In an attempt to discredit D&C 87, the so-called “Civil War” Prophecy (“so-called” as it covers much more than the then-future Civil War; see, for e.g., Jeff Lindsay’s discussion of D& 87), the Tanners wrote the following in a section entitled, “Suppressed Material Concerning the Civil War Prophecy”:
In the History of the Church, Vol. 5, page 324, we find another reference to the 1832 prophecy attributed to Joseph Smith:
I prophesy, in the name of the Lord, that the commencement of the difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in South Carolina. It may probably arise through the slave question. This a voice declared to me while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 25, 1832.
In our research in the diary of Joseph Smith, we found that this statement does appear under the date of April 2, although there have been a few changes in wording. A careful examination of this portion of Joseph Smith’s diary, however, reveals that some very important material has been suppressed. Before we can understand the significance of this matter we must turn back in Joseph Smith’s diary to the date of March 11, 1843, where we find the following:
A dream, then related, Night before last I dreamed that an old man came to me and said there was a mob force coming upon him, and he was likely to loose his life, that I was Leut General and had the command of a large force, and I was also a patriot and disposed to protect the innocent &-- [word unclear] finding & wanted I should assist him. I told him I wanted some written documents to show the facts that they are the aggressors & I would raise a force sufficient for his protection, that I would call out the Legion. He turned to go from he, but turned again and said to me. “I have any amount of men at my command and will put them under your command.”
This dream, with some modifications, appears in the History of the Church, Vol. 5, page 301.
Now, when we move ahead to the date of April 2, 1843, in the diary of Joseph Smith, we find that just before Joseph Smith gives his second account of the prophecy concerning South Carolina, there is an interpretation of the dream which reads as follows:
Related the dream written on page 3—Book B Interpretation by O. Hyde—old man—government of these United States, who will be invaded by a foreign fee, probably England. U.S. Government will call on Ge. Smith to defend probably all this western territory and offer him any amount of men he shall desire & put them under his command.
This important interpretation of the dream should appear in the History of the Church, Vol. 5, page 324, just before the words “I prophesy.” The reader will find, however, that the interpretation has been completely omitted. The reason that it was suppressed is obvious: Joseph Smith was dead by the time the Civil War started, and therefore the interpretation could not be fulfilled. In his first account of the prophecy on the Civil War, Doctrine and Covenants 87:3, Joseph Smith had predicted that England would come into the war and that the war would spread until it “shall be poured out upon all nations.” The war did not spread to “all nations” as Smith had predicted, and the U.S. government certainly did not call upon Joseph Smith to protect it from England or any other country. (Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? [5th ed.; Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987 2008], 195-H)
The Tanners make a number of blunders in the above commentary.
With respect to D&C 87:3, the text reads thusly:
For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations.
The text does not say that “the” war (i.e., the then-future Civil War) would have England as a participant, only that the Southern States would request assistance from other nations, including England, which they did (In May 1861, the Southern States sent representatives to England, France, Holland, and Belgium, seeking both political recognition and military and economic assistance in the war), and after this, “war” (used in a general sense; note the use of “then” as opposed to “the”) would be the condition such nations would find themselves in (e.g., the two World Wars which took place after the U.S. Civil War).
As Duane
Crowther, in his book on Joseph Smith’s prophecies, wrote:
For many years
England relied on the strength of her navy for protection rather than on
alliances with foreign powers. It was not until Germany began to rival her sea
power that England sought alliances with France and other nations for
protection against the Axis powers. These alliances brought on World War I, and
in that conflict and in World War II it can be seen that war was poured out
upon all nations. (Duane W. Crowther, The
Prophecies of Joseph Smith: Over 400 Prophecies
By and About Joseph Smith, and Their Fulfillment [Bountiful, Utah:
Horizon Publishers, 1983], 231)
In volume 3 of their A Commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants, H. Dean Garrett and Stephen E. Robinson offered the following insight into the verse:
3. The Southern States will call on other nations. Two separate historical periods are described in this verse. The first of these is the Civil War, during which the Southern States would enlist the aid of other nations, including Great Britain, against the Northern States. History shows that the South did seek aid and alliances from Great Britain and also from France, Holland, and Belgium. These nations offered passive support to the South but would not enter into official political and military alliances unless the Confederacy could demonstrate some likelihood of ultimate victory.
A second historical period is described in the last half of this verse, when "they shall also call upon other nations" to defend themselves from still "other nations." When the events described in this verse take place, war will become worldwide. Brother Sidney B. Sperry noted that the pronoun "they" in this passage refers not to the South but to the nations to which the South had previously appealed, that is, to Great Britain and France, Holland, and Belgium. This seems likely, since the South never sought military aid against "other nations" (foreign powers) but only against the Northern States. Thus, the prophecy in verse 3 indicates that during the Civil War the South would call upon Britain as well as on other nations. Then, at a later time, Britain, France, Holland, and Belgium would in turn also call upon other nations for help against their enemies, and war would at that time be poured out upon the whole world. In fact, Great Britain and these other nations did seek the aid of other nations at least twice in the twentieth century, and on each occasion the result was a world war.
With respect to Joseph Smith’s dream on 9 March1843 (recollected by Joseph on 11 March and recorded in his journal by William Clayton), do note a few things:
Firstly, Joseph Smith did not view it as a prophetic dream or based on divine revelation.
Secondly, Orson Hyde’s interpretation is couched, not in prophetic language, but conditional language (note the use of “probably”). Again, Hyde is not speaking as a prophet, but as one giving his opinion.
Thirdly, there is a contrast between the non-inspired dream and its interpretation by Orson with the inspired, authoritative revelation Joseph offers after such speculation. In his journal for 2 April 1843, we read:
I prophecy in the Name of the Lord God that the commence[n]t of bloodshed as preparat[o]ry to the coming of the son of man. will commenc[e] in South Carolina.—(it probably may arise through the slave trade.)—this the a voice declared to me. while I was praying earne[s]tly on the subje[c]t 25 December 1832. (The Joseph Smith Papers, Journals: Volume 2: December 1841-April 1843, eds. Andrew H. Hedges, Alex D. Smith, and Richard Lloyd Anderson [Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2011], 324-25, emphasis in bold added)
Of course, the then-future Civil War did indeed begin in South Carolina in 1861, and Joseph was correct in his personal belief that it would probably be due to the issue of Slavery (which was the main cause of the Civil War).
Finally, one may ask why the Lord would make the following promise:
I earnestly desird to know concern[in]g the coming of the Son of Man & prayed. when—a voice said to me, Joseph, my, son, if thou livest until thou art 85 years old thou shalt see the face of the son of man, therefore let this suffice & trouble me no more on this matter. (Ibid, 325)
Some may argue this is a case of “divine deception” as the Lord knew Joseph would be killed in 1844. As one who is an Open Theist, I believe God has contingent foreknowledge, so perhaps it is a real possibility that Joseph may have lived until he was 85 years of age and would have received this promised vision of the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, that this was not a prophecy of what would happen but could, note the use of “if.” For more on contingent foreknowledge, see the discussion of the topic in my paper:
A search on “contingent foreknowledge” and “Open Theism” on this blog will also bring up other discussions, such as D&C 124, William Law, and Open Theism.
Commenting on this text, John Tvedtnes, in his excellent paper The Nature of Prophets and Prophecy wrote:
Since Joseph did not live to the age of 85, the “if” portion of the Lord’s statement to him clearly shows that it was conditional. Moreover, Joseph was not told that the Lord would return in glory in 1890, only that he would see him at that time if he was yet alive. In other words, the Lord did not answer Joseph’s question directly, for the very reason that no one knows the time of his coming–not even Joseph Smith or the angels of heaven (Matthew 24:36).
One might enquire about the likelihood that the Lord would “trick” Joseph Smith thus, making him think that he would see the Lord in 1890 when, in fact, the Lord knew Joseph would die in 1844. The question is mooted by a similar situation in the Bible. Isaiah came to King Ahaz in the name of the Lord and told him that Ephraim (head of the northern kingdom of Israel) would be broken “within threescore and five years” (Isaiah 7:8). Ahaz reigned in Judah from 734 to 728 B.C. Sixty-five years later would be 689-663 B.C. In actual fact, however, Israel was taken captive in 722 B.C., just six years after Ahaz’s death, when his son Hezekiah was king of Judah.
Some critics, including the Tanners, argue that this text proves Joseph Smith believed that the Second Coming would take place in 1890/91. However, as we have seen, this was not a prophecy of the Second Coming, but a conditional promise that Joseph would see a vision of Jesus if he lived until 85 years of age.
Indeed, that Joseph Smith himself did not believe this was a prophecy of the date of the Second Coming can be seen in his retelling of this experience in a special conference of the Church four days later (note the explicit use of conditional language and Joseph giving his opinion, not inspired revelation he received, on issues):
<I was once praying earnestly upon this subject. And a voice said unto me.> my son, if thou livest till thou art 85 years of age, thou shalt see the face of the son of man . . . <I was left to draw m own conclusions concerni[n]g this &,> I took the liberty to conclude that if I did live till that time Jesus <he> would make his appearance.--<but I do not say whether he will make his appeara[n]ce, or I shall go where he is.-->
I prophecy in the name of the Lord God.--& let it be written. <that the> Son of Man will not come in the heavens till I am 85. Years old
48 years hence or about 1890. (Ibid., 338)
The prophecy Joseph offered, in its context, as well as his other sermons and writings, was not that Jesus would come in 1890, but he would not come until at least 1890. For more refuting the bogus claim that Joseph believed the Second Coming would take place in 1890/91, see my post Did Joseph Smith Predict the Second Coming Would Happen in 1890/91? As well as the excellent article by Malin Jacobs, The Alleged Fifty-Six-Year Second-Coming Prophecy of Joseph Smith: An Analysis (cf. Response to a Critique of: Alleged 56-Year Second Coming Prophecy)
As we see, the Tanners, are guilty of misreading and abusing sources, and attributing inspired, prophetic status to comments that were never presented as such by the speakers and writers!
