his spectacles in his vest pocket, … and when us boys saw him feel for his specs, we knew that was a signal to get ready for prayer, and if we did not notice it mother would say, ‘William,’ or whoever was the negligent one, ‘get ready for prayer.’ After the prayer we had a song we would sing; I remember part of it yet: ‘Another day has passed and gone, We lay our garments by.’” (“Chapter 2: God the Eternal Father,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 36–44.)

Joseph Smith Sr.’s example is impressive. Keep in mind that at the time he was unchurched. When his son Alvin died, the preacher who spoke at the funeral suggested that Alvin had gone to hell because he was unbaptized. Smith was offended. He did not join any denomination until his son Joseph Smith organized the Mormon Church. (“Chapter 35: Redemption for the Dead,” Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, [2007], 401–11.)

Furthermore Joseph Smith Sr.’s example affects Mormons today. He influenced the prophet Joseph Smith, who in turn influenced Mormons in general. We stand on Joseph Smith’s shoulders as he stood on his father’s shoulders. Never underestimate the power of example, or the duration of example for that matter. Joseph Smith Sr.’s example of prayer and spiritual leadership is still echoing two centuries later.

It is crucial for men to be good role models. In the media, men are usually depicted as being either inadequate (i.e. Homer Simpson) or as evil (i.e. Hannibal Lector). However in the Mormon Church men are encouraged to be better, to be something more than oafs and sociopaths.

Howard W. Hunter, the fourteenth president of the Mormon Church advised men this way:

“A man who holds the priesthood leads his family in Church participation so they will know the gospel and be under the protection of the covenants and ordinances. If you are to enjoy the blessings of the Lord, you must set your own homes in order. Together with your wife, you determine the spiritual climate of your home. Your first obligation is to get your own spiritual life in order through regular scriptural study and daily prayer. Secure and honor your priesthood and temple covenants; encourage your family to do the same.”

“Take seriously your responsibility to teach the gospel to your family through regular family home evening, family prayer, devotional and scripture-reading time, and other teaching moments. Give special emphasis to preparation for missionary service and temple marriage. As patriarch in the home, exercise your priesthood through performing the appropriate ordinances for your family and by giving blessings to your wife and children. Next to your own salvation, brethren, there is nothing so important to you as the salvation of your wife and children.” (Howard W. Hunter, “Being a Righteous Husband and Father,” Ensign, Nov 1994, 49.)

That is why I love Mormonism: it has a place for men to be the type of men they should be. True manhood is cultivated and husbanded, and the world is a better place for it.

I’ll never forget a particular woman I met while serving as a missionary for the Mormon Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, known as the Mormons, in Portugal. She was a Jehovah’s Witness, but was dissatisfied with some of the rules of that faith. My missionary companion (this was before I was assigned to work with him) was in her neighborhood and knocked on her door.

She let him in, and they had a nice talk. In the process of the meeting, my companion showed her this passage from the Book of Mormon:

“Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid; for the Lord JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also has become my salvation.” (2 Nephi 22:2)

She got excited by seeing that we also believed in Jehovah. She was hooked. And the rest is history.

Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the Mormon Church, revealed Jehovah’s identity. On April 3, 1836, he and Oliver Cowdery were attending church meetings in the Kirtland, Ohio temple. They had just finished building the temple and had dedicated it a week earlier. After they administered the sacrament (communion, or the Lord’s Supper), they began to pray. After finishing they had this vision of Jehovah:

“The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened.”

“We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber.”

“His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying:”

“I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father.”

“Behold, your sins are forgiven you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice.”

“Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and let the hearts of all my people rejoice, who have, with their might, built this house to my name.”

“For behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.”

“Yea, I will appear unto my servants, and speak unto them with mine own voice, if my people will keep my commandments, and do not pollute this holy house.”

“Yea the hearts of thousands and tens of thousands shall greatly rejoice in consequence of the blessings which shall be poured out, and the endowment with which my servants have been endowed in this house.”

“And the fame of this house shall spread to foreign lands; and this is the beginning of the blessing which shall be poured out upon the heads of my people. Even so. Amen.” (D&C 110:1-10)

The person who appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery identified Himself as Jehovah. He then described Himself using these words:

• “I am the first and the last”
• “I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain”
• “I am your advocate with the Father.”

These titles indicate that this personage was none other than Jesus Christ. This explains why He forgave Joseph Smith’s and Oliver Cowdery’s sins: Jesus Christ is in the business of forgiving people who really repent.

This is why Mormons believe that Jehovah is Jesus Christ. Of course these names can be confusing, so In 1916 the leaders of the Mormon Church wrote a document that outlined the relationship between God and Jesus, Elohim and Jehovah. (Click here for an online edition of this document.)

Yes, it can be confusing, but we should remember that God goes by many names: Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). Each one of these titles highlights an aspect of God’s character. Jehovah means “I AM” or “The Unchangeable One,” and is the name He used before He was born.

Jehovah was the name He went by in the Old Testament, which was the era of the great temples. Since Joseph Smith was restoring temples in this era of earth’s history, it is not surprising that Christ used His old name to highlight the connection to the Old Testament.

For me, it is important to know who God is and who His Son is. And knowing the names of God—be it Christ or Jehovah—is a key to understanding who He is.

Saturday, February 9, 2008 was momentous for members of the Mormon Church. First, it was the first time that the church membership in general was invited to attend a worldwide leadership training broadcast. Since the subject was on families, the church felt that all members needed to hear the counsel and principles that were being taught.

Second, it was the first time that Thomas S. Monson addressed the church in his new capacity as president. For Mormons, this is like hearing a new president give his inaugural address or first state of the union speech, or a new pope giving his first Urbi et Orbi address. Even though President Monson has been in the first presidency (the supreme governing council of the church) since 1985, there was still anticipation and excitement for his new role.

In his sermon, President Monson suggested three practical things we can do to strengthen our families:

1. Develop a pattern of prayer.
2. Build a library of learning.
3. Leave a legacy of love.

I will focus on the second point, the home library. This idea is not new to Mormonism. Joseph Smith, the founding Mormon prophet, received a revelation that, in part, said:

“And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith.” (D&C 88:118)

Of course the best books would include The Good Book, and all of the scriptures. We all could use more scripture study, and have more exposure to the ancient wisdom, the lessons of history, and the prophetic insight that the scriptures contain. Also, we need to brush up on the Life of Jesus Christ. We should be as familiar with the life of Jesus Christ as we are with our own lives.

While J. K. Rowling was still writing, we would hear about the reading binges and marathons that would happen with each new Harry Potter book. But I would always wonder if these same children approached scripture study with the same passion and vigor. I would also wonder if they knew the life of the Savior as well as they knew the life of Harry, Hermione, and Ron. Reading is a pleasure, but there needs be priorities.

There is also another point. Dr. Hugh W. Nibley noted that this commandment to read is open-ended:

“We are to ‘teach one another…learning even by study and also by faith.’ And from what sources? Out of the best books? Where is the list? Why no syllabus? Because we are to do the seeking. It is we who must decide which are the best books and to do that we must to ‘prove all things [and] hold fast to that which is good’ (1 Thessalonians 5:21). We must make our own syllabus as part of organizing ourselves and preparing ‘every needful thing.’” (Hugh W. Nibley, A House of Glory)

This is part of Christian Liberty that I love. God gives us the freedom of initiative in many things, including the selection of our reading material. The Mormon Church has no “banned book list.” We just have this general counsel: “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.” (Articles of Faith 13). We can make up our own minds about what is and is not good.

But what is The Good?

The Book of Mormon, which is another testament of Jesus Christ comparable to the Bible, gives us this answer:

“For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.”

“For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.”

“But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.”

“And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged.”

“Wherefore, I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ.” (Moroni 7:15-19)

What is The Good? Simple: The Good is Christ. This is why we need to go back to the scriptures. They give us an accurate idea about Christ. He is our model, our example, and our guide. We need to ask ourselves “What Would Jesus Do?” and then do it. The only way we know what Jesus would do is by studying what He actually did. Then we simply apply the principles to our situation.

The counsel from President Monson and the revelation from Joseph Smith makes no distinction between fiction and nonfiction, technical books, philosophy, poetry, romance, science fiction, fantasy, and so forth. It is an open-ended invitation to adventure.

My parents, for example, are constantly devouring mystery novels. I think it strengthens their marriage to be reading the same books. It gives them something to talk about, and is a unifying hobby.

President Monson’s counsel was to read good books. But there is also an implicit counsel: we need to write good books. Before a person can read a good book, someone has to write a good book. People with the ability, drive, know-how, and passion for writing need to step forward and begin typing.

This, of course, is a proactive way of dealing with the problem of bad media.

As we said earlier, Christ is The Good. But I do not think that writing a good book involves perpetually biographizing the Savior. In the case of fiction, I think it involves having Christic characters, or people who are mini-Christs in the story. Looking for Christic characters in stories is also a way to judge if the book is good. A good book would essentially be ethical, with the conflict being about choosing to follow Christ, or choosing to be a half-hearted follower or a semi-Christian.

Imagine a 100% Christian and a 99% Christian debating on a course of action. That 1% makes all the difference in the world! Of course there are infinite possibilities, but the core must be Christ.

Orson F. Whitney, an apostle in the Mormon Church once said of the Mormons:

“We will yet have Miltons and Shakespeares of our own. God's ammunition is not exhausted. His brightest spirits are held in reserve for the latter times. In God's name and by His help we will build up a literature whose top shall touch heaven, though its foundations may now be low in earth. … Small things are the seeds of great things, and, like the acorn that brings forth the oak, or the snow-flake that forms the avalanche, God's kingdom will grow, and on wings of light and power soar to the summit of its destiny.” (June 3, 1888. Collected Discourses, volume 1)

That is something to strive for. If we read good books, or feel the call of God to write good books, we can do good. Either way, the world will be a better place for our trying.

Why are Mormons so focused on Joseph Smith, this first prophet of their church? What makes him so different from other great figures in history?

One reason—and possibly the main reason—is that Joseph Smith is a revealer of Christ. He taught about the life, mission, and atonement of Jesus Christ, and restored facts, knowledge, and truths that allow us to be more like Jesus. His teachings are essential to fully receive the blessings of Christ’s atonement for ourselves and our families.

Having said that, I realize that many people have lauded Jesus Christ. The Pope, Billy Graham, and even the president of Iran have all said positive things about Jesus. Liking Jesus is par for the course. Again, the question is asked, what makes Joseph Smith so different?

One way to show how Joseph Smith is different (and therefore more interesting) is to contrast him with other people who, at first blush, seem similar. For this blog I will use Socrates.

In his defense before the Athenian assembly, Socrates explained that he saw himself as a gadfly that nipped the horse that was the Athenian state. His job was to goad, cajole, and nag the Athenians into action. (Apology, 30e)

The Danish philosopher Søre