Untold Prophecies

I never knew there were revelations, prophecies, and inspiration that were dismissed or erased when these later prove to be damaging or untrue.

Fulfillment of prophecy is often held up as proof that Mormonism (or any other religion for that matter) is correct. This is the model used throughout the Bible and the Book of Mormon, as well as other religious teachings. It usually goes something like, "Our prophet said this was going to happen, and look! It happened. So you should listen to everything this prophet says and follow." This may be a valid argument if every proclamation were able to be recorded, analyzed, and evaluated on authenticity, accuracy, relevance, and being outside the realm of common knowledge.

However, typically only a subset of statements from proclaimed prophets are available, and it is typically the followers of said prophets or the prophets themselves that make them available. It is hard to believe we get a representative, random samplings of a prophet's statements this way. Prophecies can be amazingly accurate if you only keep the good ones and get rid of the ones that don't work in your favor. This could include: only releasing prophecies after sufficient time has passed to test their viability; downplaying revealed information that later turns out untrue; enabling self-fulfilling prophecies by making revelations within the control of followers; or remaining vague on when the prophecy will occur so it could always still occur in the future.

More information on the prophesies of Joseph Smith is available now than ever before. This is most likely just a sliver of the revelations Joseph Smith gave in public and private, but it does give us a view into his declarations and their outcomes. Some prophecies came true, some did not. I never knew about those that were not accurate either partly or wholly, so I was never able to give a adequate analysis of Smith's prophetic abilities.

Some examples of prophecies I didn't know or understand include:
Prediction of Civil War (D&C 87:1-5)
This is a popular revelation which appears to show Joseph Smith predicted the US Civil War 29 years before first shots were fired. I can remember being inspired by this when we discussed it in seminary. But what we didn't talk about is that it precipitated a previous clash in South Carolina which was believed would lead to civil war. That it wasn't published for 19 years after it was supposedly written. That Great Britain did not get involved nor was "war poured upon all nations." That Brigham Young predicted the war would not free the slaves (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, page 250).

Preaching to the Inhabitants of the Moon
Joseph Smith (along with many others through patriarchal blessings) predicted at least one individual would preach to the inhabitants of the moon. It was common belief at the time that the sun and the moon were inhabited, but a message from god should have known better.
(The Young Woman's Journal, 1892, vol 3, page 264) Apologists have their own take on the topic.

Kirtland Bank will Prosper
When Joseph Smith and the church leadership set up the Kirtland Safety Society in 1836 he said it was, "wisdom and according to the mind of the Holy Spirit, that you should call at Kirtland, and receive counsel and instruction upon those principles that are necessary to further the great work of the Lord, and to establish the children of the Kingdom, according to the oracles of God, as they are had among us. And further, we invite the brethren from abroad, to call on us, and take stock in our Safety Society." (Messenger & Advocate 3:443) The bank is eventually cited as illegal, Smith and Rigdon are convicted and fined but flee to avoid prison, debt, and persecution. (FAIR analysis)

Second Coming is Imminent
Joseph Smith prophesied that Jesus would return when Smith was 85 years old, or around 1891, as recorded in his diary April 6 1843 and in History of the Church 5:336. A similar, albeit less stringent account also appears in D&C 130:14-17. He said some of the rising generation would not taste of death before Christ returned. After 167 years there is no evidence that anyone from that generation is still alive.



Explanations have been given by apologists for when prophesies are proven wrong. I've tried grouping the ones I've seen into seven different categories:

1) Deny the statement ever occurred or question the reliability of the source
It is a good idea to be sceptical of sources, and certainly one persons claim should not be used as firm evidence. Ideally we would have well documented first-person accounts, but that just isn't usually the case in history. So we also have to look at plausibility and general trends.

2) Claim the statement was taken out of context or is not being interpreted correctly
It is true that this can happen to event the best intentioned writers. Each person has a unique perspective through which they see the world and interpret what others say and do. However, this is not the best argument when the entire statement is analyzed, and the historical environment taken into account.

3) Claim the prophecy just hasn't occurred yet, but still can in the future
An infinite timeline provides plenty of time for something to occur which can be interpreted as fulfillment of prophecy.

4) Claim some change in the circumstances, such as the righteousness of the people, requires the prophecy be updated.
Since an omnipotent god would know the change in circumstances that would occur, one must question why the original prophecy would be made in the first place.

5) Declare that church leaders are not infallible, or that they were "speaking as a man" and not officially for god or the church
This is a popular explanation, Joseph Smith even used it saying "a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 5:278) The "official" church stance from the LDS newsroom is,

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
Approaching Mormon Doctrine, May 4 2007

I have two problems with this. First, this explanation is never accompanied with a guide to knowing when a prophet is speaking as a prophet and when they are speaking as a man. If I don't know which is which, what good are the true prophecies?! Second, the church wants to have it both ways, release from responsibility when proven false, but unwavering commitment to everything a prophet says. D&C 1:37 says, "Search these commandments for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled." Ezra Taft Benson described 14 Fundamentals to Following the Prophet during a Feb. 1980 BYU Devotional, including:

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in
everything.
Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.
Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.
Eighth: The Prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.

I have difficulty accepting that one should rely so heavily on a prophet when what they say may or may not be inspired and correct.

6) Argue that God works in mysterious ways, or it is just a trial of faith
"Your ways are not my ways, saith the Lord" so the scripture goes. This argument absolves god of any human rules or reason. "He's god, he can do whatever he wants. Who are we to question?" If God can make things appear false, just to test whether you will believe in him anyway then there is no way of evaluating any prophecies or declaration for ourselves. We would have to just blindly accept what others told us was true.

7) Claim that ignoring the evidence is for a "greater good"
The idea is that believers and investigators need to be protected from evidence which may cause them to question their faith and lose their testimony. Boyd Packer told LDS educators,

You seminary teachers and some of you institute and BYU men will be teaching the history of the Church this school year. This is an unparalleled opportunity in the lives of your students to increase their faith and testimony of the divinity of this work. Your objective should be that they will see the hand of the Lord in every hour and every moment of the Church from its beginning till now... Church history can be so interesting and so inspiring as to be a very powerful tool indeed for building faith. If not properly written or properly taught, it may be a faith destroyer... There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not... Some things that are true are not very useful... That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weaknesses and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer of faith — particularly one within the Church, and more particularly one who is employed specifically to build faith — places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not be among the faithful in the eternities. ...Do not spread disease germs!
("The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect", 1981, BYU Studies, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 259-271)

Russell Nelson said, "Indeed, in some instances, the merciful companion to truth is silence. Some truths are best left unsaid... Any who are tempted to rake through the annals of history, to use truth unrighteously, or to dig up "facts" with the intent to defame or destroy, should hearken to this warning of scripture."(“Truth—and More,” Ensign, Jan 1986, 69) The idea of "milk before meat" is encouraged among missionaries, to avoid the "heavier" topics with those they teach. These tactics, while for pious purposes, is still lying and deceit.

(For a comprehensive treatment of this topic, see the article "Lying for the Lord" from a former LDS Institute director)



How could one ever hope to distinguish a false prophet from a true one, if all are granted these same exceptions? Under what conditions could a false prophet actually be identified? If these explanations are to be applied to LDS prophecies, they should also be allowed for other religions and philosophies, and that would make everyone potentially correct.