Messenger
Prophets and Opinions
Posted on 7/9/2005 at 7:04:34 AM
Everyone has opinions, points of view, or different perspectives. However we may phrase it we realize that there are some things we do not totally know or understand, and that we may speculate upon.
Opinions can be valuable, such as in the case of the views of someone who has great experience in his professional field upon a new project, or of a wise old grandparent who has seen or been through certain problems many times before in their life. Yet the conjecture of someone completely unacquainted with some situations might be considered of low value or worthless in comparison.
If a country’s President has an opinion which is unpopular he is likely to have it seized by the media, and his character is likely to be judged upon it. If anyones opinions are in wide contrast to those around them they may be labeled “out of touch with reality,” yet if they are in line with the majority they are more likely to be seen as a sage, and their words may be more easily accepted.
In all of these scenarios though no definite facts have been established by the giving or accepting of someones views, except that we learn that opinions are valued very differently depending on how close they are to conventional thinking, and upon who gives them and the position they are in.
For truth the world might look to scientists, historians, philosophers, and certain political ideologies. Religious peoples look however to sacred texts and personal spiritual experiences to define and judge the truth. Yet this begs the question, “did the writers of the scriptures ever give opinions within the texts they were inspired to write?” Is the Bible, for instance, solely God’s words? A modern prophet had this to say on that subject:
“I believe that the Bible contains the word of God, and the words of good men and the words of bad men; the words of good angels and the words of bad angels and words of the devil; and also the words uttered by the ass(1)» when he rebuked the prophet in his madness.”(2)»
When angels or men speak within the scriptures it is usually easily identifiable, and distinct from when God speaks, or when a prophet is speaking as inspired to do so. However, the sacred writ is primarily a compilation of those words intended to instruct us in true principles, whether through commandments, or good or bad examples for us to learn from.
Yet, just as we seek for wise counsel to guide us to meet the specific problems of our time, so too do some of the passage of scripture contain such ‘advice’ to the people of the time in which they wrote. This is a hard concept for some to accept. Some believe that all of the Bible is applicable to all of God’s children in all ages and all verses are of the same weight, although some Jews may limit this view only to the Old Testament, and some Christians exclusively to the New Testament. Others view all commandments as relative to individuals, or groups of people at limited times, or consider the whole body of the revealed word to be only opinions.
The scriptures themselves cut a path between all of these views. They identify times when prophets gave their opinions and differentiate them as such. One prime example of this is Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians. It seems that there was some controversy amongst the group of Saints to which he wrote, and some problems – perhaps specific to them – that he felt he needed to give counsel upon.
Paul, although an inspired servant of the Lord did not claim to have revelation on the matter, but felt he had advice to share that may be of help to them. To make sure his readers understood this he began this section of his letter with the words, “I speak this by permission, and not of commandment,”(3)» or as a more modern translation has paraphrased it, “This is only my suggestion. It’s not meant to be an absolute rule.”(4)»
Through several of the subsequent verses he continues to remind them that his words are to be taken as opinion and not revelation. He does this with phrases such as “to the rest speak I, not the Lord,”(5)» “I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment,”(6)» and “I suppose therefore that this is good for the present.”(7)»
Some may say that this is only part of the imperfections of the Bible, and had it been translated or at least compiled correctly such a passage may have been left out, or that subsequent scribes changed his words to make them seem less certain. But us Latter-day Saints can settle this issue by an appeal to the Book of Mormon, which we believe to be the most correct of any book. Could it too contain opinions? We can let Alma answer that question:
“Now, my son, I do not say that their resurrection cometh at the resurrection of Christ; but behold, I give it as my opinion, that the souls and the bodies are reunited, of the righteous, at the resurrection of Christ, and his ascension into heaven.”(8)»
Alma’s views in this case where later revealed to be true, but at the time he gave them it seems that this had not been revealed to him, although his speculation proved to be inspired.
A Modern Example
In our day prophets and apostles are not exempt from having points of view either. They are mortal men with minds that grasp after the things of eternity, who sometimes see more clearly from their position that we do from ours, but who are still able to have moments of speculation.
The role of the head of the Priesthood on the earth is to teach the doctrine necessary to exaltation and to dispense and oversee those ordinances necessary to obtain it, but this does not mean that every word he speaks is revelation. That is not something which any prophet has ever claimed. Brigham Young who gave sermons that he called scripture, would still – on some occasions – make it plain he was speaking as Brigham Young – the Man.
One subject over which prophets, apostles, and saints have wondered and imagined over is that of “daughters of Perdition.” They have long asked, “were only men cast out of heaven?”, and “is it possible for a women to become one?”
The scriptures only ever speak of “sons of Perdition,”(9)» yet contain accounts of some very wicked women. This is a subject Joseph himself never weighed in on in any public discourse or any contemporarily recorded account. Although we have the word of Mosiah Hanock that the Prophet Joseph believed his vision (of the pre-existence in which only men were cast out) to be accurate.
Brigham Young on the other hand stated his belief that no woman “will never become an angel to the devil”(10)» and he said he doubted “there is a female in all the regions of hell.”(11)» Yet Wilford Woodruff had a different idea and had “no doubt” “that there will also be daughters of Perdition.”(12)» Some years later President Joseph F. Smith also weighed in on the issue, and gave his own view that, “there would be no daughters of Perdition.”(13)»
One day we will probably know the answer to this question for ourselves. Perhaps we will be able to get a glimpse into the outer darkness of hell and see for ourselves, or perhaps by that point we may not worry or wonder about it.
In Conclusion
Prophets are entitled to their own views. They struggle with their own weaknesses, and yet the Saints are often guilty of expecting a degree of perfection from them that the Saints themselves do not possess. This was a tendency the Prophet Joseph faced in his day.
“This morning … I visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that ‘a prophet is always a prophet;’ but I told them that a prophet is a prophet only when he was acting as such.”(14)»
“I was introduced to a man from the east. After hearing my name, he remarked that I was nothing but a man, indicating by his expression, that he had supposed that a person to whom the Lord should see fit to reveal His will, must be something more than a man.”(15)» him?
Yet at the moment there are many people who worry about the differing opinions of prophets, and take issues of little consequence to them personally and focus on them to the exclusion of principles of far more importance and relevance to their lives. They throw such quotes out as stumbling blocks for others to trip over, or use them as an excuse not to take inspired counsel or even revelations so seriously.
Some justify apostasy and claim authority based on such issues. But they and their followers fail to realize that whatever disagreements we have with them gives us no more authority or power, or make us right in undermining their difficult role. If we believe someone to be wrong in doctrine are we not as obliged to go to him personally, as the scriptures instruct us that we should do if we “have ought against”(16)» him?
Whether the question is “was God a Savior in mortality” or “were Blacks neutral in the war in heaven?” or “where are the ten lost tribes?” we will find differing views from Apostles on these matters, and yet – despite individual imperfections – true Prophets have always been consistent on the requirements for exaltation, on the moral and ethical laws God expects of us, and have held the keys of the Priesthood in uninterrupted succession.
There are many matters we have no obligation to know and God has no obligation to tell us. We are free to speculate, but remain responsible if we place too much faith in our speculations. Perhaps we should be rejoicing in the fact that our prophets have “like passions”(17)» and wonder about the same things we do. Maybe in their thoughts we can sometimes find glimpses of higher truths, and insights into minds often focused on the infinite. Could it be that hearing their views could sometimes be a privilege, and we should be honored they have placed the trust in us to share them?
The responsibility of the head of God’s Priesthood on the earth is to ensure that those doctrines, ordinances, and laws essential to our exaltation are carried out exactly how God gave them. In this mission there has always been absolute consistency between true prophets past, present and future. Beyond this role, however, there may be as many opinions as there have been prophets, and they have as much a right to their views as anyone else.
The Gospel is like a beautiful painting on an enormous canvas, on which we can only focus parts of our vision on at any one time. Others may have focused elsewhere, and maybe some may have been able to step back a little further to see a larger section, but we all “see in part and know in part” and through our mortal eyes “look through a glass darkly.”(18)» The day will come when the light will shine in those dark places and our minds will be illuminated, but until that time we can often see more and understand more by trying to focus together as a people.