Thesis
The Second Great Awakening was a time of religious fervor that instigated many to reconnect with or join for the first time a church. However in the wake of this spiritual stirring, a young man of simple means named Joseph Smith founded Mormonism. Claiming to have experienced heavenly visions providing guidance and wisdom to found a new religious system, the records of this time, as well as Joseph Smith’s own writings provide for the modern reader satisfactory evidence to determine the validity of Joseph Smith’s prophet-hood based on the requirements of Deuteronomy 18:22 as compared to the unambiguous happenings of history. Historical records indisputably testify that Joseph Smith was wrong about his account of history (which is written in a book attributed by Mormons with the authority of scripture) on many points and therefore is disqualified as a true prophet of God, consequently and necessarily qualifying himself as a false prophet. This paper will not address why these errors occur, as that is out of the scope of this writing. Sufficient for our purpose will be to show that these errors do in fact occur. The implications will thus be self-evident.
Critical Interaction
Starting off with a clear determination of time frame of the Second Great Awakening is necessary if one is to have a foundational knowledge of the events of this time. To remain focused on our task, we will not discuss any of the surrounding influences, effects, theology, etc. of the Second Great Awakening.
Marking the traits of this second awakening as “a sudden increase in Christian devotion and living,” Justo L. Gonzalez places the Second Great Awakening at the close of the eighteenth century into the beginning of the nineteenth century.[1] Gonzalez goes on to explain the traits of this widespread movement, “Attendance at worship increased markedly, and many spoke of having had an experience of conversion.”[2] The effects of this movement are felt throughout New England for decades, as Gonzalez attributes the founding of several Christian societies to the influence of the Second Great Awakening, some founded even as late as 1826.[3] Jonathan Hill is far more tolerant in his assessment of how long the Second Great Awakening lasted, attributing its influence to the founding of the Seventh-day Adventists in 1863, as well as the teachings of Joseph Smith.[4]
Within the time frame of the Second Great Awakening, which we now know encompasses at least 1800-1863, it must also be established when a local revival within the vicinity of Manchester, NY took place. This is referent to Joseph Smith’s claim that “Some time in the second year after our removal to Manchester, there was in the place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion.”[5] Since this does not outright refer to a date, there is some reconstruction that must be done. From Joseph Smith, in a record of what is said to be inspired, inerrant scripture, we read:
I was born in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and five, on the twenty-third day of December, in the town of Sharon, Windsor county, State of Vermont . . . My father, Joseph Smith, Sen., left the State of Vermont, and moved to Palmyra, Ontario (now Wayne) county, in the State of New York, when I was in my tenth year, or thereabouts. In about four years after my father's arrival in Palmyra, he moved with his family into Manchester in the same county of Ontario[6]
From this section of Mormon scripture one may deduce that Joseph Smith was born December 25, 1805, his father (Joseph Smith Sr.) left Vermont in young Joseph’s tenth year (or thereabouts). Assuming exactly ten years, this would yield Joseph Smith Sr.’s arrival in Palmyra, NY in roughly spring 1815/1816. Joseph Smith honestly indicates here the non-exact nature of his recollection (e.g. or thereabouts). From this point it is another 4 years until Joseph Smith Sr. once again moves his family out of Palmyra, to Manchester, NY, beginning with nearly the entire year of 1815 yields a date presumably around the 1818/1819 timeframe. In verse 5 of the Joseph Smith History presented in The Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith references “the second year after our removal to Manchester.” This would indicated that the “unusual excitement on the subject of religion” experienced by Smith in Manchester, according to these scriptures, and his own testimony, takes place in 1820 at the latest.
This is troubling because the overwhelming consensus of the facts from all other sources testifies to the falsehood of the historical recitation from Joseph Smith’s own pen regarding not only his own history, but the date of the “unusual excitement.” James R. White catalogs a long list of governmental records from varying sources countering the dates of the Joseph Smith history found in The Pearl of Great Price. First he cites a record of “warning out” from Norwich, Vermont dated March 15 , 1816.[7] This “warning out” typically happened extremely quickly if a family was not of “obvious means,” so that the town wouldn’t be overburdened by the responsibility of care for too many needy families.[8] Already this presents a slight problem, for it shows that the Smiths were in Vermont until at least March of 1816. Allowing that to be subsumed under “thereabouts” we move on to the Palmyra road tax records White cites, indicating road usage by individuals over the age of 21 in Palmyra. Joseph Smith Sr.’s name appears in these records 1817 to 1822, as does Joseph’s brother Alvin’s name appear in 1820 (Alvin turned 21 in 1819).[9] This irrefutably shows that Joseph Smith’s reconstruction of these dates is in error by virtue of the fact that for one to appear on the road tax record one must have been a resident of that community. However, Smith does accurately communicate when the revival broke out in relation to his family moving to Manchester (i.e. two years), as we will now see the date of the local revival firmly established to be 1824/1825.
Wesley P. Walters in his 1969 article, New Light on Mormon Origins From the Palmyra Revival firmly establishes through multiple sources and public records that the revival spoken of by Joseph Smith could have happened at no other date than 1824/1825. In support of this thesis he levels several historical facts against the claim in the Pearl of Great Price that, according to Joseph Smith, this revival took place in 1820. He cites testimony from a Mormon insider, Oliver Cowdery, who says, “...revival broke out under the preaching of a Mr. Lane, a presiding elder of the Methodist church.”[10] This is significant because Mr. Lane was the minister who presided over the Methodist church in the time of the revival in question, and is the one Cowdery admits was the instigator of the revival. Historical church records show that Rev. Lane was not assigned to the Ontario district where Palmyra is located until July of 1824.[11] Also, another church leader by the name of Reverend Stockton is historically connected not only to the events of the revival, but also to the writings of William Smith. Walters recounts William Smith’s testimony that Joseph Smith Sr. did not like Rev. Stockton because it was him who presided over the death of their son/brother Alvin and suggested that he might have gone to hell for having never been a member of a church.[12] The familiarity of this man to the Smith family, as has been evidenced, presents a problem because he too was not assigned as Pastor to the Presbyterian Church in Palmyra until February 18, 1824.[13] His presence at this funeral and a wedding November 26, 1823 were during visits he paid to the area, and are cataloged in newspapers that refer to him as Rev. Stockton of Skaneateles,” referring to the town where he was a Presbyterian elder.[14]
So any revival that included both of these men (Lane and Stockton) who are so intimately associated with the events described in the Pearl of Great Price could be none other than the 1824/1825 revival in Ontario county. Further support of this date is evidenced by the fact that the churches in this area saw no significant gain in new converts during 1820, when Joseph Smith suggests a revival was taking place. In point of fact, a revival without perceivable and commensurate increase in church attendance via conversion could not rightly be called a revival. This much is admitted by Joseph Smith in his classification of “great multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties.”[15] Walters reports that by September 1825 the Presbyterian church had seen 99 converts, the Baptists had seen 94, and the Methodists, from whose influence the revival is reported to have broken out, saw 208.[16] In 1820 the Presbyterians reported no significant increase, the Baptists gained 6 by way of Baptism, and the Methodists reported a loss of 6.[17] One is forced by the evidence to conclude that nothing noteworthy regarding revival happened in 1820 and instead admit that the events attributed by Joseph Smith in Mormon scripture to 1820 truly happened in the latter part of 1824 and into 1825.
What does that leave one to conclude about the revival tale in the Pearl of Great Price? Remembering that we are not seeking to answer the question of “why,” we must conclude that the account of this event as Joseph Smith tells it is indeed false. Since Joseph Smith’s false account is part of canonized Mormon scripture, one is forced to impute the same false assessment to at least the Pearl of Great Price.
The situation becomes more dire if it is realized that, as White describes, “if the revivals do not take place until [winter] 1824, and the first “spring day” that Smith can go into the woods to pray is in the spring of 1825, what happens to the “second vision” that supposedly takes place on September 21, 1823?”[18] If this most foundational account of Mormon faith is wrong, and is based on a prophetic vision claimed by Joseph Smith, then wouldn’t this impute the totality of Mormon “revelation?” Perhaps one could extent Smith some leeway, crediting this error to a simple lapse in memory regarding the date. This would seem fair, but is one’s willingness to make this allowance in agreement with Biblical texts whose authority and historical coherence has been maintained and demonstrated for centuries?
In Deuteronomy 18:22 we read, “when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.” The meaning of this is plain in the terms of the future (e.g. “see if what he says comes true”). One also may observe the implication of this passage for the accurate recollection of events being described as past. It is certain that one who did not accurately reconstruct historical events would not have been acknowledged as a prophet of God. Indeed Deuteronomy 18:22 tells us, “You need not be afraid of him.” Or in today’s vernacular, “don’t believe him.”
Even with the consideration of the Biblical criteria for prophetic testing, if allowance is still to be extended to Smith in permitting these errors, perhaps the following further evidence of Joseph Smith’s error will be adequate to relieve further doubt of his prophetic inadequacy.
Given the sequence of events described in The Pearl of Great Price where Smith claims that his father “moved with his family into Manchester in the same county of Ontario” around 1818 or 1819, it would be safe to assume that Joseph Smith’s sister Lucy Smith was with them in this move. And Smith admits as much by the statement “with his family” and then the proceeding qualification of “his family including eleven souls,” the listing of which includes young Lucy. The problem with this is that Lucy was not born until July 18, 1821.[19] So here, in revered Mormon scripture we have a blatant contradiction of historical facts, such as cannot be reconciled with any version of reality.
Conclusion
As I stated in the beginning of this paper, the implications of this are self-evident. First it is evident that Joseph Smith recorded his dates wrong, or perhaps changed them at a later date of editing. This fundamentally denies him access to the scriptural office of prophet. From this it is therefore deduced that because Joseph Smith does not fulfill the requirements to hold the office of prophet, nothing he wrote or taught should be considered authoritative. Furthermore, what he wrote and taught should be examined on the basis of true scripture (Genesis-Revelation) to determine its validity, and in the spirit of Deuteronomy 13:1-3 should be examined as to the identity, nature, and character of God. From such examination the totality of Mormon scriptures must be either accepted or rejected on that grounds. The evidence shows that they must be rejected as false, just as Joseph Smith’s status as prophet must be rejected as false.
Though Joseph Smith’s recollection of some of the events of the Second Great Awakening are accurate and history has secured the significant influence of the Mormon people, this does not translate to a determination of truth. Indeed, truth speaks when the actual turn of events is accurately reconstructed, as we have done here. The end has come to this: if Joseph Smith was any type of prophet at all, he was a false one. This is not to comment on his intensions or sincerity, but nonetheless carries real and far-reaching consequences for the modern Mormon Church. Whether or not pride and devotion will allow Mormons to weigh the evidence will only be decided one Mormon at a time.
[1] Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: The Reformation to the Present Day, (NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2010), 326.
[4] Jonathan Hill, Handbook to the History of Christianity: A Comprehensive Global Survey of the Growth, Spread, and Development of Christianity, (Oxford, England: Lion Publishing, 2006), 344.
[5] Pearl of Great Price: Joseph Smith - History. Extracts From the History of Joseph Smith the Prophet, History of the Church Vol. 1, Ch. 1-5, Verse 5. http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1
[6] Pearl of Great Price: Joseph Smith - History. Extracts From the History of Joseph Smith the Prophet, History of the Church Vol. 1, Ch. 1-5, Verse 3. http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Wesley P. Walters, “New Light on Mormon Origins From the Palmyra Revival,” Dialogue, Vol. 4, No. 1, (1969), 61.
[11] Ibid., 63.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Pearl of Great Price: Joseph Smith - History. Extracts From the History of Joseph Smith the Prophet, History of the Church Vol. 1, Ch. 1-5, Verse 5. http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1
[16] Wesley P. Walters, “New Light on Mormon Origins From the Palmyra Revival,” Dialogue, Vol. 4, No. 1, (1969), 66.
[17] Ibid.
[19] “Family of Joseph Smith Sr. and Lucy Mack Smith: The First Family of the Restoration,” Ensign, (December, 2005) http://www.lds.org/ensign/2005/12/family-of-joseph-smith-sr-and-lucy-mack-smith-the-first-family-of-the-restoration?lang=eng#footnoteSTAR2-25912_000_003 (accessed March 7, 2012).
No comments:
Post a Comment