On p. 565 of the fifth edition of Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? Jerald and Sandra Tanner wrote:
It is certainly strange that the Mormon leaders have rejected so many of be basic doctrines of Christianity, for these same doctrines are found in the Book of Mormon. As an example, the Book of Mormon teaches that man of himself is an enemy to God:
“For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, . . . “ (Book of Mormon, p. 141, verse 9)
President Young, on the other hand, taught that the natural man is a friend of God:
“It is fully proved in all the revelations that Go has ever given to mankind that they naturally love and admire righteousness, justice and truth more than they do evil. It is, however, universally received by professors of religion as a Scriptural doctrine that man is naturally opposed to God. This is NOT so. Paul says, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, ‘But the natural man receiveth not the things of God,’ but I say it is the unnatural ‘’man that receiveth not the things of God.’ . . . The NATURAL MAN IS OF GOD.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 9, page 305)
Did Brigham Young contradict the words of King Benjamin as recorded in Mosiah 3:19? Let us examine this charge.
Firstly, Brigham Young, when speaking of “the natural man,” did speak of mankind as fallen both morally and epistemologically, which is Latter-day Saint doctrine (we do not believe that Adam’s sin is forensically imputed against us or infused into our souls, which are the Reformed and Catholic views on “original sin” which LDS theology unequivocally rejects). Take these two representative examples:
If a man's capacity be limited to the things of this world, if he reach no further than he can see with his eyes, feel with his hands, and understand with the ability of the natural man, still he is as earnestly engaged in securing his salvation, as others are, who possess a superior intellect, and are also pursuing the path of salvation, in their estimation, though it result in nothing more than a good name, or the honors of this world. Each, according to his capacity—to the natural organization of the human system, which is liable to be operated upon by the circumstances and influences by which it is surrounded, is as eager to obtain that which he supposes is salvation, as I am to obtain salvation in the Eternal world.
The object of a true salvation, correctly and minutely understood, changes the course of mankind. Persons who are taught by their teachers, friends, and acquaintances, are traditionated, from their youth up, into the belief that there is no God, or intelligent beings, other than those that they see with the natural eye, or naturally comprehend; that there is no hereafter; that at death, all life and intelligence are annihilated. Such persons are as firm in their belief, and as strenuous in argument, in support of those doctrines, as others are in the belief of the existence of an Eternal God. The early customs and teachings of parents and friends, to a greater or less degree, influence the minds of children, but when they are disposed to inquire at the hands of Him who has eternal intelligence to impart to them, when their understandings are enlarged, when their minds are enlightened by the Spirit of truth, so that they can see things that are unseen by the natural eye, they may then be corrected in their doctrine and belief, and in their manner of life, but not until then.
How difficult it is to teach the natural man, who comprehends nothing more than that which he sees with the natural eye! How hard it is for him to believe! How difficult would be the task to make the philosopher, who, for many years, has argued himself into the belief that his spirit is no more after his body sleeps in the grave, believe that his intelligence came from eternity, and is as eternal, in its nature, as the elements, or as the Gods. Such doctrine by him would be considered vanity and foolishness, it would be entirely beyond his comprehension. It is difficult, indeed, to remove an opinion or belief into which he has argued himself from the mind of the natural man. Talk to hint about angels, heavens, God, immortality, and eternal lives, and it is like sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal to his ears; it has no music to him; there is nothing in it that charms his senses, soothes his feelings, attracts his attention, or engages his affections, in the least; to him it is all vanity. To say that the human family are not seeking salvation, is contrary to my experience, and to the experience of every other person with whom I have any acquaintance. They are all for salvation, some in one way, and some in another; but all is darkness and confusion. If the Lord does not speak from heaven, and touch the eyes of their understanding by His Spirit, who can instruct or guide them to good? who can give them words of eternal life? It is not in the power of man to do it; but when the Lord gives His Spirit to a person, or to a people, they can then hear, believe, and be instructed. An Elder of Israel may preach the principles of the Gospel, from first to last, as they were taught to him, to a congregation ignorant of them; but if he does not do it under the influence of the Spirit of the Lord, he cannot enlighten that congregation on those principles, it is impossible. Job said that "There is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding." Unless we enjoy that understanding in this probation, we cannot grow or increase, we cannot be made acquainted with the principles of truth and righteousness so as to become exalted. Admit that the Spirit of the Lord should give us understanding, what would it prove to us? It would prove to me, at least, and what I may safely say to this congregation, that Zion is here. Whenever we are disposed to give ourselves perfectly to righteousness, to yield all the powers and faculties of the soul (which is the spirit and the body, and it is there where righteousness dwells); when we are swallowed up in the will of Him who has called us; when we enjoy the peace and the smiles of our Father in Heaven, the things of His Spirit, and all the blessings we are capacitated to receive and improve upon, then are we in Zion, that is Zion. What will produce the opposite? Hearkening and giving way to evil, nothing else will. (JOD 1:2-3 January 16, 1853)
Many times, to all human appearance, there was no temporal salvation for the Saints. Again, those who were not faithful, beholding things as the natural man beholds them, have left the Church; yes, scores of them, hundreds of them, thousands of them, both male and female. They looked at this kingdom, and, considering its progress upon seemingly natural principles, discovered it was best for them to leave it, and if possible save their lives. Those who have been faithful can witness this day, that those who have sought to save their lives have lost them, while those who have sought diligently to build up the kingdom of God, who have clung to the commandments of the Lord, who have not counted their lives dear to them, have saved their lives. (JOD 2:248 April 6, 1855)
Furthermore, Brigham Young in the sermon the Tanners quoted from, is speaking of the abilities of man prior to the Fall-- notice what else Brigham Young said in JOD 9:305-306 (June 15, 1862):
It is fully proved in all the revelations that God has ever given to mankind that they naturally love and admire righteousness, justice and truth more than they do evil. It is, however, universally received by professors of religion as a Scriptural doctrine that man is naturally opposed to God. This is not, so. Paul says, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, "But, the natural man receiveth not the things of God," but I say it is the unnatural "man that receiveth not the things of God." Paul, in another place, says, "if our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: in whom the goal of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light, of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." That which was, is, and will continue to endure is more natural than that which will pass away and be no more. The natural man is of God. We are the natural sons and daughters of our natural parents, and spiritually we are the natural children of the Father of light and natural heirs to his kingdom; and when we do an evil, we do it in opposition to the promptings of the Spirit of Truth that is within us. Man, the noblest work of God, was in his creation designed for an endless duration, for which the love of all good was incorporated in his nature. It was never designed that he should naturally do and love evil. When our first parents fell from their paradisaical state, they were brought in contact with influences and powers of evil that are unnatural and stand in opposition to an endless life. So far as mankind yield to these influences, they are so far removed from a natural to an unnatural state —from life to death. Adam and Eye did not sin because it was in their nature to love sin, but, as Paul says in his Epistle to Timothy, "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding, she shall be saved in child bearing, if they continue in faith, and charity, and holiness, with sobriety." The enemy of all righteousness deceived the woman, and Adam went with her that man might be, and that she might be saved in child-bearing. I hold that it is easier to do right than wrong, and that it gives more real satisfaction, more sterling happiness, and more self-respect to any person to do a good deed than to do an evil deed. "Man is born unto trouble as the sparks fly upward," and that in consequence of sin's being in the world.
Brigham Young is clearly speaking about (1) our natures prior to entering this fallen world and (2) when discussing Adam and Eve, is speaking of their pre-fallen state. There is no contradiction between Brigham’s comments and those of King Benjamin when the former is read in context. The Tanners had no excuse for this shoddy error (if not downright misrepresentation)—all that had to do was continue reading the next couple of lines of this sermon.
Of course, the Tanners have a long history of misrepresenting Brigham Young—see this article by Cooper Johnson and D. Charles Pyle proving their deliberate misquotation of early LDS leaders in an attempt to show they were ignorant of Joseph Smith’s First Vision.
