FAIR

2022 FAIR Conference videos are now available to watch!

Oliver Mullins

A Case for Ancient Temple Ordinances

by

salt-lake-temple-exterior-789727-printThe most sacred structure to Latter-day Saints is the Temple. Of course, what makes the Temple sacred has nothing to do with the building; it is because of the holy ordinances that are performed inside. The Church teaches that only through those ordinances are the greatest blessings available through the Atonement to be had1.  The Church also teaches that Temple ordinances have been around since the time of Adam2. By contrast, most anti-Mormons believe that they are a modern invention, a mixture of Joseph Smiths imagination and plagiarized Freemason ritual.  This is simply not true. Although not a comprehensive analysis, I hope to give throughout this post a glimpse of the plentiful evidences that these ordinances were practiced anciently, and that divine revelation to Joseph Smith is a much better explanation for their genesis than pretending he made it up.

Before getting into the heart of the subject, I want clarify a couple of things. First, I am not suggesting that early Temple ritual was a carbon copy of what is practiced today. We just don’t know exactly what the ordinances were like in ancient times. How they are performed has been changed from time to time by the presiding authorities to better meet the needs of the Church membership (one of the beauties of continuing revelation), and so there is no need to assume that the ordinances have remained unchanged throughout history.  Also, it is entirely possible that there have been periods of time where the full spectrum of Temple ordinances has not been available on the earth (for example after the Children of Israel lost the Melchizedek Priesthood). But since those ordinances are critical to our salvation, the essential core aspects would have remained the same throughout time, and would have been known to the faithful.  As I hope to demonstrate, there are many evidences of this found within ancient texts and traditions.

Second, I’m purposefully not discussing in detail any connections to Freemasonry. This has been explored extensively, and FairMormon has plenty on the subject. The primary purpose of this post is to discuss documents and traditions relating to the Temple that pre-date Freemasonry. From my point of view, any connection between Temple ritual and Freemasonry need not be distressing. I believe that it is entirely possible (if not probable) that Joseph Smith was inspired to become a Mason so that he could better learn how to use dramatic ritual and symbols to teach complex ideas; and while some similarities undoubtedly exist, you cannot explain the ordinances of the Temple by looking at Freemasonry alone. [Read more…] about A Case for Ancient Temple Ordinances

The Parable of the Hounds and the Herrings

by

Hunt_Master_exits_Castle_croppedIn 19th century England, hounds were often used for hunting foxes and other game for food or sport, a tradition that survives in some parts of that country even today.1 According to legend, sometimes as the hounds went off in search of animals scent, saboteurs would take smoked fish (usually herring turned reddish in color because of the smoking process) and drag it along the hunting route but away from the game. Perhaps they were other hunters wanting the trophy for themselves, or maybe just mischief makers–––the story doesn’t specify. Whatever the motivation, their ploy would cause the dogs to abandon the trail and follow this new and alluring scent. Unfortunately, this would sabotage the hunt, and the dogs would be left empty handed, so to speak, because they had lost sight (or smell) of the true prize.2 Although the origins of this story are dubious, the phrase “red herring” has stuck to refer to using false or misleading information to redirect attention away from the real issue.

In our parable we are the hounds and anti-Mormon critics are the saboteurs who use (figurative) strong-scented fish to lead us away from our real treasure: the core doctrines and ordinances of the Gospel. There are many examples of this, and they are too numerous to mention here, but always the goal is the same: distract from the critical issues (is the Book of Mormon true? is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints God’s Church on the earth? is Joseph Smith a Prophet?) by getting us to focus all of our time and energy on infinitely less important ones (Joseph Smith’s character flaws, translation “issues” with the Gold Plates or the Book of Abraham, polygamy, etc.). We start to ignore what really matters–––the things actually important to our salvation–––to focus on these other issues, and in the process allow our testimonies to wither and die. Unfortunately, it can be easy to take the bait and fall down this false trail. I would like to offer up a few suggestions that might be helpful as we find ourselves dealing with this problem.

First, a common red herring that gets thrown around is that if we don’t have the answers to every question an anti-Mormon critic brings up, then the Church obviously isn’t true. This is just ridiculous. The Church has never claimed to have the answers to everything. In fact, it is commonly taught that we don’t have all of the answers and probably won’t in this life. Scientists don’t have all of the answers about science, yet you never hear anti-science critics decrying all their findings as false. Doctors don’t have all the answers about medicine, but you don’t hear critics portraying every medical professional as a fraud. You get the idea. Not knowing everything is part of the Plan of Salvation. If we did know everything then we would have no need for faith, and faith is a crucial part of our mortal experience. Without it we cannot be exalted.

That being said, there are good answers to almost all of the questions posed by critics, and even more answers will come with additional research. A good example would be the supposed anachronisms found in the Book of Mormon. The more we have learned about ancient America, the more they have disappeared.3 We would do well to follow the counsel of Sister Camilla Kimball, wife of President Spencer W. Kimball: “I have always had an inquiring mind. I am not satisfied just to accept things. I like to follow through and study things out. I learned early to put aside those gospel questions that I could not answer. I had a shelf of things I did not understand, but as I have grown older and studied and prayed and thought about each problem, one by one I have been able to understand them better.”4 Just because we don’t have the answer to a question right now doesn’t mean we won’t later, and as such is no reason to leave the straight and narrow sniffing after smoked fish.

Second, we need to be careful to not sacrifice our study of the things that really matter as we search for answers to less important issues. Just as our bodies require constant physical nourishment to survive and thrive, our testimonies need the constant spiritual nourishment that the scriptures and words of the living prophets provide. It can be easy to get so wrapped up in an issue that we obsessively read every article and blog post on the subject–––taking up hours of our time and neglecting the scripture study we so desperately need. Now don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that we shouldn’t find answers to issues that trouble us. But I am saying that we should not sacrifice the “best” for the “good.” I think that scholarly research about the Church is critical, and I spend a good amount of my time studying it, but when all is said and done, it will be the study of spiritual things that draws us closer to Christ and ultimately saves us. It is not something we should abandon, especially when there is an issue we are struggling with. The more we let the Spirit into our lives, the easier it will be for Him to teach us the truth.

Third, when we are seeking answers to questions that may bother us, we owe it to ourselves and to our Heavenly Father to use sources that will build up instead of attempt to tear down our testimonies. This is critical. How information is presented, whether it is true or not, can have a significant impact on how it is received and interpreted. A good example of this is found in a recent FairMormon podcast by Ned Scarisbrick. Even something critical to life itself (like water) can be given such a negative spin as to make is seem reprehensible. The same is true about things of the Spirit. As Elder Stanfill of the Seventy eloquently explained during this most recent General Conference:

When we consider thoughtfully, why would we listen to the faceless, cynical voices of those in the great and spacious buildings of our time …These ever-present naysayers prefer to tear down rather than elevate and to ridicule rather than uplift. Their mocking words can burrow into our lives, often through split-second bursts of electronic distortions carefully and deliberately composed to destroy our faith. Is it wise to place our eternal well-being in the hands of strangers? Is it wise to claim enlightenment from those who have no light to give or who may have private agendas hidden from us? These anonymous individuals, if presented to us honestly, would never be given a moment of our time, but because they exploit social media, hidden from scrutiny, they receive undeserved credibility.5

Let us be careful not to give these critics power over us that they don’t deserve and instead seek answers from good, qualified, uplifting sources of which there are plenty.

Lastly, remember that the things that really matter, spiritual truths that can save and uplift us are only understood by spiritual means. It is not a sign of weakness or lack of intelligence to rely on God for this; it is a sign of faith. These truths can only be revealed by His Spirit, and when we have gained our testimony the other issues don’t seem to matter as much, for we know that we are on the right path and that all of our answers will come in time. It’s not so much that our questions disappear, but we gain a greater peace and understanding that overcomes our uncertainties. On the other hand, if we allow them to, red herrings can take us away from those central, core truths that bring to us light and life, but that doesn’t need to be the case. Consider the following quote from President Uchtdorf:

I wish I could help everyone to understand this one simple fact: we believe in God because of things we know with our heart and mind, not because of things we do not know.  Our spiritual experiences are sometimes too sacred to explain in worldly terms, but that doesn’t mean they are not real. Heavenly Father has prepared for His children a spiritual feast, offering every kind of exquisite food imaginable—and yet, instead of enjoying these spiritual gifts, the cynics content themselves with observing from a distance, sipping from their cups of skepticism, doubt, and disrespect. Why would anyone walk through life satisfied with the light from the candle of their own understanding when, by reaching out to our Heavenly Father, they could experience the bright sun of spiritual knowledge that would expand their minds with wisdom and fill their souls with joy?… Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it. It is the faithful life that requires moral strength, dedication, and courage. Those who hold fast to faith are far more impressive than those who give in to doubt when mysterious questions or concerns arise.6

Let us be careful that in our search for truth that we do not fall into the trap of the cynics. Rather, let us see these red herrings for what they truly are–––stinky fish–––and follow instead the path that will lead us to eternal life.

                                            References

  1. Foxhunting (n.d.). In Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/sports/foxhunting
  2. Jack, Albert (2004). Red Herrings and White Elephants. The Origins of Phrases We Use Every Day [Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader] pp. 188-189. Retrieved from http://leafo.net/hosted/ase/WhatCD
  3. Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/Basic Principles (n.d.). FairMormon Answers. Retrieved from http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Basic_principles
  4. Caroline Eyring Miner and Edward L. Kimball, Camilla (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1980), pp. 126–27
  5. Stanfill, Vern P (2015) “Choose the Light.” Retrieved from https://www.lds.org/general-conference/print/2015/10/choose-the-light?lang=eng
  6. Uchtdorf, Dieter (2015) “Be Not Afraid, Only Believe.” Retrieved from https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/be-not-afraid-only-believe?lang=eng

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Joseph Smith and Magic

by

Anthony_Sweat_Translating_with_Martin
Artistic depiction of Joseph Smith translating the Book of Mormon by peering into a seer stone kept at the bottom of a hat.

A common accusation levied against the Prophet Joseph Smith is that he was heavily involved with “magic.” Not in an abstract believe-in-something-greater-then-yourself kind of “magic,” but in more of a literal “Harry Potter” sense. This myth is propagated both by anti-Mormons and at times concerned believers. It is unfortunate that this troubling falsehood keeps being brought up from time to time, but as I hope to show to those who may be concerned by the allegation, it is misleading.

These claims, which are as old as the church itself, range from Joseph Smith owning a Jupiter Talisman, magic parchments, and a mars dagger (which was used in ritualistic magic). Some claim that Joseph Smith and his family were involved in drawing “magic circles,” and many other ridiculous accusations. Some of these allegations can be dismissed as having absolutely no evidence to support them, or coming from sources that need to be viewed with extreme skepticism. The one accusation, however, that I do want to discuss in more detail is that Joseph Smith, through magical means, used a stone to search for buried treasure, and that this was the basis for him claiming to have found a “golden bible.” This proves, the anti-Mormons say, that the Book of Mormon (and by extension The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) was founded on occultism, and not by God.

Before addressing this topic, I first want to paint a picture of the world of Joseph Smith in the early to mid 1800s. It was in many ways completely different then the modern world in which we now live. Practices like dowsing (also known as divining­­­­–––the practice of using a rod to find water or ore) was commonplace in that century, and was believed to be scientifically valid, the rod pointing towards the water like a compass points towards magnetic north. (An interesting side note, while certainly not as common now, dowsers are still employed by many farmers today). Seers who used stones to find lost objects were also not uncommon; in fact around the vicinity of the small town of Palmyra at least four people were operating as such. These practices certainly seem extremely strange to us in our day, and it is easy to dismiss them as the superstitions of simple, uneducated country folk. But it was not limited to them. It truly was part of the early modern worldview. For example, Sir Isaac Newton, arguably the greatest scientific mind of all time–––who died 78 years before Joseph Smith was born–––believed in alchemy (that common metals could be transformed to gold or silver). As we can see, if we are to try and understand why Joseph Smith may have done some of the things he did, we need to look at it under a 19th century lens, not our 21st century one.

Another important point to consider is the American frontier at the time was steeped in a religious and biblical culture–––much more so then we are today–––and many (though not all) would have certainly viewed these practices as falling under biblical approval. The Bible certainly lends credit to God use of physical objects in miraculous ways. Consider Jacob’s use of peeled poplar and hazel sticks to produced striped and spotted stock, Moses’ and Aaron’s rods, the Urim and Thummim, and consecrated oil to heal the sick as examples. It is critical to note, however, that the Bible absolutely condemns magic and sorcery. This is important: all who believe in the Bible (or virtually any other book of scripture for that matter) most certainly believe in supernatural, unexplainable miracles, but point to God as the source, not magic. Most of these practitioners–––be it “dowsers” or “seers”–––were practicing Christians, and as such they would have believed that they were given their gifts from God, not that they had some inherent magical power.

This brings us to the question of what Joseph Smiths involvement in all of this was. Early historical documents do show that prior to the Restoration Joseph Smith was involved in the practice of using a seer stone to find lost or hidden objects. As was discussed earlier in this post, this does not show that he believed in, or practiced, magic or sorcery in any form. Rather he, as a young man, believed either that he had been blessed with a gift from God, or that he had a talent for finding lost objects which was not incompatible with the scientific worldview at the time (much like dowsing). Unfortunately, there are no first hand accounts of this, and so we are without Joseph’s own thoughts and feelings on the matter and are left to draw conclusions based on the testimony of witnesses and other evidences. Also, many of the second hand accounts were given many years later, which adds a layer of complexity when trying to determine exactly how and to what extend Joseph Smith was involved. Hopefully throughout the remainder of this post I might be able shed some light and perhaps bring some context to this subject.

To the best of our ability it appears that he first used a seer stone to help locate lost objects in 1819-1820. In one of the early accounts it appears that Joseph Smith used the stone to help locate some lost cows. In another second hand account he was asked to tell the future, but he refused–––which is an important point. In his 2009 FAIR conference presentation, Brant Gardner stated, “I suspect that the refusal tells us about the spheres in which Joseph believed that particular talent operated. That refusal suggests Joseph made a distinction between that which was holy (which I believe he classified as religion) and his other functions (which I believe he classified as a talent).” In other words, this shows that Joseph Smith was concerned with not trying to extend his “talents” to do something that God would not sanction (i.e. prophesying the future without divine approval). But as this example demonstrates, it appears that he viewed the searching for lost objects to help others in an entirely different category, one which God did not disapprove.

Another common accusation was that Joseph Smith used this seer stone to con others into paying him to find lost treasure. The only well documented “treasure hunt” that Joseph Smith participated in was the 1825 expedition with Josiah Stowell (or Stoal) Sr. Josiah Stowell hired Joseph to help him find what he believed to be a lost Spanish silver mine (see previously linked FAIR presentation for more information). It is noteworthy that Joseph Smith was taken to court over the incident by Josiah Stowell’s nephew who accused him of conning his uncle. Josiah Stowell testified on Joseph Smith’s behalf and it appears he was acquitted of the charge. In his written history, Joseph Smith testifies that he actually was the one who persuaded Josiah to give up searching for the mine. His own humorous response to the accusation “was not Joseph Smith a money digger?” was “Yes, but it was never a very profitable job for him, as he only got fourteen dollars a month for it.” As we can see, it is very difficult to paint him in the light of a treasure seeking con artist.

The questions that most concerned Latter-day Saints probably have concerning this matter, however, are probably more along the lines of: did Joseph Smith actually have the gift to find lost objects using a stone? Are there any implications with the translation of the Gold Plates? Why would Heavenly Father choose as His prophet someone who practiced something that seems so foreign and strange to us? While we don’t have answers to all the questions on this subject, I hope to be able to offer up some ideas to anyone who may be struggling with this issue.

The seer stone believed to have been used by Joseph Smith in translating the Book of Mormon (October 2015 Ensign)
The seer stone believed to have been used by Joseph Smith in translating the Book of Mormon (“Joseph the Seer,” October 2015 Ensign).

First, we have no idea if Joseph Smith felt like his early use of a seer stone was assisted by a spiritual gift–––he said nothing on the matter. It would not surprise me at all if Heavenly Father had blessed the young boy with a gift that he used to assist others in finding things that were lost. That being said, my faith also allows 100% for a young Joseph Smith who was interested in an old tradition common to his time, and not believing it to be under biblical condemnation, sought to learn about and practice it. Remember, he was a teenager at the time, and one who sought truth from God wherever he could (even in a grove of trees). Would it not be unreasonable for such a young man to see if there was any truth among the local “seers” in his area? And could that not have sparked in interest in his teenage mind to see if he also possessed a “talent” for such things?

Whether his use of a seer stone was inspired by God, or a practice he became interested in and picked up on his own, we can only speculate. What is clear, however, is that Heavenly Father used this to further his purposes and prepare the young Joseph Smith for the great work that lay ahead of him. Because Joseph Smith was familiar using a stone to find lost objects, it would absolutely make sense to him that he could use stones to translate a “lost” language from an ancient record. It was a physical object that he could put his faith in while God used him to work mighty miracles. Did Heavenly Father need to use a stone or Urim and Thummim to translate the Book of Mormon? No, of course not. In fact, later Joseph Smith stopped using the stone to receive revelation because he no longer needed it. God didn’t need Moses’ rod to part the Red Sea either. But the rod, like the stone, was familiar to His prophets and it served as a catalyst to build their budding faith while they grew into the great men God intended them to be. God took Joseph Smith as he was, a “rough rolling stone,” and molded him into the great prophet of the restoration.

I would like to finish by quoting Elder D. Todd Christofferson:

We should be careful not to claim for Joseph Smith perfections he did not claim for himself. He need not have been superhuman to be the instrument in God’s hands that we know him to be. In May, 1844, Joseph declared: “I never told you I was perfect, but there is no error in the revelations which I have taught.” He had commented earlier: “Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs I am charged with doing: the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature, like other men. No man lives without fault. Do you think that even Jesus, if He were here, would be without fault in your eyes? His enemies said all manner of evil against Him—they all watched for iniquity in Him.” Joseph Smith was a mortal man striving to fulfill an overwhelming, divinely- appointed mission against all odds. The wonder is not that he ever displayed human failings, but that he succeeded in his mission. His fruits are undeniable and undeniably good.

To me the greatest way to defend accusations against the Prophet, and to calm any nagging doubts, is to look at the fruits of Joseph Smith, namely the Book of Mormon and the work of the Restoration. Could such a work be brought forth by an uneducated farm boy who dabbled in magic and had no assistance from the Divine? I would testify absolutely not–––that this could only be brought forth by the gift and power of God. Ultimately, however, we each need to determine this for ourselves. The beauty of the Book of Mormon is that for us, it is something physical that we can read, study, and ask God ourselves to determine the truth of what it contains. The exact mechanics of how the plates were translated, or how Joseph Smith became prepared to translate them is a secondary issue. And if we can determine the truthfulness of the end product, we can be assured that while we may not have all the answers, God’s hand was involved from the beginning to the end.

Faith and Intellect

by

man-praying-1082988-galleryI recently read a blog post on Patheos about archeology and the Book of Mormon. The author’s tone was friendly and accepting of Latter-day Saints as a people, for which I am grateful, but his ultimate conclusion was that there is absolutely no archeological evidence of the Book of Mormon, so there is no way it can be an authentic historical text. While this is not correct, I will not attempt to refute this particular claim in this post, but rather will simply mention that answers to his questions can be found here on the FairMormon website.

I will concede the point that you cannot scientifically prove that the Book of Mormon is true. However, this shouldn’t be anything shocking to believers; the same thing is true about the Bible, Jesus Christ’s divinity, and even for the all-encompassing question of God’s existence. And it is certainly true that while there is evidence for all of these issues, there isn’t any proof. Why is this?

Part of the reason lies in the limitations that are inherent in the scientific method. Science is just incapable of answering certain questions: Why are we here? Does God exist? Do the Book of Mormon and Bible contain the word of God? You get the idea. These questions just don’t lie within the scope of what can be tested scientifically. Regardless of personal belief systems, one has to give some value to religion because it answers those questions that cannot be answered in any other way. It can also give greater meaning and purpose to science, just as science can help validate (but not necessarily prove) many of the tenets of religion.

Another reason is that “proof” can be a rather elusive principle when it comes to truly changing people. Laman and Lemuel saw an angel, but they still rebelled. Despite all of the wonders shown to the Children of Israel, they still wanted to go back to Egypt. And despite being shown the Gold Plates by an angel, all of the Three Witnesses fell away from the Church, at least for a time (although the fact that they never denied their testimony is powerful evidence for the truthfulness of that event). I would argue then that we should not be seeking evidences as a means to prove that the gospel is true, but rather as a means to assist with conversion, which causes a much deeper and more profound change.

Conversion is unique in that it requires us to use both intellect and spirit. We are to “study [the gospel] out in [our] mind” (D&C 9:8) and then ask if it is right. But we must do so with “a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ” (Moroni 10:4). In other words it is the convergence of faith and reason to bring about a “mighty change of heart.” While science and reason can assist in conversion, by themselves they are not enough.

Let’s make no mistake about it. If Heavenly Father saw fit, He could certainly offer up irrefutable science on any matter, but it doesn’t usually happen that way. Why not? Doing so would certainly make it easier for us to convince the rest of the world that the Church is true, but it would also undermine the entire point of our existence. Although conversion is not an easy or quick process, it gives us a strength that could not be gained in any other way.

Elder Jeffery R. Holland, in his discourse “Missionary Work and the Atonement,” had this to say concerning missionary work and conversion:

Anyone who does any kind of missionary work will have occasion to ask, Why is this so hard? Why can’t our success be more rapid? Why aren’t there more people joining the Church? Why isn’t the only risk in missionary work that of pneumonia from being soaking wet all day and all night in the baptismal font?

I have thought about this a great deal. I offer this as my personal feeling. I am convinced that missionary work is not easy because salvation is not a cheap experience. Salvation never was easy. We are The Church of Jesus Christ, this is the truth, and He is our Great Eternal Head. How could we believe it would be easy for us when it was never, ever easy for Him? It seems to me that missionaries and mission leaders have to spend at least a few moments in Gethsemane. Missionaries and mission leaders have to take at least a step or two toward the summit of Calvary.

Now, please don’t misunderstand. I’m not talking about anything anywhere near what Christ experienced. That would be presumptuous and sacrilegious. But I believe that missionaries and investigators, to come to the truth, to come to salvation, to know something of this price that has been paid, will have to pay a token of that same price.

For that reason I don’t believe missionary work has ever been easy, nor that conversion is, nor that retention is, nor that continued faithfulness is. I believe it is supposed to require some effort, something from the depths of our soul.

If He could come forward in the night, kneel down, fall on His face, bleed from every pore, and cry, “Abba, Father (Papa), if this cup can pass, let it pass,” then little wonder that salvation is not an easy thing for us.

Although we are not talking specifically about missionary work I believe what Elder Holland said is the essence of this issue. If we had every question answered, our experience here in mortality would not be a test but rather a “cheap experience.” While in mortality, it is absolutely essential that we don’t know everything, otherwise there would be no need for faith and no need to lean on our Father in Heaven.

Now, I don’t want anyone to misunderstand where I am coming from. I am a firm and ardent believer of science–––in my personal, professional, and religious life. I believe there are literally thousands of strong evidences that support the authenticity of the Restoration. We should (and do) continually search out these evidences from all sources possible, including scientific research, but in the end, without the Spirit, what we find won’t be enough for a true change of heart.

So then, let’s not be distraught over any supposed lack of “proof.” All answers will come in the Lord’s own time–––both through our efforts to learn and through revelation to His prophets. Let us instead be grateful. For what may seem as a hindrance at first is actually an opportunity to grow, develop our faith, and walk a few steps along side our Savior on our symbolic journey “toward the summit of Calvary.”

Dating Christ’s Birth

by

Untitled1

I have always loved Christmas. As far as I can remember, it has always been my favorite time of the year. I love the sights, the smells, and the tastes. Most of all, however, I love that we are able to remember the birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ.

This leads me directly into the perennial debate: when was Christ actually born? Has there been any modern-day revelation on the matter? What is the Church’s official position about this? These are all interesting questions to ponder, and I will attempt to address these to the best of my ability throughout this post.

We, as members of the LDS Church, celebrate the birth of Christ on December 25, along with the rest of the Christian world. Many faithful Latter-day Saints (including many of our leaders), however, believe that April 6 was actually the birth date of our Savior, using D&C 20:1 as scriptural justification. Does that match what the scholars say? And if not, how can we explain the disparity?

Before we get into the meat of this question, it is important to first determine the Church’s official position. In this case it’s easy—there isn’t one. Knowing the exact day and year He was born simply does not pertain to our salvation, and as far as I was able to tell, there has been no official revelation on the matter. The Church, as an organization, simply has not spent that much time and energy worrying about it.

Why then should we worry ourselves about something that (in the eternal scheme of things) really doesn’t matter all that much? That’s a legitimate question. First, I believe very strongly in gaining as much knowledge as possible (D&C 130:18–19), especially knowledge related in any way to the Savior. Second, I believe that as defenders of the faith, we need to be able to have ready answers to questions that we might be asked, and this topic is certainly fair game. Furthermore, no one should have their testimonies rocked because a critic brings this up as evidence that the Church cannot be true.

First, let’s examine what the Prophets and apostles have said on this matter. The first LDS author to speak on this subject was Elder James E. Talmage in his book Jesus the Christ. He was of the opinion that Christ was born on April 6, 1 B.C. He apparently interpreted D&C 20:1 as meaning that April 6, 1830, was literally one thousand eight hundred and thirty days to the day that Christ was born, as opposed to just the day that was revealed for the Church to be organized.1

The next major work by an apostle touching on the matter was done by Elder Hyrum M Smith in his 1919 commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants. He stated his belief that April 6 was probably the birthdate of Christ, but at the same time also commented that “all that this Revelation means to say is that the Church was organized in the year that is commonly accepted as 1830, A.D” and is not meant to be a revelation about the day Christ was born.2

In 1954 President J. Reuben Clark of the First Presidency, in his book Our Lord of the Gospels, said, “I am not proposing any date as the true date. But in order to be as helpful to students as I could, I have taken as the date of the Savior’s birth the date now accepted by many scholars,—late 5 B.C. or early 4 B.C.” This would clearly exclude April 6.3 It is also interesting that this book was later reprinted as the Melchizedek Priesthood manual in 1958.4

Finally, we had Elder Bruce R. McConkie addressing the issue in his Messiah series. Elder McConkie referenced all of the three aforementioned apostles, reiterated the fact that no one knows for certainty the true date of our Savior’s birth, but noted that for his purposes he would use the same timeline as President Clark.5 To date, he is the last apostle or prophet that I am aware of to try and address this issue in any comprehensive form.

I should also mention that there have been other apostles and prophets who have spoken (at least briefly) on this matter, including President Harold B. Lee, President Spencer W. Kimball, President Gordon B. Hinckley, and Elder David A. Bednar. When I read their various talks, I was unable to tell if they were saying that they had personally received revelation on the matter, if it was their own opinion, or if they were basing their remarks on what Elder Talmage and others have previously stated. None of them, however, declared it as official Church doctrine.

It also needs to be said that D&C 20:1 was not originally part of section 20 but was added at a later date.4 As far as we know, Joseph Smith never officially attempted to answer the question of the official date of Christ’s birth. And as discussed earlier in this post, no date has ever been presented to the Church as an official declaration or proclamation.

In addition to the leadership of the Church, multiple LDS scholars have attempted to answer this question. Some have been in favor of April 6, and others have fallen more in line with what other scholars hold to—that the date falls sometime between the end of 5 B.C. and the beginning of 4 B.C. (which interestingly means that December 25 could have actually been the day Christ was born). For those interested, you can read the arguments both ways here and here.

The purpose of this blog post isn’t to answer this question, and indeed it is impossible to do so. Rather, I wanted to present enough information so readers can research this issue on their own and make informed decisions as well as be able to give informed answers. I hope that I have been able to at least point readers in the right direction and have shown that this should be a non-issue when dealing with critics of our faith.

I definitely can’t end this blog post without one last comment. Remember that the important part of all of this was that the Savior was actually born. He wasn’t a fictional character invented for a book to teach us good moral principles. He was a real person, and really was the Son of God who came to this world to save us all from sin and death. Though it has been absolutely fascinating (and faith building) to research the day of His birth, it is secondary at best to His mission and His ministry. May all of us grow closer to our Savior the more we learn of His birth, His life, and His matchless grace.

References:

  1. Jeffrey R. Chadwick, “Dating the Birth of Jesus Christ,” Brigham Young University Studies 49 no. 4 (2010), 28–29, fn. 12.
  2. Ibid
  3. Ibid
  4. Jesus Christ/Date of birth. (2014 June 7). Retrieved at http://en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Date_of_birth
  5. Ibid