Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods/Use of sources/Joseph Smith's Narcissism

Those Power-Hungry Mormons

A FAIR Analysis of: Criticism of Mormonism/Books/One Nation Under Gods A work by author: Richard Abanes

Thou Shalt Not Raise a False Report

Chapter 9, March to Martyrdom: Joseph Smith's Narcissism

The Quote

One Nation under Gods, page 171, epigraph

I combat the errors of the ages;...I solve mathematical problems of universities, with truth--diamond truth; and God is my 'right hand man.'...[God] will make me be God to you in his stead,...and if you don't like it, you must lump it....I have more to boast of than ever any man had....I boast that no man ever did such a work as I.

Joseph Smith History of the Church, 1844

The Reference

Endnote 1, page 542 (hardback)

1. Joseph Smith, HC (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976/1980) vol. 6, 78, 319-320, 408-409.

The Problems

With only one endnote number given for the epigraph, the quote has the appearance of being from a single discourse. However, when one looks up the corresponding endnote, he or she will discover a different story. As shown in the endnote, the epigraph has three parts to it; all of which can be found in Volume 6 of the History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This volume is one of seven that contain numerous quotes from historical documents such as letters, diaries, and minutes.

The first part of the epigraph is an excerpt from a particular letter, written by Joseph Smith, to a man by the name of James Arlington Bennett, dated November 13, 1843. The second comes from a record of some remarks that Joseph made at a General Conference on April 8, 1844. The third and final excerpt comes from an address that the Prophet Joseph is reported to have made on May 26, 1844.

Each of these statements, though they can be found compiled in a single volume, are nevertheless independent sources. Consequently, since all three come from different context, time, and circumstance, it is therefore unethical for the author to merge the quotes with mere ellipsis. The Oxford Guide to Writing Style states, "If two or more separate quotations (i.e. not continuous in the original) are displayed to follow one another with none of the author's own text intervening, the discontinuity is shown by leading (usually 3-point vertical spaces) separating each quotation from the next." ^[1]

In this example (the epigraph above) the author attempts to lead his readers into believing that the quote is single. Giving a single endnote number, and the merging of three independent quotes into one, however, is not the only tactic used to create this farce. The author additionally dates the composite quote as 1844, despite the fact that the first fragment comes from a letter dated November 13, 1843. The slip-up over such a minute detail conveniently adds more smoke to the illusion that he seeks to create.

The author is also guilty of breaking one of the cardinal rules of scholarship. In The Chicago Manual of Style we are instructed, that while "making elisions in quoted material, the author should take great care to avoid altering the meaning of the original." ^[2] This leads us to the discussion as to the various ways that the author "altered" the meaning of the original--or rather, originals (plural).

Within the composite quote, the author sandwiches Joseph's statement, "[God] will make me be God [sic] to you in His stead," between two fragmented quotes that, when set apart from their original context (which I will discuss below), have the appearance of being extremely boastful. However, realizing the less-than-forthright tactics that the author has employed in the production of One Nation under Gods, we must ask if his presentation is consistent with the actual context and mindset of Joseph, at the time that such a statement was made? Not surprisingly, the answer is "No!" Nowhere within the April 8th discourse did Joseph make any boastful comments.

Lets take a look at the document cited and see (smoke and mirrors aside) what it actually says.

At the very beginning of the conference report record, it is noted that Joseph "called upon Brigham Young to read 1 Corinthians, 15th chapter, as his own lungs were injured." [Italics added] Joseph Smith spoke on the topic of Zion, the importance of the temple, and the ordinances that were to be performed therein. Then, Joseph (who was certainly weary of speaking) said the following: I shall leave my brethren to enlarge on this subject: it is my duty to teach the doctrine. I would teach it more fully--the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. God is not willing to let me gratify you; but I must teach the Elders, and they should teach you. God made Aaron to be the mouthpiece for the children of Israel, and He will make me be god to you in his stead, and the Elders to be mouth for me; and if you don't like it, you must lump it. I have been giving Elder Adams instruction in some principles to speak to you, and if he makes a mistake, I will get up and correct him. ^[3] [Text the author quoted marked in red lettering.]

Now that we have the context of what Joseph said, lets look at what he meant by "He will make me be god to you in his stead." The following explanation for Joseph's words can be found in a footnote, at the bottom of the pages the author quoted from:

• The scripture alluded to in the text is as follows:--Moses pleaded to be excused from the appointment to deliver Israel on the plea that he was not eloquent; whereupon the Lord said: "Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth; * * * And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: * * * * he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God" (Exodus iv: 14-16.)

Somewhat later this passage occurs: "And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharoah; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." (Exodus vii:1) ^[4]

It should be noted that in the context of this passage, "god" (with a lowercase "g") means "ruler" or "judge." Any rational mind can see that without the context of Joseph's statement and knowledge of the scripture that was being alluded to, it would be essentially impossible to understand what Joseph truly meant.

Such pseudo-scholarship on the part of the author, I am convinced, is not due to accidental sloppiness. There are too many problems within this quote alone to give the author the benefit of the doubt. The author even went so far as to alter the original text by capitalizing the lowercase "g," that he might thereby ensure that his audience believed Joseph had declared himself as Deity. Again, this is another BIG no, no. The rule is as follows: "Direct quotations must reproduce exactly not only the wording but the spelling, capitalization, and internal punctuation of the original..." with the exception of a few occurrences. ^[5] (None of the exceptions, however, warrant changing the capitalization in the middle of a quotation, as the author has done.)

Another thing that is quite telling is the omission made from the quote in question. Here is the quote the author gave, and underneath is the same quote with the underlined omission restored:

Author: [God] will make me be God to you in his stead, ...and if you don't like it, you must lump it.

Restored: He will make me be god to you in his stead, and the Elders to be mouth for me; and if you don't like it, you must lump it.

As one can see, the author's omission makes it appear that Joseph was saying, "If you don't like the fact that God chose me to be God over you, that is too bad. You must lump it." But this was not at all what Joseph was saying. The subject of controversy was not the status of Joseph Smith, but rather the status of the Elders as mouthpieces of Joseph Smith. This would be consistent with the fact that, just prior to the statement he expressed concern over his inability to speak to the Saints, saying, "I would teach it more fully--the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. God is not willing to let me gratify you; but I must teach the Elders, and they should teach you."

In regards to Joseph saying, "you must lump it," it is necessary to understand, when dealing with historical documents, that humor does not transfer well to paper. Without a note from the scribe concerning the tone of his voice, the expression on his face, or even the reaction of the audience, our only option is look at the surrounding text. As the only grounds for determining whether or not Joseph's comments were intended to be humorous, the author must carry the burden of proof to support his obviously slanted reading. Frankly, this would be a very heavy burden to carry since the text makes absolutely no indication in the text that Joseph had negative thoughts towards the congregation.

Again and again, the author is guilty of misrepresenting the truth. While what I have shared may be enough to remove any doubt whatsoever that the author is a fraud as a scholar, there is still much more to be said about the other fragments that he incorporated into his composite quote. Let's move on to another fragment:

I combat the errors of the ages;... I solve mathematical problems of universities, with truth--diamond truth; and God is my 'right hand man.'

What the author has quoted here is a very popular quote in anti-Mormon circles. In Jerald and Sandra Tanner's book, The Changing World of Mormonism, the quote is listed under the subheading, "Greater that Jesus?" as one of a few "statements which show that Joseph Smith felt he was almost equal with God." ^[6] This of course is same skewed reading that the author wishes to portray to his readers, in hopes to support his thesis that Joseph Smith "suffered from the mental pathology associated with narcissism." ^[7]

What exactly did Joseph mean when declaring his ability to "combat the errors of ages" and "solve mathematical problems of universities?" Ironically, the meaning is explained within the same letter that the author quoted from. In response to a letter from James Arlington Bennett, Joseph wrote, "[Y]ou have here given your opinion...that revelation, the knowledge of God, prophetic vision, the truth of eternity, cannot be solved as a mathematical problem." ^[8] Joseph replied to Bennett's assertion, saying,

The first question then is, What is a mathematical problem? And the natural answer is, A statement, proposition or question that can be solved, ascertained, unfolded or demonstrated by knowledge, facts or figures; for 'mathematical' is an adjective derived from mathesis (Gr.), meaning, in English, learning or knowledge. 'Problem' is derived from probleme (French), or problema (Italian, or Spanish), and in each language means a question or proposition, whether true or false. ^[9]

In accordance with these definitions, Joseph then applied appropriate methods used for discovering eternal truth. He pointed out that the law of two or three witnesses was essentially a mathematic formula "sufficient to establish any one point." ^[10] Additionally, Joseph spoke of another formula that was prescribed by the Savior, when Jesus declared, "If any man will do his [the Father's] will, he shall know the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself." ^[11] Joseph commented,

Here, then is a method of solving the divinity of men by the divinity within yourself, that as far exceeds the calculations of numbers as the sun exceeds a candle. Would to God that all men understood it and were willing to be governed by it, that when one had filled the measure of his days, he could exclaim like Jesus, Veni mori, et reviviscere! ^[12]

What is the "it" that Joseph speaks of? The answer lies in the assertion that Joseph is responding to. "It" is "revelation, the knowledge of God, prophetic vision" and "the truth of eternity". Latter-day Saints believe that it is through this divine power that Joseph could correct and restore the gospel that had been corrupted by the philosophies of men.

It is additionally important to acknowledge, however, that Joseph understood that his many accomplishments were not the product of his own merit. He said, "[O]ne man empowered from Jehovah has more influence with the children of the kingdom than eight hundred millions led by the precepts of men." He likewise admitted that if he were to "leave the dignity and honor of heaven to gratify the vanity of man or men", that his power would "cease, like the strength of Samson, when he was shorn of his locks, while asleep in the lap of Delilah." ^[13]

Let's now draw our attention to the remaining portion of the statement. Joseph further said, "God is my 'right hand man.'" What did Joseph mean by this? By saying that God was at his "right hand," did this mean that Joseph believed that he was at the same level, as the author implies, thereby joining the ranks of like-minded critics such as Jerald and Sandra Tanner? Of course not. This implication sounds rather preposterous, since we have already established that Joseph believed his own greatness was due to him being "empowered from Jehovah," and that he was subject to the laws and judgments of God.

Looking for the context is again necessary. By doing so, we can learn that Joseph had actually adopted the phrase from James Arlington Bennett, who (in a previous letter) had offered to help him (as Joseph's "right hand man") through some trials. ^[14] The Prophet turned down the offer, replying that only support he needed was from God the Father. Only God was his "right hand Man."

An interesting thing to note is that such a testimony was likewise born by King David, who honorably proclaimed, "I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved." ^[15] This of course begs the question, "Does the author also consider David's statement blasphemous?" To answer in the affirmative is to judge Joseph with an unbiblical standard. To answer negative is to babble an embarrassing double standard. I suppose, however, that the author would chose to avoid answering the question altogether.

Now, in regards to the final fragment of the author's composite quote, Joseph proclaimed,

I have more to boast of than ever any man had.... I boast that no man ever did such a work as I.

What must be done to get an accurate understanding of the above quote? That's right; we must go to the actual source cited in order to find the nuggets of information about which the author conveniently neglects to inform his audience. This time, the author overlooks two. One, Joseph had a particular audience that he was directing his words to. Secondly, Joseph read a scriptural passage that explained the nature of the words that he intended to speak.

Preceding the recorded discourse, the following details are given:

Address of the Prophet--His Testimony Against the Dissenters at Nauvoo. President Joseph Smith read the 11th Chap. II Corinthians. ^[16]

Who was Joseph speaking against? Answer: The very people who had beaten, tarred, feathered, spit upon, and would ultimately kill him. How did 2 Corinthians 11 explain what he was going to say? Open up a Bible and take a look, paying particular attention to verses 1, 16-18, 22-23, 32-33. The Apostle Paul said:

WOULD to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. (v. 1)

I say again, Let no man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast myself a little. That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. (v. 16-18)

Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. Are they ministers of Christ (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. (v. 22-23)

In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me: And through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped his hands. (v. 22-23) [underlining added]

Understanding that Joseph had read the above to the congregation as an introduction to his address makes all the difference. In so doing, Joseph was asking the saints to "bear with him" in his "folly", while he "boasted foolishly" about his "labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent". He also wanted them to know that what he was about to say, would not be "after the Lord, but as it were foolishly." Joseph Smith planned to "glory after the flesh" as he spoke against his dissenters, just as Paul had done. He was going to mock the fools with foolishness, while simultaneously making it very clear: "WHATEVER YOU DO TO ME, I WILL ALWAYS COME OUT ON TOP!"

For a "highly regarded authority" ^[17] on Mormonism to be so irresponsible, dishonest, and sloppy should baffle all of our minds. The epigraph at the beginning of Chapter 9 is beyond misleading; it is a manufactured, spurious concoction of recycled, outdated anti-Mormon drivel.

Endnotes

1. [note] Robert M. Ritter, The Oxford Guide to Style: The Style Bible for All Writers, Editors, and Publishers (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 194. The "leading" that is referred to in this quote is explained on page 48. The following is written: "The vertical or interlinear spacing within the body of a page is called leading, from the strips of lead formerly inserted between lines of type." From the instruction given, the proper way would have been for Abanes to separate them entirely with a row of white space. Ellipsis ( . . . ) should be used to show omission within a single quote. They are not used for merging independent quotes into one.
2. [note] The Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers, 14th edition (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993), 377.
3. [note] Joseph Smith, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. 6 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1978), 218-220.
4. [note] Ibid., 319-320.
5. [note] The Chicago Manual of Style, 357-358. The only exception that is spoken of for changing capitalization is in regards to changing the initial letter in a quote. This does not apply to the quote in question since the capitalization occurred in the middle of the quote. It should also be mentioned that in the scenario of changing the initial letter of a quote, that the readers must still "be informed of any such alterations" when dealing with older works. Abanes has broken both of these rules.
6. [note] Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), 460. For a list of reviews of Jerald and Sandra Tanner's publications, see: http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai188.html
7. [note] Richard Abanes, One Nation under Gods (New York: Four Walls eight Windows, 2002), 175.
8. [note] Smith, History of the Church, 6:76.
9. [note] Ibid.
10. [note] Ibid.
11. [note] John 7:17.
12. [note] Smith, History of the Church, 6:77.
13. [note] Ibid., 77-78.
14. [note] Ibid., 72.
15. [note] Psalms 16:8, emphasis added.
16. [note] Smith, History of the Church, 6:408.
17. [note] The front, inside cover-page of Abanes' book crowns him with such a title.