Living President vs. Dead Prophet
Joseph’s special commission as the head of this dispensation was not without substance. As is the case with all dispensation heads, Joseph was given special experiences with heaven that provided him with uncommon knowledge about the gospel. His experiences were described well in an editorial he wrote for the “Evening and Morning Star”:
Wherefore, 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; they saw the flood before it came; they saw angels ascending and descending upon a ladder that reached from earth to heaven; they saw the stone cut out of the mountain, which filled the whole earth; they saw the Son of God come from the regions of bliss and dwell with men on earth; they saw the deliverer come out of Zion, and turn away ungodliness from Jacob; they saw the glory of the Lord when he showed the transfiguration of the earth on the mount; they saw every mountain laid low and every valley exalted when the Lord was taking vengeance upon the wicked; they saw truth spring out of the earth, and righteousness look down from heaven in the last days, before the Lord came the second time to gather his elect; they saw the end of wickedness on earth, and the Sabbath of creation crowned with peace; they saw the end of the glorious thousand years, when Satan was loosed for a little season; they saw the day of judgment when all men received according to their works, and they saw the heaven and the earth flee away to make room for the city of God, when the righteous receive an inheritance in eternity. And, fellow sojourners upon earth, it is your privilege to purify yourselves and come up to the same glory, and see for yourselves, and know for yourselves. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. (E&MS August, 1832. DHC 1:282-284.)
Joseph's life and teachings are perhaps the most proximate resource we have in getting to know Jesus. In order to draw closer to Jesus, you have to know him. And yet, Jesus is not wholly accessible. What the world knows about him is limited to the little contained in the Bible. He comes to those who seek him without limitation, but seeking him requires us to already know him, to an extent, creating a paradox. The role of true witnesses is that they serve as signposts along the way. Joseph Smith interfaced more with Jesus than any man we know of after his mortal ministry. While Peter, James, and John may have spent more time with him, their contributions to our understanding of him are limited in volume and subject to a host of factors that dilute their effect. These include cultural and historical context that is unfamiliar to us, as well as limitations in translation and preservation. In Joseph Smith we find a more proximate example of a saved man than, say, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. While we have very scant information on the life of the patriarchs, we have an almost constant record of Joseph's later life: not just of the spiritual high points, but of the seemingly mundane events. With these accounts we have many firsthand accounts of those who observed him in his day-to-day life, providing exterior frames of reference. We also have, of course, a very large body of recorded revelation that reveals much more doctrinally about God when placed in the context of the events surrounding them.
How much time do people in the church, from the president of the high priesthood down to the newest member, spend searching out the words of Joseph Smith—the words God gave him to deliver? What proportion of their time is spent on that source compared to others? It is odd that we would sing “Praise to the Man” while simultaneously completely ignoring what that man actually taught, not to mention that which God has commanded us to study.1
It is beyond dispute that Joseph possessed the ability to ask and receive the oracles of God. In D&C 77 we have an example of how Joseph could ask God questions and receive categorical answers. For example, he asks (about John’s vision in the Book of revelation) “What are we to understand by the eyes and wings, which the beasts had?” In response, the Lord says, “Their eyes are a representation of light and knowledge, that is, they are full of knowledge; and their wings are a representation of power, to move, to act, etc.” (D&C 77:4.) What was a routine process for Joseph in obtaining revelation on seemingly any question is markedly absent from the experience of modern Mormons. Who among us today can ask questions like these questions and receive answers to them?
Modern Mormon leaders do not share the same experiences Joseph had. They do not have the visions Joseph had. They do not have the revelations Joseph had. They have not displayed the ability to ask questions and receive answers from God. Joseph was a dispensation head. Through him God revealed the gospel of Jesus Christ. Because of this, we can use the scriptures and the words of Joseph to vet modern teachings.2 John Taylor wrote:
If any man writes to you, or preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, set him down as an imposter. (Times & Seasons, April 1, 1844.)
President Joseph Fielding Smith taught:
When prophets write and speak on the principles of the gospel, they should have the guidance of the Spirit. If they do, then all that they say will be in harmony with the revealed word. If they are in harmony then we know that they have not spoken presumptuously. Should a man speak or write and what he says is in conflict with the standards which are accepted, with the revelations the Lord has given, then we may reject what he has said, no matter who he is. (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1 p. 187.)
When a man teaches that they have the authority to overrule revelation given through Joseph Smith,3 you can “set him down as an imposter.” When a man teaches that he is a higher authority than scripture,4 you can “reject what he has said, no matter who he is.” God’s word does not have an expiration date. What he said at any time in the past is just as valid today as it was then.
What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same. (D&C 1:38.)
When there is a difference5 between what Joseph taught and what is taught today, you will have to decide who you will believe:6 the man who communed with Jehovah, through whom God said he would speak, who— though he be taken—would leave to us God’s oracles, or the man who says he stands above Joseph,7 yet who cannot speak of any of the same experiences, of whom God has not testified, who contradicts God’s words by saying that they are no longer valid,8 but without offering any revelations to back up the claim. When men pray for a revelation that contradicts what God already said through Joseph, you can be sure they will not receive it.9 When doctrines taught by Joseph Smith are removed from the doctrines of the church, you will have to decide who knows better: Joseph Smith, who received it from God, or a group of men who find that Joseph’s doctrine contradicts their tradition.10
All men are liars who say they are of the true Church without the revelations of Jesus Christ and the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which is after the order of the Son of God. It is in the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood, but when men come out and build upon other men's foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust. Did I build on any other man's foundation? I have got all the truth which the Christian world possessed, and an independent revelation in the bargain... (Joseph Smith, TPJS, pp. 375-376.)
Some men teach that the words of a living prophet are more important than those of a dead one. God commissioned Jeremiah to provide an interesting test to a group of people called the Rechabites. God said:
Go unto the house of the Rechabites, and speak unto them, and bring them into the house of the Lord, into one of the chambers, and give them wine to drink. And I set before the sons of the house of the Rechabites pots full of wine, and cups, and I said unto them, Drink ye wine. But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever....we have...obeyed, and done according to all that Jonadab our father commanded us.....Then came the word of the Lord unto Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Go and tell the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Will ye not receive instruction to hearken to my words? saith the Lord. The words of Jonadab the son of Rechab, that he commanded his sons not to drink wine, are performed; for unto this day they drink none, but obey their father’s commandment: notwithstanding I have spoken unto you, rising early and speaking; but ye hearkened not unto me. I have sent also unto you all my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them, saying, Return ye now every man from his evil way, and amend your doings, and go not after other gods to serve them, and ye shall dwell in the land which I have given to you and to your fathers: but ye have not inclined your ear, nor hearkened unto me. Because the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have performed the commandment of their father, which he commanded them; but this people hath not hearkened unto me: Therefore thus saith the Lord God of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring upon Judah and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the evil that I have pronounced against them: because I have spoken unto them, but they have not heard; and I have called unto them, but they have not answered. And Jeremiah said unto the house of the Rechabites, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Because ye have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts, and done according unto all that he hath commanded you: Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever. (Jeremiah 35:2,5-6,10,12-19.)
God seemed very pleased that the Rechabites had preserved the commandment they had received for generations, and he blessed them for it. He also cursed those who had ignored the commandments received from prophets from generations past. That Zechariah preached the principle of the persistence of God’s word suggests this is a standing doctrine:
Should ye not hear the words which the LORD hath cried by the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity, and the cities thereof round about her, when men inhabited the south and the plain?...But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear. Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the LORD of hosts hath sent in his spirit by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the LORD of hosts. (Zechariah 7:7,11-12.)
The past prophets hold just as much authority today as they did in their day. God’s word does not have an expiration date. If there is a contradiction between former prophets and current prophets, we must analyze the source of each message. In 1 Kings 13 we read of a prophet who was commanded of God to fast for a prescribed time. As the LDS chapter heading states, he was “led astray by a prophet” who convinced him to disobey the original commandment, claiming God had told given him a new commandment that overruled the previous one. God destroyed the deceived prophet, who refused to analyze the source of the new, contradictory commandment or ask God about it before accepting it. When men claiming to be prophets encourage us to act contrary to God’s commandments given by the former prophets, we are obligated to ask God to detect if we are being led astray, as was the deceived prophet in 1 Kings 13. Only then will we be taking measures to avoid substituting the philosophies of men mingled with scripture for the word of God received by the former prophets.11 Nephi warned that
Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. (2 Nephi 28:31.)
Joseph Smith possesses a unique claim as the head of the dispensation, the source of God’s word to this generation. As long as this dispensation stands, any “living prophet” ought to preach in favor of—not contradict—God’s dispensation of the gospel through Joseph Smith. True messengers contradict—not invent—false traditions, restoring teachings to their original, undefiled state. Their teachings should not contradict scripture, but support it.
Footnotes
- 1. This is reminiscent of the chiding the Lord gave to the Pharisees who built monuments to the prophets that their fathers had killed (See Matt 23:29). ↩
- 2. Joseph Smith said that this rule was so firm that we could use it to distinguish between angels from God and angels from the devil: “How, it may be asked, was this known to be a bad angel?...by his contradicting a former revelation.” (Joseph Smith, TPJS, pp. 214-215.) ↩
- 3. For instance, “When there is to be anything different from that which the Lord has told us already, he will give it to his prophet...” (Harold B. Lee, “The Place of the Living Prophet, Seer, and Revelator,” address to CES religious educators, July 8, 1964). ↩
- 4. For instance, “The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Fourteen Fundamentals of Following the Prophet”) ↩
- 5. Elder Oaks, among others, has taught that any differences in teachings between modern Mormon leaders and Joseph Smith is due to circumstance. He taught, “the most important difference between dead prophets and living ones is that those who are dead are not here to receive and declare the Lord’s latest words to his people. If they were, there would be no differences among the messages of the prophets.” (Dallin Oaks, “Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall,” General Conference October 1994.) This creates an apparent contradiction. If God does not change, why would his commandments change? Why would he revoke his words concerning Joseph Smith, whom he said would be the only one among us to reveal his commandments? The contradiction disappears when it is realized that the changes do not come from God, but from men who believe their feelings are the same as God’s word, and who are willing to bow to societal pressures. See “Revelation” and “Prophets, Seers, Revelators?” ↩
- 6. “A desire to follow a prophet is surely a great and appropriate strength, but even this has its potentially dangerous manifestations. I have heard of more than one group who are so intent on following the words of a dead prophet that they have rejected the teachings and counsel of the living ones.” (Spencer W Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982), p. 462) The issue is not whether we are listening to men who call themselves prophets, but whether we are listening to God. ↩
- 7. “Beware of those who would set up the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Fourteen Fundamentals of Following the Prophet”) ↩
- 8. “Soon after President David O. McKay announced to the Church that members of the First Council of the Seventy were being ordained high priests...a seventy I met...was very much disturbed. He said to me, ‘Didn’t the Prophet Joseph Smith say that this was contrary to the order of heaven to name high priests as presidents of the First Council of the Seventy?’ And I said, ‘Well, I have understood that he did, but have you ever thought that what was contrary to the order of heaven in 1840 might not be contrary to the order of heaven in 1960?’ He had not thought of that. He again was following a dead prophet, and he was forgetting that there is a living prophet today. Hence the importance of our stressing that word living....We have some today willing to believe someone who is dead and gone and to accept his words as having more authority than the words of a living authority today.” (Stand Ye in Holy Places [1974], 152–53.) ↩
- 9. “And again we never inquire at the hand of God for special revelation only in case of their being no previous revelation to suit the case;” (Joseph Smith, TPJS, p 22.) ↩
- 10. “The Lectures on Faith defined the Holy Ghost as the mind of the Father and the Son, a member of the Godhead, but not a personage, who binds the Father and Son together. This view of the Holy Ghost reinforced Trinitarian doctrine by explaining how personal beings like the Father and Son become one God through the noncorporeal presence of a shared mind.” In the fall of 1898, the First Presidency asked him to rewrite the lectures and present them for approval as an exposition of Church doctrines. In the process, Talmage reconsidered and reconstructed the doctrine of the Holy Ghost....By January 1915, Apostle Charles W Penrose had completed a revision of Parley E Pratt's Key to the Science of Theology. Penrose deleted or altered passages that discussed the Holy Ghost as non-personal and that posited a sort of ‘spiritual fluid’ pervading the universe....The clarification of the doctrine of the Holy Ghost and the relationship between the three members of the Godhead also made necessary the revision of the Lectures on Faith....the First Presidency appointed a committee consisting of Apostles George F. Richards, Anthony W. Ivins, James E. Talmage, and Melvin J. Ballard to review and revise the entire Doctrine and Covenants.....The committee proposed to delete the Lectures on Faith on the grounds that they were ‘lessons prepared for use in the School of the Elders, conducted in Kirtland, Ohio, during the winter of 1834-35; but they were never presented to nor accepted by the Church as being otherwise than theological lectures or lessons.’ How the committee came to this conclusion is uncertain. The general conference of the Church in April 1835 had accepted the entire volume, including the Lectures, not simply the portion entitled ‘Covenants and Commandments,’ as authoritative and binding upon Church members.” (Thomas G. Alexander, “The Reconstruction of Mormon Doctrine,” Sunstone, August, 1980.) This is just one example of rejecting God’s word to keep their own tradition. (Mark 7:8–9) ↩
- 11. “For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him. Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them. And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.” (D&C 3:4-6)” ↩