In the 1964 edition of Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? the Tanners admit that it was a popular belief, even among scholars, to postulate that the sun and/or moon were inhabited:
Many years ago the Protestant
writer Adam Clarke made this observation concerning the sun and the moon:
"OF
THE SUN
"On the nature of the sun
there have been various conjectures . . . Dr. Herschel's discoveries by means
of his immensely magnifying telescopes, have, by the general consent of philosophers,
added a new HABITABLE WORLD to our systems, which is the SUN. . . .
OF
THE MOON
"There is scarcely any doubt
now remaining in the philosophical world that the moon is a HABITABLE GLOBE.
The most accurate observations that have been made with the most powerful
telescopes have confirmed the opinion. Tee moon seems in almost every respect
to be a body similar to our earth; to have its surface diversified by hills
lakes, and seas." (Clarke's Commentary, Vol. 1, page 35)
Today, we look at this and smile,
for we realize that Adam Clarke was influenced by the views of his time. The
leaders of the Mormon Church were also influenced by the views of their times.
"Who call tell us of the
INHABITANTS of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the
MOON? When we view its face we may see what is termed 'the man in the moon,'
and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these
sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about
the INHABITANTS of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant
in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to
the INHABITANTS OF THE SUN. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it
is. Do you think there is any life there? NO QUESTION OF IT: IT WAS NOT MADE
IN VAIN". (Journal of Discourses, v. 13, p. 271)
In the Journal of Oliver B.
Huntington JOSEPH SMITH is recorded as saying the following concerning the
inhabitants of the moon:
INHABITANTS
OF THE MOON
"'The INHABITANTS OF THE
MOON are more of a uniform size than the inhabitants of the earth, being about
6 feet in height.
They dress very much like the
quaker style and are quire general in style, or the fashion of dress.
They live to be very old;
coming generally, near a thousand years.'
This is the description of
them as GIVEN BY JOSEPH THE SEER, as he could 'See' whatever he asked the
father in the name of Jesus to see." (Journal of Oliver B. Huntington,
Vol. 2, page 166 of typed copy at the Utah Historical Society)
It should be noted that there is
a difference between Adam Clark's statement that the moon is inhabited and Joseph
Smith's description of the inhabitants. Adam Clarke claimed that he received
his information from the evidence of his time. Joseph Smit, on the other hand,
claimed (according to Oliver B. Huntington) that he received his information by
revelation from God. We can overlook Adam Clarke's statement and enjoy the rest
of his commentary. In those days the telescopes were not as powerful as the
one's we have today. Adam Clarke can be forgiven for making a mistake that any
one of us could make if place in similar circumstances. Joseph Smith's supposed
to have come from God, and a revelation given in Joseph Smith's day should be
as reliable today as it was then. (pp. 89-90)
It should be noted that the Tanners, unlike later editions
of the book, admit that belief in the sun and moon being inhabited was an
acceptable view among intelligent people of Joseph Smith’s and Brigham Young’s
time. However, they are misreading the Huntington journal. While Oliver imputes
some level of inspiration to Joseph’s words, even in Huntington’s (late [1881])
entry, Joseph does not present his comments as inspired.
Here is a scan of the relevant pages (click to enlarge):
Kerry Shirts (who has now gone full atheist) wrote the following response to the Tanners on the issue of "moon men" in his A Marvelous Work? The Tanners Wonder (Chapter 1):
I notice the Tanners apparently feel it is important
to establish that Joseph Smith, none other, was the first to say and believe
that men lived on the moon. This is quite important for the Tanners to
establish apparently. They spend their entire update of this chapter trying to
show they have found more sources, blessings in early Mormonism, etc., rather
than showing they understand the wider context of Mormon cosmology. How they go
about it is quite revealing in my opinion. It is also totally useless in my
opinion, but then again, as I have noted, I am a Mormon, so obviously things
like this I wish to dismiss. But, there are reasons why I want to show they are
worth dismissing because they really don’t make the point which the Tanners
wish to make.
I will give them credit for one thing to be sure. They didn’t
stoop so stupidly low in their argument to actually proclaim this idea was a
prophecy. Other anti’s have said this, but of course, without the slightest
evidence.
Well, O.K., as a scientist friend of mine has always told me, what
is the assumption in an argument? The argument is only as strong as the
assumptions upon which it is based. In this case, the assumption appears to me
to be the utter silliness of a prophet of God believing that people live on the
moon. It is impossible, and wrong, and therefore the Prophet shouldn’t have
believed it. This shows the Prophet to be false. That is the assumption of this
argument, so far as I can see. I am willing to be corrected if I am wrong.
So what of it? Well the first thing to note is there is simply no
first hand material which demonstrates Joseph Smith actually taught this. It
all comes from later secondary sources. Now secondary sources have their value
I must admit, as I use them heavily in many areas of my own research. However,
conclusions based on secondary sources simply must be understood to be
tentative and not firmly established fact. They are indicators, so to speak,
not the law. This is why in my own use of secondary sources, I seriously try to
get primary sources as well. This is crucial to do for sound historical
research.
Context is another area that the Tanners need to sincerely work
on. Once we realize that the context of the Prophet’s time was such that even
astronomers and Bible scholars were indicating belief in life on the moon, the
anomaly disappears. Now it might be assumed that a Prophet is supposed to teach
total truth and not fall prey to the times he or she lives in, but all records,
whether the Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, PofGP, Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads,
Quran, etc., indicate this is not necessarily the case.
One very good book showing how Joseph Smith’s understanding was
expanded with further light and knowledge, is Robert J. Matthews book on the
Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. Another is Gary James Bergera,
"Line Upon Line," showing that full and complete concepts are not
automatically bestowed upon prophets just because they are prophets. A prophet
can be mistaken in his or her belief. This has nothing to do with whether the
office is true or not. There is no freedom taken away from believing something
incorrect when one becomes a prophet.
But there is another approach to this topic as well. When even the
followers of Joseph Smith believed in inhabitants on other planets and even in
the sun, this is used as total incredulity for the Tanners. This is just too
silly for words! The sun? Yeah right, as if we could exist on such a hot
sphere. Notice the assumption here though. The assumption is that it is human
inhabitants with flesh and blood living on the sun. Nowhere does Brigham Young
say such. Do the Tanners not believe in other types of living beings besides
humans? What of spiritual beings? Now it is well known that Joseph Smith taught
that God dwells in everlating burnings. Heaven is hot. The angels come from
realms of light according to many ancient sources. They are associated with
light, heat, glory, etc. Who is to say what kind of beings
Brigham Yong was talking about? Emanuel Kant, the great philosopher even noted
that the universe is inhabited with many kinds of beings, and in fact our own
moon and Jupiter, etc., as well as the sun are such!15
Does this prove though, to the Tanners then, that Science itself
is a phony enterprise? If it proves it for Mormonism, why not for philosophy,
science and religion in general? It just honestly appears to me to be a double
standard based on the Tanner’s hope of making Mormonism look just plain stupid
with stupid teachings. But it backfires when context is understood. In fact,
the Medieval Cabalist Johann Reuchlin even noted that the
"Hashamayim", is always translated in the plural, as "the
heavens," a plurality of heavens and worlds the eyes have not seen yet.17
Another area which is relevant to this idea is understanding the
Mormon Cosmology ideas. There is no wasted space nor planets. This was an Early
Christian theme such that there was a continuous creation and destruction of
worlds, and the inhabitants of them as Hugh Nibley has so remarkably
demonstrated.18 The dovetailing concept of God involved with all his creatures
throghout the immensity of space with inhabitants on other planets, even the
moon and sun, makes much more sense with a wider view and understanding. Some
of those inhabitants may very well be human, others may be spirit. We just
don’t know. Nibley has shown how in the Enoch literature, the world moans and groans
and quakes, and the entire cosmos shares in its fate. Nay even
"inhabitants in other worlds weep too." This carried on right up into
early Christian times as their writings describe it.19
Notes for the
Above:
15. Kerry A. Shirts, "Terminating some
Terminology Problems Between Evangelical Christians and Mormon
Christians," in FARMS Review of Books, 12/1 (2000):
323-334.
16. Michael J. Crowe, The Extra-Terrestrial Life Debates: 1750-1900: The Idea of a
Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell, Cambraidge Univ. Press,
1988, p. 53f.
17. Johann Reuchlin, De Arte Cabalistica, translated by Martin and Sarah
Goodman, On
the Art of the Kabbalah, Univ. of Nebreaska Press, 1983, p. 345.
18. Hugh Nibley, "The Expanding Gospel," and
"Treasures in the Heavens," in Nibley on the Timeley and Timeless,
Truman Madsen ed., Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1978, chs., 2, 3. Also see
Hugh Nibley, "Unrolling the Scrolls – Some Forgotten Witnesses,"
in Old
Testament and Related Studies, FARMS/Deseret, 1986, ch. 6.
19. Hugh Nibley, Enoch the Prophet, FARMS/Deseret, 1986, p. 14. See
especially pp. 236-248!
