Hilasmos
Puritan Board Freshman
So, I have become motivated to study mormonism some. I am reading chapters out of White's Letter's to a Mormon Elder, Mormon Claims Answered, and The Gospel according to Joseph Smith.
Anyways, I am honestly struggling with the long list of the false prophecies of mormonism. The mormon prophecies are rediculous, no doubt, but what I am finding is that they are more ambigously worded than what their Christian critique would suggest.
For example, from Cowan's book Mormon Claims Answered he gives an example:
Another web article words it this way:
Notice the phrase "would be." That seems to be the crux of the critique, Smith was giving revelation about what "would" be the case, it wasn't the case, so Smith is a false prophet. Sounds good to me, but then I go read the section in D&C, and it just doesn't seem to carry the same weight when it isn't "summarized" by the Christian.
Here is v. 56 from D&C 124 (Doctrine and Covenants 124*)
Maybe it's just me, but doesn't the actual wording of the D&C seem to state this is "god's" will...let this happen, let this happen, bla bla. It is not "Joseph Smith and his family will posses this house forever..." As if it were a predictive prophecy. It reads more as a command, but commands are not predictions of future events per se; and commands can be broken.
Now, if that was just the only example, no biggy...but, I have been going one by one through these prophecies and I cannot find a single one that doesn't have some level of ambiguity in the actual context that a mormon could not respond to. Basically, it just doesn't read as black and white in the D&C as the Christian critique makes it out to be. That is a little troubling, because of course we would demand of our critiques to be as fair as possible.
For example...
This is a shaky critique if you want to be consistent with a lot of the soon to return passages of the Bible. At any rate, my purpose is to ask whether anyone who has studied this more than I have the "best" example of a D&C prophecy that has failed? I have found some critiques better than others, but not as many as I would have thought. I would prefer to become familiar with one "good" one (since that is all it takes, Deut 18), than spend all my time reading and gaining a general understanding of a lot of ambigous revelations.
Anyways, I am honestly struggling with the long list of the false prophecies of mormonism. The mormon prophecies are rediculous, no doubt, but what I am finding is that they are more ambigously worded than what their Christian critique would suggest.
For example, from Cowan's book Mormon Claims Answered he gives an example:
11. D. & C. 124:56-60 is part of the previous revelation and says the "Nauvoo House" was to be built and that Joseph Smith and his descendants were to "have place in that house, from generation to generation, forever and ever!" But, Smith was killed, and the Nauvoo House was never even completed, so the Smith family never occupied it. The unfinished building still stands by the Mississippi River and is owned by the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Thus, this prophecy has never been fulfilled. But, D. & C. 1:37 says, "Search these commandments for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled." This is part of the preface to all the revelations given by Joseph Smith in the first edition. Therefore, all of the examples we have given in the D. & C. should have been fulfilled!
Another web article words it this way:
In D&C 124.56-60, Smith prophesied that the Nauvoo House in Nauvoo, IL. would be in his family forever (1841). It did not remain in his family, and is not owned by them today. This makes for a very false prophecy.
Notice the phrase "would be." That seems to be the crux of the critique, Smith was giving revelation about what "would" be the case, it wasn't the case, so Smith is a false prophet. Sounds good to me, but then I go read the section in D&C, and it just doesn't seem to carry the same weight when it isn't "summarized" by the Christian.
Here is v. 56 from D&C 124 (Doctrine and Covenants 124*)
56 And now I say unto you, as pertaining to my boarding ahouse which I have commanded you to build for the boarding of strangers, let it be built unto my name, and let my name be named upon it, and let my servant Joseph and his house have place therein, from generation to generation.
Maybe it's just me, but doesn't the actual wording of the D&C seem to state this is "god's" will...let this happen, let this happen, bla bla. It is not "Joseph Smith and his family will posses this house forever..." As if it were a predictive prophecy. It reads more as a command, but commands are not predictions of future events per se; and commands can be broken.
Now, if that was just the only example, no biggy...but, I have been going one by one through these prophecies and I cannot find a single one that doesn't have some level of ambiguity in the actual context that a mormon could not respond to. Basically, it just doesn't read as black and white in the D&C as the Christian critique makes it out to be. That is a little troubling, because of course we would demand of our critiques to be as fair as possible.
For example...
In the Pearl of Great Price (PGP), Joseph Smith-History (JSH) 1.40-41, (1823) Smith claimed that the angel Moroni told him that the prophecies in Isaiah 11 were "about to be fulfilled," and that those in Joel 2 were "soon to be" fulfilled. More than 165 years have passed and that interpretation of prophecy has not yet come to pass.
This is a shaky critique if you want to be consistent with a lot of the soon to return passages of the Bible. At any rate, my purpose is to ask whether anyone who has studied this more than I have the "best" example of a D&C prophecy that has failed? I have found some critiques better than others, but not as many as I would have thought. I would prefer to become familiar with one "good" one (since that is all it takes, Deut 18), than spend all my time reading and gaining a general understanding of a lot of ambigous revelations.