What Do You Think of Joseph Smith?

100 Evangelical Christians Interviewed

"…the Joseph Smith of the popular imagination is no more a reality than Santa Claus or Uncle Sam." --John Henry Evans

I asked 100 people three questions:

 

1. What do you know about Joseph Smith?
2. What do you think of Joseph Smith? And,
3. Have you read the Book of Mormon?

And here’s what I found out…

First, you need to know—these 100 people were all "non-restorationists." That is, none were Mormons (LDS or RLDS). All were evangelical Christians; what we would consider to be "mainstream" Protestants.

Specifically, 10 evangelical pastors, 10 Protestant university professors, 10 Baptists, 10 Methodists, 10 Lutherans, 10 Charismatics/Pentecostals, 10 unchurched, 10 at random, 10 media personalities (i.e., radio talk show hosts, tv news announcers), and 10 Youth For Christ teenagers—were asked the three questions.

As said, here’s what I discovered…

None were favorable toward the man. Most believed Joseph Smith was deceived rather than a deceiver. (They did give him that much.) Out of the 100, none had read the Book of Mormon through. A few had read portions of it or heard quotes from it. Most of the pastors interviewed had taken courses while in college or seminary on "The Kingdom of the Cults," a major fundamentalist textbook written by Walter Martin, of which Joseph Smith was included as one of the founders of a cult. Of the 100, all of them considered Joseph Smith to be either—an imposter, egoist, plagiarist, or fanatic. I would say, generally speaking, those are my conclusions summarized.

I have a different set of conclusions.

 

1. None of the 100 had studied the life of Joseph Smith using primary sources. And there are plenty of primary sources available. That is, all had come to their conclusions by second-handed information (secondary sources): i.e., pastor’s opinions, books on cults, parents’ opinions, college courses, or by what they had heard from the evangelical community, particularly their pastor.
2. All were convinced the Book of Mormon was "not of God" without having read it. Again, conclusions were based upon second-handed sources.

I find their conclusions terribly inadequate. I didn’t say their conclusions were wrong; I said they were inadequate. For one thing…

All 100 had come to their conclusions by believing what they had been taught from second-handed sources.

Brothers and sisters, that’s not good enough especially when it comes to discerning spiritual matters. A Christian is one who gets to the source! The 100 had not gotten to the source. John the Beloved said,"…That which we have seen and heard we declare unto you…" --I John 1:3

Declared information for early Christians meant declaring first-hand information. Nothing less.

Truth was manifested unto them. They had seen it and handled it. No second-handed information was passed on.

They wouldn’t have accepted it then.

And I suggest—nor should we now.

I have discovered, most Protestant/Pentecostal Christians have come to certain conclusions about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon based upon second-handed information. That’s unacceptable.

Then what should be our approach to truth and error? There are…

TWO MODELS

…regarding truth and error.

There are two points of view about what I’ve done:

1. the counterfeit point of view, and
2. the military point of view.

Two distinct models for discovering truth and avoiding error. One is of God; one is man-made.

For example, when asked whether or not they had read the Book of Mormon, more than a few of the 100 responded, "…No, and I see no need to. I’ve never had a desire to study Joseph Smith’s writings. I mostly stick to reading the Word of God…" In other words, the best way to detect a counterfeit is to spend your time studying the real thing. Bankers teach us that. It’s the counterfeit-model approach to truth.

Sounds real spiritual, doesn’t it? But it’s not.

The military model concerning truth and error is what the Bible teaches. We’re soldiers, all of us (II Timothy 2:3), and a good soldier is not to be ignorant of his enemy’s devices or strategies (2 Cor.2:11). The enemy is lying—if you leave the devil alone he’ll leave you alone. Not so. The devil doesn’t play fair. Leave him alone and he’ll destroy you. We’re in a war! And we’ve invaded behind the enemy’s lines.

Can you imagine being in a war and telling your enemy, "…now, we’ve decided to leave you alone. You leave us alone…"

Paul told Timothy, "…therefore endure…as a good soldier of Jesus Christ…" (II Tim.2:3), and warned the Church at Corinth, "…we are not [to be] ignorant of his devices…" "…lest Satan should get an advantage of us…" (2 Cor.2:11).

Soldiers must understand their enemy’s tactics. It’s basic strategy to winning the war.

As Christians we’re to have the advantage. Not our enemy. And you can’t have the advantage if you don’t have proper information. Not having false information is basic to sound military strategy.

It bears repeating—second-handed information will not do when it comes to ascertaining spiritual matters. The biblical approach to truth and error is the military model. We must know our enemy! First-hand.

The "counterfeit model" regarding truth and error is a man-made model. It’s what bankers use. Yes, the approach sounds spiritual but it’s human wisdom at work. Most all the 100 believers I interviewed had applied their human wisdom to arrive at conclusions concerning Joseph Smith. They weren’t led by the Spirit. They used the counterfeit approach—"…I see no need to read the writings of Joseph Smith. I stick to reading the Bible…" That’s not the military approach to truth. It’s not the biblical approach.

Then how do we research out a matter?

For starters, there is…

An investigation can be fair or unfair. It can be "rigged" from the start.

Josh McDowell, contemporary evangelical apologist, in his excellent book Evidence That Demands A Verdict, speaks of two kinds of research (p.9). One is valid, one is not. One kind of research starts with a set of preconceived notions and adjusts conclusions to its own liking. Another kind reproduces the best evidence it can and lets the evidence speak for itself. The latter is fair research, the former is not. It is "rigged" from the get-go.

It’s my prayer, concerning Joseph Smith, the restoration movement, and the Book of Mormon, that we participate in "fair" research. That we let the evidence speak for itself. I heard an old Baptist preacher say once, "…too many of us read the Bible with our glasses on. We approach it through our Baptist eyes." He went on to say, "…we need to take our denominational glasses off and come to the Word of God like a child."

I agree.

SPECIFIC RESPONSES

Certain comments—more than others—kept surfacing as I interviewed non-restoration believers. For instance…

"…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word…"

Let’s address each comment.

"…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word…"

We have addressed the above comment and concluded—though the statement sounds spiritual, it’s really based upon a non-biblical model: the counterfeit approach to truth. The biblical approach to truth is the military model.

"…Well, I believe Joseph Smith plagiarized the book [of Mormon]. He even copied the King James style…"

This comment seemed to echo back and forth. Let’s address the matter of…

PLAGIARISM

Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the Book of Mormon?

Let’s see.

But first, would you permit me the privilege of indulgence for a moment?

While reading the Book of Mormon through for the first time, the matter of plagiarism was especially important to me since my background is in literature. I kept looking for "clues" of plagiarism as I read.

I have a Ph.D in literature and a specialty degree in composition theory from the University of Iowa. I have taught composition theory, and writing classes off and on in universities, both secular and Christian. Besides, it’s safe to say—I’ve seen hundreds of plagiarized student papers.

I believe I have some sense of "literary feel" for the real and for the fake. I understand—there are definite internal and external evidences that point to a text’s own authenticity. For years I have studied the Bible as literature as well as feasting upon it as the precious Word of God.

Example: Did you know, the Bible has an amazing literary structure? Let me illustrate.

May I give you an assignment? Here it is…

Assignment

I want you to take 40 different writers over a period of 1,500 years. Put them on three different continents and select men from all walks of life-—doctors, shepherds, kings, fishermen, herdsmen, military generals, cupbearers, prime ministers, tax collectors, and a rabbi. Pick them from miles and generations apart. Give them little or no opportunity to communicate. Have some of them to write in the wilderness, some in a dungeon, on a hillside, some in a palace. Some while traveling, others while in the middle of a war. Separate most of them from the church organizations of their day. Ask them to write on religion, poetry, health, ethics, science, morality, and philosophy. Ask them to make predictions of future events, on the meaning of life, the mystery of existence, and man’s final purpose. And ask them to write in the following literary styles: story of origins, heroic narrative, epic, parody, tragedy, lyric and lamentation, epithalamion, encomium, wisdom literature, proverb, parable, pastoral, prophecy, gospel, epistle, oratory, and apocalypse. O, one last thing—ask them to write in three different languages.

That’s your assignment. Now go to it. And collect all the writings. You be the editor. Condense and couch what you’ve collected into the common language of the people. Divide it into books, chapters, and verses and put it into a single book. Then bind it. What do you have? I’ll tell you what you have.

Literature hash!

No man on earth could make unified sense out of such a mess of outdated ideas, wild speculations and hopeless contradictions.

Yet that’s exactly how the Bible was written!

Praise His name. What a marvelous book, what a Divine book we have.

And miraculously, from Genesis to Revelation the Bible’s message is one amazing whole—united in theme, consistent in concept, logical in development and agreed in doctrine. In "real life" situations, parable and prophecy, the Bible is a love story of history—God seeking rebellious man.

Yes, what a miraculous book—written over 1,500 years. Written over 40 generations. Written by over 40 authors. Written with one united them in mind.

It bears repeating—the Bible possesses definite internal and external textual evidences that point to its own authenticity.

Or, to put it in laymen’s terms—the Bible is reliable.

Here’s my point. Like a detective pouring over the evidence, those same internal/external textual confirmations was what I was looking for (inspirational "clues") while reading the Book of Mormon.

And you know, I found them. In fact, let’s turn our attention to the Book of Mormon.

We’ve had one assignment—collect writings from over 1,500 years, written over 40 generations by 40 authors, on 3 continents in 3 languages. Let me give you another assignment. I want you to write another book. That is, again be the editor.

This assignment is a bit different.

This time I want you to find a male lad between the ages of 23 and 24. He cannot be a college graduate. In fact, he can possess only three years of formal schooling. He must write a history of an ancient country (such as Tibet), covering a period from 600 BC to 421 AD. Put the history into a book with 102 chapters—25 of them about war, 10 about history, 21 about prophecy, 32 about doctrines, 5 about missionaries, and 9 about the mission of Christ. The lad must include in his writings the history of two distinct and separate nations, along with histories of different contemporary nations or groups of people. His writings must describe the religious, economic, social and political cultures and institutions of these two nations. He must weave into his history the gospel of Jesus Christ and the pattern for Christian living. The lad’s history must be approximately 522 pages with over 500 words per page. He must add 180 proper nouns to the English language; more than William Shakespeare added (30). When the lad has finished, he must announce that his "literary narrative" is not fiction, but true! It is actual history! In fact, his heroic narrative must fulfill Bible prophecies—even in the exact manner in which they shall come forth, including to whom given. Also, when the 23 year-old lad has finished, he must not make any changes in the text. Not one. No editing allowed! The first edition must stand "forever more." After pauses for sleep and food, if dictating to a stenographer, he must never ask to have the last paragraph or sentence read back to him. Another thing, the lad must not be allowed to research any of the subjects he’s writing upon. One last thing—how long does he have to finish the project?

It must be completed within 80 Days!

You say, "…that’s an impossible assignment. It can’t be done."

Yes, it can.

It was done.

The Book of Mormon was written exactly under those circumstances! Let me be bold—plagiarism is impossible under the above circumstances.

Let me also say, while reading the book, I discovered…

Styles such as:

…quotations from other Jewish scriptures, especially Isaiah.

…testimonies: Ammon’s review (Alma 14:79).

…hymns and poems: Nephi’s psalm (II Nephi 3:30-66)

…narratives of dramatic happenings: Nephi, the ship builder (I Nephi 5)

…letters: exchange between Captain Moroni and Governor Pahorun (Alma 27:14)

…sermons: Jesus Christ to the Nephites (Alma 7)

…patriarchal blessings: Alma to his three sons (Alma 17-19)

…theological discourses (II Nephi 6)

…battle accounts and military marches.

…sections on social collapse and on Zionic community lift.

All of the above hint of internal evidences of a text’s authenticity. Perhaps, however, one of the more convincing indications of inspiration was the re-occurrences of Hebrew literary evidences. That is, evidences peculiar to Hebrew literature. For example, the Bible is full of "Herbaisms," parallelisms peculiar to Hebrew poetry, or more specifically, the "chaismus."

So is the Book of Mormon!

That says "volumes" concerning "clues of inspiration."

Here is what I’m talking about.

A "Hebraism" is the literal translation into English of Hebrew words, parts of speech, and language peculiarities, such as: " and," "and it came to pass," "behold."

Take the word "and." "And" starts sentences, and is repeated before each noun in a series. It’s a common Hebrew literary device.

And the Lord hath blessed my master greatly

Parallelism is the basic poetic technique of Hebrew poetry, especially throughout the Psalms. Praise, adoration, awe, joy, sorrow, depression—these are the emotional subjects that recur throughout the Psalms. The same subjects are recurrent throughout the Book of Mormon.

Parallelism occurs when two or more lines correspond to each other in both meaning and structure.

Ascribe to the Lord,

Believe in God;

(Zarahemla Research Foundation)

Let me ask a direct question: Do you think a 23 year-old man with a third grade education could plagiarize sophisticated Hebraisms, synonymous, antithetic, and staircase parallelisms? Do you think a young man with a third grade education could plagiarize the inverted parallelism or Hebrew chiasmus? And do it consistently? Sustain the form for over 500 pages? Do you think such a lad was familiar with Hebrew poetry?

I rest my case.

We need to address another question before we move on…

No it doesn’t.

Two reasons: 1) we must remember, the Book of Mormon is a translation, and 2) the King James English was the accepted vernacular style of the English language used in churches in 1830, the time of translation. It makes sense, the Lord would translate reformed Egyptian into the "church language of the day." In other words, the King James style was the "Living Bible" style of their day.

To give an analogy, today there are various "updated" versions of the Bible; i.e., American Standard Version, the New King James Version, New International Version, The Living Bible, etc. Remember, the King James English was the "updated" version during the 1830s.

Put another way, Hebrew literary evidences are found in the Book of Mormon as well as the Bible. It appears the translation of the Book of Mormon into English has been quite literal. It also appears the King James translators were also quite literal in transferring Hebrew idioms into the King James English. This is a mark of its authenticity and antiquity (Criticisms of the Book of Mormon Answered, p.21).

The fact that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon into his everyday church vernacular (King James English) authenticates the work, not discredits it.

One other matter concerning literary style—the genre of….

The Bible is primarily a story. Even a casual reading demonstrates—a large amount of the Bible consists of stories: the story of Adam and Eve, the story of Abraham, the story of Jacob, the story of Joseph, the story of David, of Solomon, of Gideon and Daniel, of Ruth and Boaz, the story of Esther, the story of the Savior, the story of the early church.

The Bible seems to yell at us, "…tell me a story!"

So does the Book of Mormon. Book of Mormon characters are just as intriguing, just as likely to "jump off the page." I’m thinking of Nephi, Jacob, Alma, Benjamin, Mosiah, Moroni, and Jared. There are others. All the ingredients of story are there—character development, protagonist, antagonist, plot, hero, villain, action, conflict, setting, and resolution.

Both the Bible and the Book of Mormon tell a story in which God is depicted as the God who acts in story line, in history. Which points to a Hebrew pattern: the Hebrew mind thinks in concrete terms. The Greek mind thinks in general terms, abstractions. If the Book of Mormon is (as it professes to be) a translation of the Lehites who were Hebrews from Jerusalem, then "concreteness of style" is to be expected. The reader is not disappointed—another internal evidence of the text’s authenticity.

Let’s move on.

We’ve discussed the Book of Mormon’s literary style; now let’s briefly look at its….

Which brings up another issue raised by the 100 people interviewed.

Does it?

Let’s see.

Here is what the Book of Mormon says about God and His universe:

….God is creator of all things (Mosiah 2:13,14).

….God continues in creation and communication (2 Nephi 12:63).

….God provides the earth for man’s habitation and good life (I Nephi 5:126,127).

….The way of God’s universe is the way of righteousness, which is the way of happiness

(2 Nephi 1:90-92).

….God is the source of goodness; evil comes out of disharmony with God

(Moroni 7:10,11).

….Righteousness achieves priority in the long range of history (I Nephi 7:35-37).

….God designated a chosen people for the accomplishment of his purposes

(I Nephi 5:132).

….God uses the Gentiles for His purpose as the Jews fall short (I Nephi 7:17-19).

….God designed the Western land to be a land of promise (2 Nephi 1:6).

….Zion emerges as a core community in God’s purpose and program

(I Nephi 3:187, 2 Nephi 10:54).

….The life and ministry of the Messiah is central in human history (preface statement).

Having read the Book of Mormon as a Baptist minister, there is absolutely nothing in it that contradicts the Bible. For example, the book uplifts the blood of Christ (Mosiah 1:118), declares that salvation is only by God’s grace (2 Nephi 7:42), defends the grand theme of salvation (Mosiah 1:108), and proclaims that salvation comes only through faith on the Lord Jesus Christ (Mosiah 3:8,9). Other themes such as repentance, atonement by Christ’s blood, redemption, and forgiveness run like a scarlet thread through the book as well (Alma 3:86, Helaman 2:71, Alma 13:13, Mosiah 2:3,4).

No, the Book of Mormon does not contradict the teachings of the Bible. On the contrary, the centrality of the person of Jesus Christ and His Lordship are lifted up.

Let’s address another issue that came up while interviewing:

Which is really raising the issue…

What in the world is a seer?

We Baptists haven’t seen many seers lately. (And I don’t mean that facetiously.) I know, growing up in a small Baptist church in the middle of the Missouri Ozarks, I never heard one sermon on "a seer."

Were there seers in the Bible? Was Joseph Smith a seer? Are there seers today in the Body of Christ? Is it a legitimate office? And what’s the difference between a seer and a "psychic," a person motivated by demonic power of divination (Deut.18:10)?

Seers are mentioned 28 times in the Bible. King David had his personal seer; his name was Gad (II Sam.24:11). Kings often had personal seers. Heman was the King’s seer (I Chron.25:5). So was Jedu (II Chron.35:15). Amos was a seer (Amos 7:12). Asaph was a seer (II Chron.29:30). Iddo was a seer (II Chron.9:29).

Seers were special to kings.

All seers were prophets but not all prophets were seers. Seers were true visionaries. More so than prophets. They were the "God Squad." It’s like God turned on the TV set inside of them. Kings, in dire need of immediate direction from the Lord, often times called upon their personal seer. The Lord often gave immediate counsel through His seers. Seers were known for their sayings (II Chron.33:19) and for speaking "…in the name of the Lord God of Israel" (II Chron.33:18). Seers saw visions (II Chron.9:29). As I said, they seemed to have had built-in television sets from God.

Joseph Smith was a modern-day seer.

Seers are mentioned 11 times in the Book of Mormon and 7 times in the Doctrine and Covenants. The Bible mentions them the most (28).

Joseph Smith did not translate the Book of Mormon by the power of divination; he translated the book by a biblical instrument, the Urim and Thummim, an instrument worn upon the high priest’s breast when he went into the holy precincts of the temple (Lev.8:8). The Urim and Thummim was a well-known instrument used by God’s people in early biblical times. They used the instrument in order to ascertain God’s will. Some called the Urim and Thummim "…the interpreters of light and perfection."

The Urim and Thummim is mentioned 7 times in the Bible.

(By the way, I have discovered—evangelical Christians are almost totally unaware of the instrument’s existence, though it’s mentioned 7 times in the Bible.)

Aaron wore it (Ex.28:30). Eleazor the priest wore it, and asked counsel of the Lord "…after the judgment of Urim before the Lord" (Nu.27:21). Levi had one (Deut.33:8). Priests were even using the instrument during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah: "…there stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim" (Ezra 2:63, Neh.7:65).

What did the Urim and Thummim look like? Joseph Smith had one. He describes it:

"…There were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim…and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book [of Mormon]." --Pearl of Great Price, p.52

An Old Testament commentary describes the same instrument:

"…The Urim and Thummim were two small oracular images similar to the Teraphim personifying revelation and truth, which were placed in the cavity or pouch by the folds of the breastplate, and which uttered oracles by voice."--Popular Bible Encyclopedia, p.1693

Our point is—the instrument was an instrument of God, not an instrument of divination. Not an instrument of the devil. The Bible is quite clear on the matter.

There’s an interesting passage in I Samuel that emphasizes that very distinction:

"…And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets." --I Sam.28:6

You say, of course the Lord wouldn’t answer by the Urim; it’s of the devil. Wait a minute. Are dreams of the devil? Are prophets of the devil? No.

Here are three legitimate means of receiving directions from the Lord: 1) by dreams, 2) by Urim, and 3) by the prophets. The Urim was included.

Saul, however, did not receive direction from the Lord, so what did he turn to? Verse seven reads:

Saul then turned to divination once the Urim did not give him direction from the Lord. That’s pretty plain.

 

• Let me interject my personal feelings. We evangelical are so cautious; I believe we’re overly cautious. Anything out of the norm (whatever that may be) becomes suspect. We’re so "Word-centered" that sometimes we miss God. Any experience out of the ordinary becomes immediately questionable. I’m aware—receiving a God-given ability to translate ancient languages from a peculiar-looking apparatus used back in olden times is not exactly "orthodox." I’m aware of that. But I’m also aware—our God is not orthodox! God told Isaiah to take off his clothes in public and preach (Isa.20:2). Not very orthodox. A man came to Jesus wanting to see. What did God do? He spit on the ground and threw mud in the man’s eye (Jn.9:6). Not very orthodox. See what I mean?

Do you recall the first miracle of the church?

The saints were gathered in Joseph Knight’s home, the father of Newel Knight. Our prophet called on the son to lead in prayer. You remember, Newel Knight was bashful to pray in public. Our prophet cast the devil out of him and then all the saints witnessed together the very first miracle of the church—the power of God had lifted Newel Knight up to the ceiling and was pressing his head against the ceiling beam when the son realized he was floating in the air.

Not very orthodox!

Back to seers.

At least, concerning this matter of seers and the Urim and Thummim, grant the author the evangelical maxim—"…show it to me in the Word and I’ll believe it." I’ve done that.

Here’s a wonderful passage:

What a passage.

Joseph Smith said this, "…We again say, search the revelations of God; study the prophecies, and rejoice that God grants unto the world Seers and Prophets. They are they who saw the mysteries of godliness…" --Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.12

Yes, Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the power and gift of God. No, he did not use divination. Quite the contrary—he was seeing the mysteries of godliness.

Moving on…

Here was another key response:

The Man of God will make you mad or glad. It depends upon the soil of your heart—if it’s fertile or fallow.

Joseph Smith made people mad or glad. To some he was a prophet; to others he was a plagiarist. To some he was humble; to others he was an egotist. Some knew him to be kind and generous; others said he was lazy and a gold digger.

Two people looking at the same thing can, and often do, arrive at exact opposite views. One sees an angel; the other, a demon. (Ever watch Hannity & Colmes?)

Worldly evidence is no substitute for personal revelation. For one thing, such evidence (archaeology, linguistics, botany, computer research, and ancient history) merely confirms what we already know in our hearts to be true. It can’t be the other way around. Archaeology, for instance, can never confirm Truth. Truth, however, can confirm archaeology. First the spiritual, then the natural.

I like the way my old professor of theology used to put it. "…A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument…"

Well said.

Regarding our last topic—Joseph Smith, the Man—it is not my duty, nor intent, to impose my convictions upon you. And I share my bias up front. There is so much "anti-Mormon" material written about Joseph Smith that I’m being deliberately selective in my material. I simply want to swing the pendulum back to the center.

Before we examine the man’s character, I want to say a word or two about the comment, "…the main thing I look for is the fruit…"

There is a subtle sinister side to that statement. I must admit, I have heard Christians use that statement (or similar ones) in defense of their own arrogance. For example, the statement can mean,

I have heard Christians with unpliable spirits say, "…I can’t judge the brother, but I can sure be a fruit inspector…"

God, spare us from such subtle hardness.

As I said, there is a negative side to what we’re talking about. Let’s turn to the good side. What about Joseph Smith’s character? What do we know about the man?

For one thing, there are plenty of good, first-hand sources available. I’m a great believer in using first-hand sources when possible. Joseph Smith kept a personal journal. It’s available to read. A great source. His mother also wrote an excellent book about her son. Perhaps the best source of all.

We must keep in mind—by the Law of Letters, we’re not talking about a very long time ago. We’re tracing sources and documents back a mere 150 some years. That’s nothing compared to tracing historical documents back to the times of Christ! Those 2000-year old-sources are still quite reliable, and we Baptists trust them.

Since 1985 I have diligently researched this matter—who was Joseph Smith? I have had essentially one rule: use primary sources when available. It’s safe to say—I have read hundreds of volumes, thousands of pages. I have dug into archives, visited sites, and spoken to "old timers." And I claim no original scholarship. I merely want to find out all I can about this man, about his movement, and about how I may be directly affected during my life time. Could it be? I’m a Latter-day Israelite living in the land of Zion?!

How blessed!

Then who was Joseph Smith, Jr?…

He was a man who believed that all of Israel would be saved; that is, all of the ten lost tribes would some day be regathered. He was a man who translated a book tracing the migration of one of those lost Hebrew tribes. (All the authors of the Book of Mormon were Hebrews, descendants from the tribe of Lehi who left Jerusalem in ac 600 BC.) He believed the earth would be restored, that this earth is not going to be eternally the pleasure ground of sin-cursed man. He believed that nothing short of a restoration of primitive Christianity would "get the job done." Restoration, not reformation, was his theme. He believed the reformation of the 1500s didn’t go far enough. He despised sectarianism. He believed there are biblical principles of economics (the celestial law) that will one day allow a wealth transfer into the kingdom. The saints will inherit the wealth of the wicked someday, as well as the earth. He believed what the first Adam lost, the Last Adam restored. He believed that this earth will one day be returned to Paradise.

In other words, he was a man much like you and me. Believing many of the same things as we. He was contemporary with Charles Finney, William Chalmers Burns, and Robert Murray McCheyne. The same Spirit rested upon them all.

Joseph Smith, Jr. was martyred for his faith. He was a witness for his Lord (a potential martyr) in the truest sense of the word.

Let’s return to the comment, "…the main thing I look for is the fruit…" We need to be precise here. Surely the gentleman who told me that means—we’re to look for the fruit of the Spirit evident in a man’s life (Gal.5:22-23). Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Did Joseph Smith demonstrate such qualities? Also, what is the fruit of the movement? Is Christ the center focus? Or do followers worship Joseph Smith?

With the above concerns before us, let’s now turn our attention to the man, Joseph Smith. I could tell many stories about the man, but I limit myself to one. Because this particular story is so moving, I want Joseph to tell in his own words of the night he and Emma lost their adopted twin son. As I said, he kept a personal journal:

"…On the 24^th of March the twins, which had been sick of the measles for some time, caused us to be broken of our rest in taking care of them, especially my wife. In the evening I told her she had better retire to rest with one of the children, and I would watch with the sicker child. In the night she told me I had better lie down on the trundle-bed, and I do so.

The mobbers were composed of various religious parties, but mostly Campbellites, Methodists, and Baptists, who continued to molest and menace Father Johnson’s house for a long time.  --Joseph Smith’s Personal Journal

I am tempted not to comment. Some things are so convincing they stand on their own.

Can you, can I, have our home raided in the middle of winter, be physically abused to the point of death, have our backs clawed, stripped naked, our mouths filled with tar—then preach the next morning with love in our hearts as our perpetrators sit in the congregation and listen?

Can we preach to the murderers of our child with love in our heart?! Joseph did. Can we display the fruit of the Spirit under such circumstances? Can we still love our mobbers, especially if our mobbers were professing brethren in the faith?

I know this much--phonies don’t let a mob murder one of their children and not lash out. To say it another way—hypocrites don’t die for their faith, and phonies don’t preach to the murderers of their children.

Did Joseph Smith display qualities of the fruit of the Spirit in his life?

I’ll let you answer.

I might add—two things are usually, without fail, genuine spiritual barometers: 1) how we treat our enemies, and 2) what our children say about us.

Joseph Smith exhibited an unusual amount of love and forbearance toward his enemies—and children loved the man, especially his own. I could tell story after story, but I won’t.

SUMMARY

While discussing Joseph Smith with 100 or more evangelical Christians, many questions were raised. More than a few comments were made. In our essay we have chosen to focus on key issues that seemed to surface over and over. Again, these issues were:

 

• "…No, I haven’t read the Book of Mormon and see no need to. I’m sticking to the Word."
• "…I believe Joseph Smith plagiarized the Book of Mormon. You know he copied the King James style, don’t you?
• "…You’re aware, aren’t you, Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by divination."
• "…I look for fruit."

I have tried to answer the above comments and concerns to the best of my ability—with fairness. With primary sources. And I might add—with Christian charity.

I have one prayer: that having read this essay, you can put it down and know—that Christ had a prophet named Joseph Smith.

r

About the Author:

Lynn Ridenhour grew up in the heart of Missouri near the Ozarks. A licensed Baptist minister for over 38 years, Lynn read the Book of Mormon and had a marvelous conversion experience to the restoration gospel as proclaimed by Joseph Smith.

Dr. Ridenhour’s email address is: htrails@solve.net

Lynn, his lovely wife, Linda, and their teenage daughter, Lori, make their home in Independence, Missouri.

Visit our website at: www.greaterthings.com/Ridenhour/