New Witnesses for God (Volume 2 of 3) — John Shaqi
New Witnesses for God (Volume 2 of 3)Roberts, B. H. (Brigham Henry)
Religion
New Witnesses for God (Volume 2 of 3)
Roberts, B. H. (Brigham Henry)
Book of Mormon; Smith, Joseph, Jr., 1805-1844
While the coming forth of the Book of Mormon is but an incident in
God's great work of the last days, and the book itself subordinate to
some other facts in that work, still the incident of its coming forth
and the book are facts of such importance that the whole work of God
may be said, in a manner, to stand or fall with them. That is to say,
if the origin of the Book of Mormon could be proved to be other than
that set forth by Joseph Smith; if the book itself could be proved to
be other than it claims to be, _viz_., and chiefly, an abridged history
of the ancient inhabitants of America, a volume of scripture containing
a message from God to the people to whom it was written--"to the
Lamanites [American Indians], who are a remnant of the house of Israel;
and also to Jew and Gentile; written by way of commandment, and also by
the spirit of prophecy and revelation"--if, I say, the Book of Mormon
could be proved to be other than this, then the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints, and its message and doctrines, which, in some
respects, may be said to have arisen out of the Book of Mormon, must
fall; for if that book is other than it claims to be; if its origin is
other than that ascribed to it by Joseph Smith, then Joseph Smith says
that which is untrue; he is a false prophet of false prophets; and all
he taught, and all his claims to inspiration and divine authority, are
not only vain but wicked; and all that he did as a religious teacher is
not only useless, but mischievous beyond human comprehending.
Nor does this statement of the case set forth sufficiently strong the
situation. Those who accept the Book of Mormon for what it claims to
be, may not so state their case that its security chiefly rests on the
inability of its opponents to prove a negative. The affirmative side
of the question belongs to us who hold out the Book of Mormon to the
world as a revelation from God. The burden of proof rests upon us in
every discussion. It is not enough for us to say that if the origin of
the Book of Mormon is proved to be other than that set forth by Joseph
Smith; if the book itself be proved to be other than it claims to be,
then the institution known as "Mormonism" must fall. We must do more
than rest our case on the inability of opponents to prove a negative.
The security of "Mormonism" rests on quite other grounds; and, from a
forensic standpoint, upon much more precarious ground; for not only
must the Book of Mormon not be proved to have other origin than that
which we set forth, or be other than what we say it is, _but we must
prove its origin to be what we say it is, and the book itself to be
what we proclaim it to be--a revelation from God_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account