Truth Can Come from Anywhere

In the process of evaluating truth, candidate truth should never be dismissed out of hand. We dismiss candidate truth out of hand when we assume the church is the source of all truth. This belief is manifested when we refuse to consider material not officially sanctioned by the church. Sometimes, we dismiss candidate truth out of hand through association with terms that generate an immediate emotive response. For example, when we associate material with “apostasy,” do we immediately feel badly or set it aside? Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said there were “phrases that serve as an excuse for not thinking.” We must exercise caution and control our emotive responses. Vocabulary concepts can be a powerful means of thought control.¹

Dismissing a matter out of hand was specifically forbidden under the law of Moses. “Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?” (John 7:51) How can one honestly evaluate whether a position is true without first hearing why someone holds it? “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.” (Proverbs 18:13.)

The idea that truth can come from anywhere is not only true, but was once a founding principle of Mormonism. Joseph Smith wrote:

Mormonism is truth; and every man who embraces it feels himself at liberty to embrace every truth: consequently the shackles of superstition, bigotry, ignorance, and priestcraft, fall at once from his neck; and his eyes are opened to see the truth, and truth greatly prevails over priestcraft....Mormonism is truth, in other words the doctrine of the Latter-day Saints, is truth....The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men, or by the dominations of one another, when that truth is clearly demonstrated to our minds, and we have the highest degree of evidence of the same. (Letter from Joseph Smith to Isaac Galland, Mar. 22, 1839, Liberty Jail, Liberty, Missouri, published in Times and Seasons, Feb. 1840, pp. 53–54; spelling and grammar modernized.)

This principle endured at least into Brigham Young’s administration. It was a frequent theme in his sermons:

I want to say to my friends that we believe in all good. If you can find a truth in heaven, earth or hell, it belongs to our doctrine. We believe it; it is ours; we claim it. (Brigham Young, DBY, p. 2).

In Joseph’s day, and for decades thereafter, it was well established that Mormonism was not the source of all truth, but a collection of men and women who sought all truth no matter where it came from. As time has passed, many Mormons have shifted to assuming that the church is the source of all truth. One noted exception was Dr. Henry Eyring, the prominent scientist and father of President Henry B. Eyring. He took a position consistent with Joseph Smith. He recognized that he was “obliged, as a Latter-day Saint, to believe whatever is true, regardless of the source.” (Henry Eyring, “The Faith of a Scientist,” Bookcraft 1969, p. 31) He took the position that the leaders of the church do not define what the church is. Rather, truth defines what the church is: “The Gospel is not the people in the Church. The Gospel is not even the people who direct it. The Gospel is the truth.” (Henry Eyring, “The Faith of a Scientist,” Bookcraft 1969, p. 23.)

The idea that all truth belongs in the church is much different from the idea that all truth comes from the church. In the former, members are expected to evaluate candidate truth from any source, including the need to evaluate what is said by their leaders. In the latter, members are expected to reject anything as false unless they hear it from their leaders while also assuming everything spoken by their leaders is true.

The former was taught by Joseph Smith and, after him, Brigham Young.

Be willing to receive the truth, let it come from whom it may; no difference, not a particle. Just as soon receive the Gospel from Joseph Smith as from Peter, who lived in the days of Jesus. Receive it from one man as soon as another. If God has called an individual and sent him to preach the Gospel that is enough for me to know; it is no matter who it is, all I want is to know the truth (DBY, p. 11).

The latter is taught by modern Mormonism:²

...the Lord speaks to the church through the Prophet....no one can be appointed to an office without a vote of the church....no one is to receive revelation for the church except the prophet....no one is to preach or build up the church except he be regularly ordained by the head of the church.3

It is a mistake to disbelieve something simply because it is not preached in the church or even that it is contrary to something preached in the church.⁴ The idea of the church as the source of all truth seems to have been created by President Harold B. Lee as the foundational idea behind his correlation program—placing the entire church in a hierarchical form under the president of the church. In the church, the correlation committee has the exclusive right to define what is true and what isn't, and members need not seek anywhere but in correlation-approved materials for what is useful in one's return to Christ. This invisible group of academically-trained theologians decide what is taught in CES classes, what appears in the church manuals, and what is allowed to be said at conference. The proclaimed purpose of this committee is to ensure that doctrinal errors do not appear in church settings, yet their material is fraught with errors and egregious omissions. They are the source of what “the church” teaches. They define orthodoxy.

The Lord taught in D&C 121 that an appeal to authority to convince of truth is unrighteous dominion. A principle should not be considered true simply because it is endorsed by the church⁵ or any individual or group within the church. Absent convincing arguments that withstand critical investigation, no principle ought to be accepted. Or, as the apostle John put it, “Dear friends, don’t believe everyone who claims to have the Spirit of God. Test them all to find out if they really do come from God.” (1 John 4:12, CEV.)

Orthodoxy is at odds with an open canon. It cannot co-exist with the expectation that God will yet reveal great things to the church and that he will reveal things never before revealed to individuals. Progress towards God is marked by invitations to do things you had either never before considered (as Moses was) or things you thought were previously wrong (as Nephi was when he was told to kill Laban). God will consistently challenge your paradigms. Ironically, orthodoxy is used as the measuring stick for apostasy, when the idea of a closed canon is itself apostate.

Orthodoxy is the antithesis of seeking truth from God.⁶ The latter requires a constant search for new facts, new observations, and new theories. The former “tenaciously defend[s] beliefs in the face of what would appear to be verified fact and plain logic...doggedly closing eyes and minds to ideas whose time has surely come.” (James Hogan, “Kicking the Sacred Cow”, p. 8.)

Joseph Smith not only preached to consider candidate truth from all sources—he also practiced it. One morning a man came into his house and introduced himself as Joshua. Joseph asked Joshua questions about his interesting ideas on religion. Despite obvious differences, he invited him to give them a lecture on his beliefs to assist him in his evaluation of what he was preaching. It took Joseph two full days of association with this man’s message to reach the point where he was willing to say his doctrine was incorrect. He did not dismiss Joshua out of hand. He listened and patiently evaluated his message.