JOSEPH SMITH. (continued 2)

This kind of error is more easily committed in reading the prophetical portions of the Bible. The prophets borrow words denoting natural objects in order to represent what is spiritual and abstract. Their books are hieroglyphical, although they do not draw their hieroglyphic pictures, as did the Egyptian priests, but describe them in words. Hence the great difficulty in interpreting prophecy. It is not less difficult than to interpret many ancient Egyptian records. The prophets, for instance, talk of a "horn" and mean a "crown" or a "kingdom." "Beast" is a usurping tyrannical power. "Key" stands for lawful authority. "Virgins" are faithful worshippers, not defiled by idolatry.

Generally it must be borne in mind that every word should be understood as it was commonly understood at the time the Bible was written. Much minute inquiry, in fact more than most people are prepared to give, is needed in order to avoid errors arising from a violation of this rule.

Sometimes a knowledge of Hebrew and Greek is absolutely necessary for the right understanding of a passage. In I Kings ii, 8, 9, David is made to say concerning Simei: "Hold him not guiltless, * * but his hoary head bring down with blood to the grave." This is, of course, a contradiction. And, besides, David had sworn not to kill Simei. It seems therefore as if one of the last acts of David was to break his oath and his royal word. But a knowledge of Hebrew idioms clears this up; for the word "not" refers to both clauses: "Hold him not guiltless, * * but bring not his hoary head down with blood." That is the meaning, and Solomon understood it so. "The end of the world" spoken of in Matt. xxiv, 3 a Greek scholar will discover to be not the end of the physical world (telos tou kosmou) but the termination of the then existing economy; for the words are synteleia tou aionos. The interpretation of the whole prophecy of our Lord hangs upon this one word. Matthew (xii, 40) makes Christ say: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly," whereas the fact is, that there is not, and probably never was, a whale in the Mediterranean. The Hebrew has "a great fish" (Jonah i, 17) which the translator of the Septuagint made into a whale, and the misleading quotation slipped into the New Testament from the Septuagint.

Sometimes people put a mystical sense into the most plain expressions. Christ says: "But one thing is needful" (Luke x, 42) and many an edifying sermon has been preached upon this one "needful thing," and much curiosity has been needlessly excited to know what that one needful thing is that in itself is necessary and sufficient to salvation. People have been so eager to make a mystery that they have forgotten the fact that Christ for the time does not refer to salvation at all, but is speaking of a much more trivial subject, yet not less interesting or noteworthy. Christ has called on His friends, Lazarus, Martha and Maria. The two ladies are both anxious to entertain Him to the best of their ability. But Martha seems to have had an idea that lots of things were necessary in order to make a comfortable meal. In order to be ready in a hurry Martha wanted her sister to help her, upon which the Savior politely remarks that "only one thing is needful." There was no cause for so much serving. He would not enter their house as a stranger for whom they would have to prepare so many extra dishes. He would come as their friend and be entertained as such. This would give both sisters time to sit down and listen to His instructions, which after all was the "good part" of the entertainment. Stripping this narrative of the mysteries of theologians and letting common sense be common sense, we have a beautiful incident at once pleasing and instructive.

Sometimes the reader will be misled by the numbers of the Bible, because he does not know how they originally were used. "Ten" sometimes stands for "several." In Gen. xxxi, 7, Jacob says that Laban had changed his wages "ten times," meaning of course "several times." Perhaps the division of the Roman Empire into "ten" as predicted by Daniel ought to be understood in the same way, since so far no one has been able exactly to tell in what "ten" (the word taken literally) kingdoms that empire on its downfall was divided. If understood to mean "several" kingdoms, there is no difficulty. "Forty," in the same way, often means "many." "Seven" and "seventy" denote a large and complete number, although uncertain to the speaker.

Sometimes a knowledge of history is required for the right understanding of passages. (Acts ix, 31): "The churches had rest throughout all Judea and Galilee" has sometimes been understood to have been the consequence of the conversion of Paul, whereas the real cause of this temporary rest was that at this time Caligula attempted to raise a statue of himself in the "Holy of holies" in the temple. The consternation which this caused among the bloodthirsty Jews made them for a time forget the Christian churches.

Nor less important is a knowledge of ancient chonology, geography, of botany, of mineralogy, zoology, and archaeology in its various branches. But we cannot here multiply instances.

To understand the Bible, even the plainist translation, all these things are necessary as helps, and yet, without the Spirit of God to lead into all truth, not all of these helps are sufficient; so numerous and so vast are the difficulties to be encountered in ascertaining the true meaning of the Bible.

Nor need we be surprised at this. The various books are written in the remote antiquity. Language changes like all that is human. Words do not remain stationary in their significations. Every word has its own history, and antique literature always requires a knowledge of the history of the words. The authors of the Bible write each from his own standpoint. Some are lawyers, as Moses. Others are humble shepherds, as Anos. Some are learned men, as Paul and Luke. Others are uneducated fisherman, as Peter and John. Some are statesmen like Daniel. Others follow more lowly occupations of life, as Jeremiah. Some write poetry, others history, others letters and others visions. Some write in the deserts of Arabia, some by the banks of the rivers in Babylon, some in the palace in Jerusalem, some in prisons in Rome. Each has his own peculiarity of style, and to understand it all, you would have to be conversant with almost every branch of human learning. It is no figure of speech when Locke says that theology is the direction of all knowledge to its true end, or when Parley P. Pratt says: "It is the science of all other sciences and useful arts, being in fact, the very fountain from which they emanate. It includes philosophy, astronomy, history, mathematics, geography, languages, the science of letters, and blends the knowledge of all matters of fact in every branch of art or research" (Key to Theology, p.2).

Seeing now that such requirements are made upon us in order to understand the Bible, and that lack of knowledge necessarily involve misunderstanding of many of the sacred passages, we ask every reasonable being, Can it be supposed that the Bible ever was intended to be a substitute for immediate divine revelation? If it were intended for this purpose it has signally failed in its purpose; and if the Bible alone be intended to be the guide to heaven, it is to be feared that a majority of people will be led to hell for the simple reason that they never had an opportunity of mastering the difficulties attending their attempts at understanding what the Bible doctrines really are.

"CHRISTIAN" SECTS AN EVIDENCE.

If further proofs for the necessity of continuous revelation were needed, the deplorable state of the Christian world, where "each goes his own way," furnishes those proofs in abundance.

The object God had in view in giving to His people men through whom He could reveal His plans and purposes was to "perfect the Saints" and preserve "unity of faith" (Eph. iv, 11-14). As long as the church had apostles and prophets, there was no necessity for the churches breaking up into factions or sects. Differences could arise, and did arise, but when referred to the inspired men, God, through His Holy Spirit always settled the difficulties, preserving the unity.

Some instances, illustrating this, have been recorded for our information.

In the church at Jerusalem, as the members increased, a feeling of jealousy grew up between the different nationalities. The "Grecians" thought that their widows did not receive a fair portion of the alms daily distributed among the poor, the "Hebrews" keeping all for their widows. Among the Jews the "Grecians," that is to say, such Jews that were not born in Palestine, were held in contempt like everything that originated outside the confines of the Holy Land. It was thought that the Jewish converts to Christianity had retained this feeling, and so neglected their foreign brethren. Now, here was a secret power of evil at work, strong enough to break the first church up into factions. For evil grows, if not conquered, and what at first appears like a cloud, the size of a man's hand, develops into a terrible storm with thunder and lightning. Small as the matter appeared to be, it was an attempt at destroying the unity of the Church of Christ. But the church was equal to this occasion. Its foundations were solid and its guardians awake. The whole matter was laid before the apostles, and these found the proper remedy. "Look ye out among you," they said to the church members, "seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business." The people, on hearing this wise counsel, made their choice, and the apostles set the chosen apart for this office. And it may be noted as a characteristic feature of God's way of managing elections, in contrast to the farcical proceedings of the iniquitous world, that the seven men elected on this occasion were all "Grecians," judging from their names. The majority, prompted by the love of God, gave to the minority—the complaining party—the whole control of the distribution. The church was saved from the spirit of destruction. Unity was preserved. But it took inspired men to solve the difficulty in this way, so contrary to all rules, recognized among men (see Acts, vi, 1-8).

The next instance is a difference concerning doctrine.

As soon as the Gospel principles spread and were embraced by the Gentiles, a struggle necessarily followed between the Jewish and the Gentile element. Both had much to give up and much to learn from each other, before a complete unity could be secured. In this struggle, various questions were brought up for discussion, and amongst others this:

Ought not a Gentile convert to first be circumcised and promise to keep the law, before he was baptized and incorporated in the church? Many Jewish converts held that this was necessary. For to them the entrance to the church ought to be through the Mosaic dispensation, to Gentiles as it had been to Jews. But the Gentiles considered this an unnecessary circuitous road to the church, holding that the acceptance of Christ and his ordinances was all that should be required. Here was a difficult question to decide, and the principle involved was one of vital importance to the whole Christian community. The danger of a split was great, but the church had inspired leaders, men who communed with God. To them the question was referred. And they decided it, not only according to the Scriptures but according to the revelation given for the occasion. "It seemed good," they say, "to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which if ye keep yourselves ye shall do well." (Acts xv, 28, 29.) Here is a decision arrived at under the direct influence of the Holy Ghost, and one that brought unity into the churches and joy among the various Gentile branches.

Thus we see exemplified the object of continuous revelation, and the necessity of it. Without it unity cannot be preserved. "That ye may be one" as Christ is one with His Father, is, however, the very essence of Christianity, the mark on which it can be distinguished from the "world," which is all strife and contention. Destroy the unity, and Christianity is gone, or, since unity is impossible without continuous revelation, abandon such revelation, and Christianty is no more.

It is noticeable that the Christian churches, as long as the inspired men were among them and they listened to their words, kept clear of all schisms. So long, we say, but no longer. For soon men arose who thought themselves too wise to listen to the counsel of inspired men. And such imposed upon themselves upon the church with big words and subtle sophistry, thus drawing many away from the path of righteousness. This was the work of the spirit of anti-Christ, and the result was schisms, sects. But still the spirit of revelation lingered among the churches, uniting the honest everywhere in the love of God and of one another, until after a long struggle amid persecution from the outside and rebellion from the inside, the Spirit of revelation was withdrawn. "The child was taken up to the throne of God." (Rev. xii, 5). The light gave way to darkness.

Not that the Christian churches became annihilated, not that the doctrines preached by Christ or, what is the same, the Christian theology at once vanished. No! It was all there, but wrapped in darkness.

Suppose yourself on a ship trying to make for the harbor on a dark, stormy night. There are the lights along the shore, according to whose guiding rays alone you can steer your course. But suppose all these lights are suddenly extinguished. You can see no more where to go. All your calculations are in vain. Those rays of lights from the lighthouses were just as necessary for your safety as are your maps and your compass. Something analogous to this happened to the world, or, rather to the Christian churches. The guiding light of continuous revelation was extinguished and the ship left in darkness. At what precise time this took place we do not presume to say. But it is certain that the time of revelation did not extend much beyond the age of the apostles. The church was still there for years, but the lighthouses were not shining.

What followed? The most pitiable confusion. The leaders of the church, no longer guided by inspiration, were unable to preserve love and unity. Factions became numerous and each faction leader claimed the supreme authority for himself. Contests for power ensued, accompanied by scandalous scenes. The church was abandoned, each faction constructing their own raft and each steering their own course, occasionally trying to sink other rafts as these by wind and current were driven out. This was the result of the withdrawal of divine revelation.

People were in total darkness. They split on the most trivial questions as well as over the more important ones. What are we to think when we read the "history of the church" and find that "Christians" are trying to find out whether Christ was a real man or only an apparition! Or whereto had truth gone, when, after long struggles about the doctrine of the Godhead, it was finally decided, as the standard of orthodoxy, that: "Incomprehensible is the Father, incomprehensible is the Son, and incomprehensible is the Holy Ghost; yet not three incomprehensibles, but one." (Symbol Athan.)? Christ says: "This is eternal life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John, xvii, 3); Paul prays that he may know Christ and the power of His resurrection. (Philippians, vi, 7-10); and John says that we by keeping God's commandments, know that we "know" Him. (I John ii, 3), but the Church, as soon as the Spirit of revelation withdrew, declared that she was in darkness. God, she said, is incomprehensible. The contrast is so conspicuous that only a blind man can help seeing it.

This spirit of darkness still enwraps the whole "Christian" world. The work of dissolution has been going on all the time, and is still going on. The "Christians" stand against each other like enemies on a battlefield. Nobody knows where to seek or to find truth. Has the Roman Catholic church the truth? or the Coptic? or the Armenian? or the Reformed church? or the church of England? or Luther's faction? or Methodists? or Baptists? or Presbyterians? or Irvingians or Adventists? or Universalists? or Quakers? Which has the truth? Which faction is the Church of Christ?

Paul says that factions are the result of a "carnal" condition. "For whereas there is among you envyings and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" (I Cor. iii, 3.) The "Christian" world to-day, the Apostle then declares to be a "carnal" christendom. But to be carnally minded, we further learn (Rom. viii, 6, 7), is "death," and "enmity against God." The Christian world to-day is therefore in a state of "death" and "enmity against God." The word of God has pronounced His judgment, and all as a consequence of their having despised and rejected continuous revelation from God.

This suggests the remedy to be applied: Divine revelation.

God has promised, in the last days, "And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions * * * * and it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call" (Joel ii, 28-33). And this promise God will fulfill. Revelations are necessary for the deliverance of His people in these last days, and God is faithful.

Already the light of revelation has broken through the dark clouds of medieval errors. The prophets of God have again spoken, revealing God's way of salvation. Will the "Christian" world believe? Or will they, like the Jews formerly, reject the light of revelation, to their own damnation?

One objection, and only one, needs to be answered before we close this part of our investigation. It has been said that God prohibits people from adding anything to the Bible, since John the Revelator says: "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book" (Rev. xxii, 18). The prohibition is given for any "man" to add anything of his own to the book of Revelation, or to the word of God. And woe to the man who is preposterous enough to add his own productions to the sacred compositions of God! But neither this passage nor any other passage in the Bible states that God would never any more reveal anything. God does not prohibit himself from adding whatever He thinks necessary.

In fact, God has added to the volume of the New Testament since the book of Revelation was written. The Gospel of John, and, in all probability, the three epistles of John, were all written after the book of Revelation. The latest date assigned to the Revelation is 96 A. D., while others (and more probably) give it the date of 67 or 68. The three epistles were written 68 and the gospel 97, so that there is no possibility for thinking that God did not intend to add anything to the existing records.

The Gospel of John is the last book of the New Testament. And in this very book we have the comforting promise of Christ recorded: "He (the Spirit) shall glorify Me: for he shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you. All things that the Father has are Mine: therefore, said I, that he shall take of Mine, and shall show it unto you" (John xvi, 14, 15). Here is a promise of continuous revelation.

II.

Having seen, now, that continuous revelation is necessary for the guidance of men unto eternal salvation, and also that God through his ancient prophets has promised to manifest Himself preparatory to the foundation of the kingdom of the Son of God upon the earth, it becomes necessary to enquire into the evidences that present themselves of the truth of the claims of Joseph Smith, the Prophet. Did God speak through him, or, was he an enthusiast, an impostor? This question concerns every human being.

With a voice like that of the angel whom John saw in his visions on Patmos, Joseph proclaims in the name of the Lord:

"Hearken, O, ye people of My Church, saith the voice of Him who dwells on high, and whose eyes are upon all men, yea, verily I say, hearken ye people from afar, and ye that are upon the islands of the sea, listen together. For verily the voice of the Lord is unto all men" (Doc. and Cov. sec. i, 1, 2).

For centuries past the world had cherished the thought that the voice of the Lord should no more be heard, when suddenly, thunderlike, a messenger appeared, heralding from one end of heaven to mother the above quoted intelligence. God has spoken.

To the chosen seed these were, indeed, tidings of great joy, but the world at large, influenced, as the Jews formerly were, by priests and rabbis, denounced the messenger as a bold imposter. He offered the strongest proof a man ever can offer as a demonstration of the truth of his message; he gave his life, sealing his testimony with his blood. Yet a sceptical world refused to believe, refused, to a large extent, even to investigate.

What was, then, the nature of his message? That the day of the Lord is at hand; that the inhabitants of the earth must repent of their sins and false doctrines, and turn unto God; that those who would obey should be made happy in the kingdom of the Son of God, but on all disobedient souls fearful judgments would speedily fall. To prepare for the coming of Christ was the message sent from God to man through His servant, the Prophet Joseph. That was the nature of the message.

It will be perceived that this is in full harmony with the sacred writ, and its very nature should be a sufficient proof of its divine origin. If it harmonizes with the Bible, how can it be false? How can those who believe the one reject the other? Is not that the very same contradiction as that of which the Jews were guilty who believed the sacred writings of the Old Testament at the same time they rejected Christ? Clearly, when the Bible is first proved to be true, everything that is in perfect harmony with the Bible must be true, too. In such relation to the Bible stands the divine message of which we are speaking.

This is a subject that must not be treated lightly. The highest interests are here at stake—interests dearer than life itself, which lasts but a moment. If God has spoken to this generation, woe, woe, woe unto those who wilfully shut their ears and harden their hearts against the word of God! The antediluvian world was drowned by a flood because the people did not heed the warning voice. The cities of the plain were wrapped in flames and buried in a sulphurous tomb because they rejected the message of God. Jerusalem fell because she did not know the time of her visitation. And how can the present world escape a similar fate under similar circumstances?

With these lessons of past ages before us, let every honest soul investigate the evidences of the truth of this message of the latter days. An honest investigation is the very least that can be demanded for a subject of this vast importance.

The attention of theological students who are familiar with the evidences of the truth of Christianity is particularly called to the line of thought here offered, as it is proposed to show that the message delivered by Joseph Smith is supported by the same evidence as the message delivered by former prophets or apostles. Christianity and "Mormonism" must stand or fall together. If the evidence here presented is sufficient for the one, it is sufficient for both.

RETROSPECTIVE EVIDENCE.

The books of the Old Testament abound with predictions foretelling the work of Christ on earth. It is distinctly predicted that a deliverer should come, "the seed of woman;" he should spring out of the people of Abraham; a new covenant would be made; the deliverer would be despised, put to death, and yet reign for ever and ever. Such wonderful predictions run like a string through the Old Testament, and are always pointed to as an evidence of the truth of Christianity. This is what is sometimes called retrospective evidence. Christ himself points to these predictions as such evidence. "Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter His glory? Beginning with Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself." (Luke xxiv, 26, 27. Compare John v, 46, 47.)

But the same prophets foretell with equal clearness the grand work in which the Latter-day Saints are now engaged, as will appear on investigation of the following passages.

Isaiah has many remarkable predictions, some of which were fulfilled shortly after their delivery. Syria and Israel, for instance, were to be conquered by Assyria, before the infant son of the prophet could say "my father" (Isaiah viii, 4). The glory of Kedar was to fail in one year (xxi, 6), that of Moab in three years (xvi, 14), that of Ephraim in sixty-five years (vii, 8), that of Tyre in seventy years (xxiii, 15). Other predictions relate to more distant times. Thus that portion of his book which is contained in chapter xl to lxiv embraces the whole period from the Babylonian captivity to the end of the Christian dispensation.

In this portion of the book the prophet predicts the deliverance of the Jews by Cyrus (xliv, 28; xlv, 1-5, xlvii); the return to Judea (xliv, 28), the coming, suffering and glory of the Messiah, the downfall of idolatry, the rejection of Christ by the Jews, and their consequent rejection by God; also their final conversion and recovery (lii, 3; lxii; lxv).

Speaking of this last event, the final gathering of the Jews—an event which is about to be fulfilled in our own time—the prophet (chapter lv) says that there should be a people or a nation, previously unknown to the Jews, who should be willing to join the Jews in their worship of God Almighty. "Behold, thou shalt call a people which thou didst not know; and a people which did not know thee shall run to thee for the sake of Jehovah, thy God, and for the sake of the Holy One in Israel, for he hath glorified thee."

Could language more clearly convey that at the time of the final restoration of the Jews there should exist another people, too, who would share with the Jews the glory in store for them? In the next chapter (lxvi, 6-8) this other people is more clearly described: "And the sons of the stranger who follow Jehovah in order to serve Him, and to love Jehovah's name * * * those I will bring to My holy mountain, and they shall rejoice in My house." These predictions are very clear, and it is a literal fulfillment thereof that the Saints are called out of all nations of the earth so that they may form that one nation here spoken of, and the latter part of Isaiah's predictions are as literally verified as that part which relates to former events.

Among the predictions of the prophet Micah we notice the invasion of Shalmaneser (i, 6-8), and Sennacherib (i, 9-16), the dispersion of Israel (v, 7-8) the destruction of Jerusalem (iii, 12). He also foretells the gathering of Israel and the exaltation of Christ over all nations. Speaking of the gathering of Israel, he says that a forerunner should first come, and this forerunner is described as a people with a leader at their head and Jehovah as their guide, alluding to Israel in the wilderness, where Moses was their prophet, Jehovah going before them. Thus saith Micah ii, 12, 13: "Certainly I will gather thee, Jacob, and bring together the rest of Israel. * * The forerunner (or rather the one who 'breaks' the way) goes before them; * * * the prince goes before them and Jehovah leads." In chapter iv. the prophet more fully describes what should happen before the gathering of Jacob: "At the end of the days the mountain of the house of Jehovah shall be established upon the top of the mountains, * * and the nations shall run thereto. * * * In the same days said Jehovah, shall I gather the remnant." Read chapter iv, 1-10 carefully. It predicts unmistakably that at the time of the final delivery of the Jews there should exist a people gathered among the mountains in order to serve the Lord, a people endowed with wisdom to exercise judgment in the affairs of the nations of the world, and yet be a peaceful, agricultural people, who had thrown away their swords for peaceful occupations. This prediction is as clear as any ever given concerning Christ and His work, and it is fulfilled in the gatherings of the Saints. If prophetic evidence is required, God has given it to us.

Let us turn to Jeremiah, who flourished a hundred years later.

The chronological arrangement of the predictions of this prophet, as has been already remarked, is not very plain, but passages relating to the first salvation of Israel are easily recognized. Chapter iii, 15-18, are among these. Here the prophet in words that cannot be mistaken says that the house of Judah shall go to the house of Israel, and "they shall come together from the land of the north to the land which I have given your fathers."

That this prediction does not relate to the deliverance from Babylon is evident from the fact that the prophet says: "the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel." The house of Israel must then already be gathered, or else the house of Judah could not go with them. At the return from Babylon Judah took the lead, and the Israelites who returned had to come to Judah. Judah took the lead. Here is a deliverance and return predicted in which Israel takes the lead. Israel must consequently be gathered as well as Judah and previous to Judah. Compare this with the message delivered through Joseph the Prophet, and the evidence is both strong and conclusive.

No less clear is Daniel. In his second chapter, this great prophet predicts coming events with the clearness of history. Four kingdoms are described: The Babylonian, under the dynasty of Nebuchadnezzar; the Medo-Persian, the Grecian and the Roman. The last named is divided into ten, all of which in their composition carry the seed of their dissolution. Iron (political power) and clay (man-invented religion) mixed together, was their inheritance from Rome, and the cause of their weakness. But in the days of these ten kingdoms the kingdom of heaven is founded, a stone cut out without hands of man yet of miraculous origin; mighty as a mountain, and finally, superior to the finest metals, the most splendid earthly thrones.

That this prediction was not fulfilled at the time of Christ is clear from two facts: First, that Christ came before the dissolution of the Roman empire; and, secondly, that Christ did not found a kingdom at all when He was here. Only by the most lamentable perversion of Scripture can this passage be made to apply to the first coming of Christ. It must apply to His second coming or have no meaning at all. But to His second coming it applies. Then His kingdom will fill all the earth, but the stone must first roll, and, while so doing, grow until it becomes fit to perform the work assigned to it.

In chapter seven the prophet treats of the same subject. The four kingdoms are represented by four beasts, and the ten kingdoms by ten horns; three of the horns or kingdoms are subdued by a little horn, the papal, anti-Christian power, which exercises its tyrannical reign, and overcomes the Saints for a period of one thousand two hundred and sixty years. Here, too, the time is fully defined, showing beyond the possibility of doubt that the restoration of the Kingdom of God belongs to this century, counting from the appearance of the little horn, the papal power.

Thus the ancient prophets have spoken of the time in which we live, and their predictions are irrefutable evidence of the truth of the message accepted by the Latter-day Saints.

Let us add one more testimony. John, the great prophet of the New Testament, while on Patmos, has a vision in which the Turkish conquest is shown (chapter ix). Four angels, bound in the great river Euphrates, are let loose to spread war and desolation upon the earth for a period of about four hundred years (Rev. ix, 15). Their great numbers are described, their armors, their national colors, their power to hurt an idolatrous "Christian" world, tormenting those who had abandoned the worship of God for the worship of Saints and images. After this (chapter x) a messenger appears with a little book, signifying that the Spirit of prophecy should again be manifested before "many people, and nations, and tongues and kings" (Rev. x, 1-11). How very clear is this prediction as to the great event of our time. In reading the vision we feel that John saw the youthful Prophet Joseph with the little book in his hand, and heard his mighty voice declaring that the fulness of times had come. "And the angel (or messenger) which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth (embracing both hemispheres) lifted up his hands to heaven and swore by him that liveth for ever and ever * * * * that there shall be time no longer, but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel * * * * the mystery of God should be finished" (x, 5-7). Is not this the very essence of the message delivered by Joseph the Prophet?

With such frequency and with such clearness the Spirit of prophecy in all past ages foretells the work in which the Latter-day Saints are now engaged. If Christ can point to predictions as an evidence of His divine mission; if Christians can point to prophecy as an evidence of the truth of Christianity, why are not these predictions, these prophecies, equally infallible evidence of the truth of the divine mission of Joseph Smith? How one can be accepted and the other rejected I fail to see.

PROSPECTIVE EVIDENCE.

Our Lord refers more than once to prophecies delivered by Himself as evidence of His divine mission: "And now I have told you before it came to pass, that when it is come to pass ye might believe." (John xiv, 29.) This kind of evidence has been called prospective. When we read, for instance, the prophecy of our Lord announcing the destruction of Jerusalem, compare the prediction with the description of the fearful event given by Joseph, and see how literally everything was fulfilled, we can understand what strong evidence the prophecy is of the divine mission of the Lord. Jerusalem, Babylon, Nineveh are all witnesses of the truth of the word of God, and their testimony is unanimously accepted by everyone who is able to trace the finger of God. The conclusion is this, that when a man foretells an event which no human wisdom could foresee, the occurrence of such an event is a sure proof that God spoke through that man. So God Himself reasons: "Who hath declared this from ancient times? Have not I, the Lord?" (Isaiah, xlv, 20-22.)

If we apply this rule to the message delivered through Joseph Smith, we unavoidably reach the same conclusion. We are forced by the most plain logic to acknowledge his divine mission.

The following is offered for consideration: In the Book of Doctrine and Covenants many predictions are given concerning the Saints, some of which have already been fulfilled, while others are still awaiting fulfillment.

In 1830, when the Church was still in her earliest infancy, it was predicted: "Zion shall rejoice upon the hills and flourish before the final salvation of Israel" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec xxxv, 24, 25). This remarkable prediction is often repeated, and finally, in the year 1838, at Far West, Missouri, it is again announced: "Therefore, will I not make solitary places to bud and to blossom, and to bring forth in abundance, said the Lord? Is there not room enough upon the mountains?" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. cxvii, 7, 8.)

From the very foundation of the Church the Spirit of God, through the prophet, thus announces in no uncertain way that Zion, the Saints, should move to "the hills," "the mountains," "the solitary places," and there be prosperous, "blossom" gloriously. It must be remembered that these predictions were delivered at a time when no human wisdom could foresee such an event. When the Church was founded in 1830, there was no possibility—speaking from a mere human point of view—of foreseeing her removal to the hills, much less that she would be removed and prosper in the "hills." Nor is there in the whole history of mankind anything analogous to this exodus of the Church. The probability, speaking from a human point of view, when the Church was founded, was either that she would be favored by the world and remain where she was, or that she would be crushed on the spot by an immense hostility. Either of these two occurrences might have been considered probable at the time; but none of them was predicted. The Church should blossom in the hills. Has not this prediction, delivered half a century ago, been remarkably fulfilled? Who can travel through the valleys of the mountains to-day, among fragrant gardens and orchards, and notice the friendly, peaceful homes that everywhere smile upon the stranger, or observe the condition of the Saints, without seeing that the predictions have come literally true? Zion now blossoms in the mountains.

The fulfillment of these predictions has not been brought about by man, otherwise than in this way that ungodly men, without their own knowledge, were the instruments. The Saints were driven from place to place. They went not with a calculation to fulfill prophecy, but because they could not help themselves. In the same way the Jews and the Romans fulfilled the predictions of our Lord.

Anyone who will honestly consider these facts will see that the events prominent in the history of the Latter-day Saints indelibly mark Joseph Smith as a prophet of God.

Other predictions delivered by Joseph the Prophet concern the nations of the earth. In 1832 the following prediction was given: "For after your testimony cometh the testimony of earthquakes, that shall cause groanings in the midst of her, and man shall fall upon the ground, and shall not be able to stand. And also cometh the testimony of the voice of thunderings, and the voice of lightings, and the voice of tempests, and the voice of the waves of the sea, heaving themselves beyond their bounds. And all things shall be in commotion; and, surely, men's hearts shall fail them; for fear shall come upon all men." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. lxxvii, lxxxix, xci).

True, this prediction has not yet in all its details been fulfilled; still, the events of the last ten years fully indicate that the time is drawing near when the "testimony of thunders" shall roll over the earth. I refer to numerous calamities which the last years have witnessed. Earthquakes, floods, storms, fires, conflagrations, wars, anarchy have filled the newspapers with horrible reading matter. We need only remember the earthquake in Charleston, the overflow of the Yellow River in China, the conflagration of several theatres, the riots in Chicago. So noted have these years been for calamities of every description that astrologers have pointed out that they were caused by certain planets which, during the past years, have had a peculiar position in relation to each other and to the earth. Be this as it may, the fact remains that we live in a time of visitation—a visitation already foretold by Joseph the Prophet. Here, again, we see his words verified, and he himself vindicated as a prophet of God.

Another prediction, the fulfillment of which is written in letters of blood on the pages of the history of the American nation, cannot be contradicted. In 1832 God declared through Joseph Smith: "Behold the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States shall call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves, and thus war shall be poured out upon all nations." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. lxxxvii, 3). Concerning this war, it was foretold that it should terminate in "death and misery to many, many souls." Also the place where the first shot was to be fired was foretold: "Verily, thus saith the Lord, concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina." (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. lxxxvii, 1; cxxx, 12, 13.)

These minute predictions were given at a time when people generally did not believe it possible for the United States to engage in a war with each other. Those acquainted with the sentiments that prevailed in America at that time, all agree in this. Nay, even when the report reached the Northern States that their Southern brethren had actually commenced the tragedy, it was hard for the Northern States to believe it. There was no possibility at the time of Joseph for human sagacity to foresee this war. Yet the despised prophet predicted it with a clearness not surpassed by Isaiah or Daniel.

Did it come true? Did the war break out in South Carolina? Was the slave question the casus belli? Did the Southern States apply to other nations for help? Every particular came true, and the world knows it, even if it fails to acknowledge that all had been predicted years before it happened.

It would be a reasonable supposition that the literal fulfillment of a prediction like this should be proof enough of the divine mission of the prophet. Or, what is required of a true prophet? Is not that enough that his predictions are proved to be true? In the case of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, John, nothing more is required. When we see that their predictions have come true we grant that they were true prophets. Must we, then, reverse every rule of logic in the case of Joseph Smith? Must we say his predictions have been fulfilled; ergo he was a false prophet? The absurdity of this is too great to need refutation.

We know that an objection has been raised that the prediction of the war did not come true in every particular—that the war was confined to the United States, and was not poured out upon all nations.

To this objection we answer that, in one sense, it was poured out upon all nations. The population of the United States consists, as is well known, of people from almost every nation under the sun, and England, Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, all were represented in the armies of that war. All contributed to the death list in that long and fearful combat. How much misery, how much sorrow, how many tears did that war cause far beyond the borders of the great republic, when aged mothers and fathers, and sisters and brothers in the old countries received the intelligence that a son or a brother was wounded or dead? If we will consider this in all its consequences we will soon find that the expression, "War shall be poured out upon all nations" is no idle figure of speech. It is a stern fact. Thousands beyond the rolling waves of the ocean drank the bitter cup filled with the curse of that war. Understood in this way, the prediction is literally fulfilled in all its details.

But it must also be remembered that we have not yet reached the last scene of the drama. It is a grave question with some clear-seeing politicians to-day whether the slave question has yet reached its final solution. If it has not, we may yet see the prediction in question fulfilled in every particular.

The prediction itself plainly states that some time would elapse between the fulfillment of its various parts. Verse 3, D&C 87, foretells that the war should be caused by the division of the United States into two great parties, and that the Southern States should call upon Great Britain; "and thus war should be poured out upon all nations." Then verse 4 explains that this should be continued "after many days," thereby that the slaves (the negroes) should rise up, and also the remnant (the Indians), and new wars, new bloodshed take place. The prophecy thus clearly marks two divisions, the events of which are separated from each other by a period of many days, or years; for days in the prophetic language are always understood to mean years. Thus the prediction itself is plain. It foretells the so-called War of the Rebellion, its subsequent result as well as its causes. It further intimates that the question out of which it arose should be settled for many years, but that again the flames of war should be kindled and spread wider than before. The first part of this prediction has been fulfilled. The second belongs to the future.

Having thus removed the objection made to the prediction, it may not be out of place to show that this way of putting close together, in prophetical sentences, events which are in time far separated from each other, is common to prophetical writers. In this respect the Prophet Joseph resembles the ancient prophets, a fact which ought not to be the ground of objection.

Isaiah, speaking of the mission of Christ (chapter lxi, 1-3), says: "The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me * * to proclaim the year of acceptance of Jehovah and the day of vengeance of our God." Christ, in reading and expounding this text in Nazareth, reads to the middle of the verse, closes the books and exclaims: "To-day this scripture is fulfilled in your ears." (Luke iv, 21.) Indeed, with the coming of Christ the year of acceptance of Jehovah had come. The first part of the verse was fulfilled, but the second portion—the day of vengeance—was not yet. Thousands of years lie between the first part of this verse and the second.

So the Prophet Joel, in his second chapter, verses 28-32, foretells in one sentence the wonders of the day of Pentecost (compares Acts ii, 16-21) and the great day of Jehovah, when no one can escape the judgments to come except those who take their refuge upon Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, events which are separated from each other by thousands of years.

The objection to the prediction of Joseph Smith is therefore no objection at all, unless the ancient prophets must be rejected on the same ground. On the contrary, an honest investigation leads to the discovery that the very language of prophecy as delivered by the Prophet of this dispensation is in harmony with ancient prophecies, that they flow from one and the same source—the Spirit of God.

DIRECT EVIDENCE.

With "direct evidence," theologians mean such evidence as is supplied by the miracles of the Lord and his servants.

It is true that miracles are often appealed to as evidence of the divine mission of Christ. Nicodemus says: "No man can do these miracles that thou doest except God be with him" (John iii, 2). Christ Himself supports this view. "I have greater witness than that of John; for the work which the Father has given me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me" (John v, 36). "Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, or else believe me for the very works' sake" (John xiv, 11). Also: "But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins (He says to the sick of palsy), I say unto thee, 'Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way unto thine house'" (Mark ii, 10, 11). Here, clearly, miracles are furnished as evidence of Christ's divine mission.

But it must be remembered that the performance of miracles is not always a proof of divine authority. The Egyptian magicians worked several miracles, it seems, in the sight of Pharaoh, thereby turning his heart away from God. The disciples of the Pharisees at the time of Christ also performed miracles. They charged Christ with the crime of being connected with the powers of darkness, and that He by such aid cast out demons; to which charge Christ with holy indignation, replies: "If I cast out demons with the aid of Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast out demons?" So that miracles were by no means something which Christ claimed as his exclusive prerogative. It has also been clearly foretold that anti-Christ should claim miraculous powers and thereby deceive many. "His coming is after the workings of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders" (II Thess. ii, 9). "And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast" (Rev. xiii, 13, 14). From these passages it is clear that caution is needed in accepting this kind of evidence. Miracles may be evidence of the presence of God or the presence of anti-Christ.

Nor is the performance of miracles always necessary to prove divine authority. A man may be sent from God in order to fulfill a very important mission without having to prove this by miracles. Thus John the Baptist had a very important mission. He came to "prepare the way" for the appearance of Christ, yet it is not known that he proved his mission by miracles.

It is true that Christ and His Apostles after Him worked many striking miracles, even the raising of the dead, but these miracles were, after all, not so frequent as has sometimes been imagined. Those men of God did not touch everything with supernatural power, healing every sick person they saw, raising every dead one, changing the common day occurrences of life into scenes matching the stories of the "Arabian Nights." Not at all. Their miracles were comparatively scarce; they were exceptional occurrences. Thus when Paul was incarcerated in Rome, the cold prison walls forming but a poor shelter for his body during the winter, and his resources probably being exhausted, he asked Timothy kindly to bring with him the cloak which Paul had forgotten at Troas, at the house of one of the brethren, called Carpus. (II Tim., iv, 13). The passage is as prosaic as it could possibly be, and has nothing supernatural about it. Still more, in the same chapter we hear Paul diligently plead with Timothy to come to Rome to him, for he was now alone. All except Luke had forsaken him, and among other misfortunes was this—that he had had to leave Trophimus sick at Miletum. "Erastus abode at Corinth, but Trophimus have I left at Miletum, sick" (II Tim. iv, 20). Sick? Why did not the great Apostle cure him instead of leaving him sick? If the Apostles had been such miracle-makers as modern fancy has represented them to be, an occurrence of this nature would have been impossible. But this is not the only one recorded. Timothy, one of Paul's converts and fellow laborers, is always spoken of in terms of high praise, and he is a noble instance of eminent gifts and grace in one young in years. This favorite of the apostle was sick, however, and in his letter Paul therefor exhorts him to be careful about his health: "Drink no longer water but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities" (I Tim. v, 23). Let those who have overestimated the frequency of miracles at the time of the first Christian churches, consider this passage well, and they will be likely to see their mistake. Here was a prominent man of the church, himself possessing great spiritual gifts, constantly suffering from "infirmities." Here is the great "Apostle of the Gentiles," whose power always was great, advising that prominent man to use a little medicine. Why did he not promise him a miracle? Why? That we do not know, but this we do know, that miracles were never by God strewn round, "plenty as black berries."

Anyone who will study the miracles of our Lord and his apostles, will find that they were always performed for the glory of God, and conveyed a lesson necessary and appropriate. Although individuals were thereby benefited, yet this was not the only or ultimate aim. Christ, for instance, heals with a touch a man whom the law had pronounced unclean, and whom no Jew would touch. He shows by His miracles that he is the Lord over disease, over demons, over physical nature, over brute creatures, in order that we may have confidence in Him in all things. We see him forgiving sins, answering prayers, direct (Mat. ix, 20-22), intercessory (23-26), united (27-31), and even unuttered (32-33). The same characteristics may be observed in the miracles of the apostles. They were never performed for selfish purposes, nor for the gratification of curiosity, never for the sake of show. The epistles explain that miraculous gifts, including prophecy, were given to confirm the truth of the Gospel, promote its rapid dissemination, and edify the churches.

Such miracles, then, are from God, and may be relied upon as evidence of the truth of those revelations which they are intended to prove.

Two questions now become appropriate in our investigation: Did miraculous manifestations follow the message of Joseph the Prophet, and, if so, were these miraculous manifestations of such a nature as to warrant the conclusion that he had his power from God? Let us see.

In the year 1830 the Lord declared through His prophet: "And it shall come to pass that there shall be a great work in the land, even among the Gentiles * * * for I am God and mine arm is not shortened; and I will show miracles, signs and wonders, unto all those who believe on my name; and who shall ask it in my name in faith they shall cast out devils (demons); they I shall heal the sick; they shall cause the blind to receive their sight, the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak, and the lame to walk. The time speedily cometh when great things are to be shown forth unto the children of men" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. xxxv 7-10.) Here we have an unmistakably clear promise that miracles should attend the message of our Prophet; and this promise is repeated at other times. But was this promise also kept? Were those "great things" shown unto the children of men? Or was the promise a false one?

How could it be false? This was one of the very first promises given. When we remember how rapidly the Church spread in those early days, no other conclusion is possible than this: that the promise given was also kept to the very letter. Men are not so foolish as to follow a man who promises "great things" and never keeps his promises. This the ministers of the world have learnt, wherefore they wisely abstain from promising any "great things" before the millennium, possibly. It is always convenient to have a future to draw on during present poverty. But here is a man who, contrary to most ministers of the world, declares in the name of the Lord that the time had now come for the manifestations of "great things." Thousands heard this and believed, in itself a sure proof that "great things" really were shown. The sick were healed, the blind received their sight, the deaf heard, the dumb spake and the lame walked.

At the time of Joseph it was generally accepted, even among the enemies, as a fact that the Prophet performed many great miracles. We remember a romance from that time wherein Joseph is represented as raising a dead lady. Of course, the author of this romance explains it as humbug, the apparent death being caused by a dose of morphine or something else. Other authors ascribe the works of the Prophet to magnetism. Joseph Smith, they say, knew the mysteries of magnetism and understood how to turn them to good account. These efforts on the part of the enemies to explain or account for the miracles of the prophet are a proof as sure as any one can desire that he showed those "great things" which he promised to show in the name of the Lord. Had there been nothing, the enemies would have nothing to account for. "He did it through magnetism" is the modern expression for: "He did it through Beelzebub." Had Joseph been an impostor, how easily that could have been exposed. Here he promises that the sick should be healed by faith. Yet no attempt has been made to prove that the promise was never kept, only that he kept it through magnetism! The enemies well knew that such works followed the testimony of Joseph the Prophet, works for which they could not account in the usual way.

As an instance of how commonly the enemies believed in Joseph's power, the following well-known incident may be referred to. A man once came to the Prophet and asked him to show a miracle. It was not the Prophet's way to make "show" of such works; wherefore he positively refused. But the man grew impertinent and abusive, and talked lightly of the work of God. Finally the prophet said in a voice which penetrated the soul of the miracle-seeking visitor: "You want a miracle. Tell me what you want. Do you want to be struck blind, deaf or dumb? In the name of the Lord God I tell you, you shall have it." Upon this the man left the presence of the prophet in a hurry. Now, why did not this man stay and have a fair trial? Joseph promised him a miracle. Why did he not wait and get it? Simply for the reason that he dared not. In common with all who knew Joseph, he was too well aware of the power of God through the Prophet. The enemies themselves are thus testifying to the fact that miracles attended this Prophet.

Orson Pratt in his work has recorded a number of cases of wonderful healing.

Nor are we referred exclusively to dead witnesses. There are still living men and women in Utah and elsewhere who were personally acquainted with the Prophet, and they are willing to testify, to the last of the great works they have seen with their eyes and heard with their ears, performed by the Prophet. Moreover, great works still continue. To deny, therefore, that miraculous manifestations followed the message of Joseph the Prophet is to deny facts.

These miracles, on the closest investigation, will all be found to partake of the nature of genuine Scriptural miracles. Their aim is the glory of God, as they are always ascribed to Him alone, not to the power of man. Nor are they performed in order to glorify any one man, or set of men. They are performed as a confirmation of faith, not to produce faith.

These points are important and instructive. While the miracles of the Catholic Church appear to be either silly nonsense or worked in support of some notoriously false doctrine, in order to gain proselytes, or otherwise exhibit their spurious origin, the miraculous manifestations following the Church of Christ exhibit no such marks. Their origin is divine, and they bear the divine in arks in themselves. Like God's works in nature, these miracles must be closely studied in order to be known in all their beauty. The indifferent pass them by without notice. There is nothing to "show" in them. But this is one proof of their divine origin. Man always works in a "showy" way when left to himself; God's ways are "in the deep."

I have pointed out that true miracles are referred to as evidence of a divine mission. We have proof that such miracles attended the message of Joseph the Prophet. The conclusion is therefore given. He was a man sent from God, and his message was divine.

When applied to Christianity no one doubts the correctness of the conclusion, if he believes in miracles at all; but if the promises are granted and the conclusion accepted in the case of Christianity, what a fearful corruption of mind there must be in a man who can deny both premises and conclusion when the rule is applied to test the claims of Joseph the Prophet. Surely, in order to be consistent, we must either accept or reject both. A third we do not see.

The evidence thus far considered is external and direct, appealing to our senses. Another class of evidence remains which has been called internal. Applied to Christianity this kind of evidence is thus explained: If Christianity is not of divine origin, it must be a cunningly devised fable. Which is the most probable supposition? Internal evidence tries to answer that question.

The same process of reasoning by which this question is answered when applied to Christianity can also be applied to the message brought by Joseph the Prophet. If this message is not from God it must be from man; it must be forged in order to deceive and must be termed the greatest fraud of the century. It is either a divine truth or a diabolical lie. Tertium non est. Which is the more likely supposition?

In order to decide this question we must consider the moral precepts given by the messenger, his own character, and the character of those who receive it and profess to follow its precepts. For it is very clear that any message which in itself is "good" and which also produces good results in the hearts and lives of men, is not likely to be from the evil one. What is good is from God. Was Joseph the Prophet a good man? Did he inculcate holy principles unto his fellow-men? Does the gospel he preached tend to make men holy? If so, his message must be from God.

MORAL EVIDENCE.

That the moral character of a man who professes to be a divine messenger is very important as an evidence of the truth of his message is admitted on all hands. The following is the opinion of an eminent writer: "The character of Christ is a wonderful proof of the divinity of the Bible. The Hindoo cannot think of his Brahmin saint other than possessing the abstemiousness and austerity which he admires in his living models. The Socrates of Plato is composed of elements practically Greek, being a compound of the virtues deemed necessary to adorn the sage. A model of the Jewish teacher might easily be drawn from the writings of the Rabbis, and he would prove to be the very deflection of these Scribes and Pharisees who are reproved in the Gospel. But in the life of our Redeemer a character is represented which departs in every way from the national type of the writers, from the character of all ancient nations, and is at variance with all the features which custom, education, religion and patriotism seem to have consecrated as most beautiful. Four different authors have recorded different facts, but they exhibit the same conception, a conception differing from all they had ever witnessed or heard, and necessarily copied from the same original. Moreover, this glorious character, while borrowing nothing from the Greek, Indian or Jew, having nothing in common with established laws of perfection, is yet to every believer a type of excellence. He is followed by the Greek, though a founder of none of his sects, revered by the Brahmin, though preached by one of the fisherman caste, and worshiped by the red man of Canada, though belonging to the hated paleface."

This very striking picture of our Savior is true in all its details. In the Gospels we see Him described as holy (John vii, xlvi, li, 8, 46, 10, 32; Matt. xxvi, lix, 27, 23, 24; Luke xxiii, 13-45); full of benevolence and compassion (John iv, Luke ix, 55; x, 30-37); kindness and affection (Matt. xiv, 27-31; Luke xix, 5; xli, 22-61; John xi; xix, 25-27); having meekness and humility (Matt. ix, 28, xviii, 22); moral courage, firmness and resignation (Matt. xxvi, 39-46; Mark x, 32; Luke iv, 23; John xi, 7; xviii, 4); abhorring hypocrisy and popularity (Matt. vi, 1-18; x, 16-39; xxii, 18; Mark xii, 38, 40; Luke xi, 44; John xvi, 1-16); being moderate and free from enthusiastic austerity (Matt. viii, 19; xxiii, 23; Luke v, 29, 35; John ii, 1; Mark xii, 17.)

Looking at all these characteristics of our Savior, so eminently "good," and hearing Him solemnly declare that He has a message from God to man, we feel bound to admit that He is no deceiver. His words are true. He is the Son of God. Thus His character becomes an evidence.

Now, concerning the subject under consideration, must we not also admit that Joseph the Prophet was a man sent from God, when we find that his character is in perfect harmony with those qualities that are peculiar to a servant of God?

Those who want to investigate this are referred to works extant, which treat on the "Life of Joseph Smith," and I think any unprejudiced reader will feel impressed with the fact that Joseph was a good man—a "man of God."

How he urges holiness as the condition of happiness! In his benevolence he seemed boundless, embracing every race of humanity, white, red and black! His kindness and affection are touching. Of meekness and humility he exhibits the most striking examples which shall ever be worthy of imitation. The moral courage and firmness which prompted him to face a hostile world and to die "calm as a summer morning," must be admired. His straightforwardness, for which hypocrisy ever stood rebuked, is well-known to his friends and acquaintances. His whole career and the doctrines he taught are indisputable proofs that, although he was inspired by a noble enthusiasm, yet he was far from being what is called an enthusiast.

Here, then, we find all the marks of a true disciple of Christ, proving, if anything at all, that Joseph the Prophet, was a man of God. His message must be therefore from God, too. We know that his antagonists have done all in their power to prove the bad character of the prophet. But we also know what credit must be attached to slanderers inspired by bigotry and hatred.

Were we to draw our information from such sources concerning Christ himself, we would have to reject even Him, the spotless Lamb of God. For the enemies did not fail to stain the character of Christ. "He casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the chief of the devils" (Luke xi, 15.) "Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan (an infidel?) and hast a devil?" (John viii, 48.) A special charge against Jesus was that He was a drunkard (Matt. xi, 19), and generally he was accused of being on intimate terms with "sinners" (Luke xv, 2), by which term the Jews understood outcasts, reprobates, the company of which was contaminating in its influences. Finally, as is well known, our Savior was tried and condemned to death by the ecclesiastical authorities for blasphemy and by the civil court for treason. Must all this be believed? Certainly not. We know that those charges were dictated by hatred. Neither must we believe what hatred has dictated against Joseph the Prophet.

After all, the most diligent slanderers have not been able to bring anything against the Prophet worse than was brought as a charge against the first Christians. When a great calamity befell the Roman empire, or a part thereof, the Christians were the originators. Pests and famines, it was thought, came on account of the Christians, or even that the Christians made them through secret exorcisms in their private meetings. During the reign of Nero, Rome was consumed by a conflagration that lasted for seven days. Five-sevenths of the city were laid in ashes, including temples, palaces and other monumental buildings. Although the embittered people had reason to believe that the emperor himself had caused the fire, yet as soon as the report was started that the Christians had done it, this was willingly believed and a persecution broke out in which most of the apostles of our Lord were cruelly put to death. That the Christians practiced bloody sins in their meetings, that they killed and ate the children and that they plotted against the state were common charges. But we know that these and similar accusations had no foundation in reality.

A very strong proof (as anyone acquainted with human nature will admit) that Joseph the Prophet was a man whose life corresponded with his teachings is the fact that those who knew him best from private intercourse with him were his most earnest admirers. His wife, his brothers, his parents, are all found among the first who joined the Church. How could this be if Joseph the Prophet had not in his daily life been a living witness to the fact that he really communicated with God? This is well worth consideration. A man who professes to have a divine message-must live accordingly or else stand rebuked as a liar before those who know him.

Not less remarkable is the fact that even apostates testify to the truth of the claims of Joseph. Thus David Whitmer, although his position towards the Church in later years was not exactly a friendly one, yet on being asked if he believed that Joseph was a true prophet, he invariably answered: "Do I still believe that Joseph Smith was a divinely inspired prophet? I know he was; it is not a matter of belief," and this testimony the old man has given to the world on his very death-bed.

Considering all this, we must conclude that the life of the prophet and the doctrines which he taught were in such harmony with each other as to impress his surroundings and friends with the fact that he was a man of God. If so, his message must be divine, for no evil power could operate through a righteous person.

This kind of evidence, however, is more to be felt, as it were, than described. Its force on the mind will depend on the moral character of the investigator. Pure minds, practical in holiness, will feel its force stronger than other less pure minds. All will depend on those "relationships of spirits" of which even poets have dreamed. The Nathanael, the "Israelite, indeed, in whom is no guile," could feel in the mere presence of Christ, through the Spirit, that emanated from Him, that here was more than man, and he had to exclaim, "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel." So will men whose hearts are pure, in following Joseph the Prophet through his short but exceedingly eventful career, certainly feel in their hearts that here is a messenger of God and perhaps sing with the poet:

PECULIARITIES OF THE MESSAGE.

When Christianity was introduced into the world it was brought in contact with many different religious and philosophical systems. The Romans were proud of their military glory, the Greeks of their superior wisdom. Among the Jews a pharisaic spirit prevailed, and the whole nation was divided in factions. They mutually hated each other and all agreed in hating their Roman oppressors and the gentile world at large. A mere human teacher, it has been justly said, would under such circumstances have become either a partisan or have flattered each sect by exposing the faults of the rest, or he would have endeavored to gain the favor of the nation by condemning their conquerors. Instances of this kind of Bessermachen are not unheard of in our time among the "Christian" world, when all stress is often laid on one principle at the sacrifice of the rest. But Christ did not follow this course. He stood up as an independent Teacher, rebuking all error, condemning all the sects, and yet taught principles contrary to the inclinations of the human heart. Hence, Christianity has several peculiarities of its own. In opposition to an empty ritualism it teaches personal holiness as the condition of eternal happiness. All men are alike brought before the bar of God. Even those who have been apostles and worked miracles will fall condemned if they be workers of iniquity. It bids men return good for evil, not to "get even" with everybody; it instructs men to love their enemies, to be humble and forgiving, qualities which philosophers considered weaknesses instead of virtues; it places every race and every station as on a level before God, except for the free mercy of God, whose choice has fallen upon one individual or one section in preference to another. Such doctrines were acceptable to none, and yet they are again and again repeated and enforced.

In the teachings of Christianity, moreover, sin is always spoken of as transgression against God, a contrast to the idea prevalent among the Greek philosophers, who taught, according to Cicero, that "the Deity is never displeased, nor does He inflict injury on man" (De Off. iii, 28). God is traced everywhere—in nature, in history, in revelation; and as for men's acts, they are traced to their very source in the human heart, and there, if evil, condemned. Christianity does not content itself with condemning sin, when already committed, like every human law; but it condemns the thought, the feeling, if not pure, thus striking at the very root of sin.

Well may we, when we rightly understand these facts, with the theologians exclaim: "It must be felt that the morality of the Gospel is not of man. Bad men could not have taught such truths, and good men would not have deceived the people."

But when we apply this great truth to the subject under consideration we reach the same conclusion. The message delivered by Joseph the Prophet, like Christianity in its primitive purity, has peculiarities of its own, all of which prove it to be from God.

First of all, let us consider the importance which this message attaches to faith. While theologians of the world either give the pre-eminence to works, like the Catholics, or like Protestants, give to faith a secondary place in their system, here comes a young man and declares, "Faith is the first principle of revealed religion, and the foundation of all righteousness." He gives to faith its right place as the very beginning of the new life, the foundation of the structure. Where had he learnt this? There is not a theological school within the sphere of our knowledge which has discovered this great truth. Men had for centuries been exhorted to repent first and then try to believe, as if it were possible to produce repentance without faith. Or, men were instructed to do good, as if works could be meritorious without faith. Not only is faith placed in its right place, but the definition of it is given strictly in harmony with ancient revelations. Faith is declared to be the only principle from which obedience and success can flow. In relation to God faith is, indeed, a confession of our weakness and utter inability for everything that is good; and yet, as to success in all things pertaining to our exaltation and glorification, it is omnipotent. (See Doc. and Cov. Lectures on Faith). Now, from whence had the youthful Prophet this discovery taught in the Bible, but not understood by the world? Who had pointed out this great philosophical truth to him? Who but God.

Nor is this all. In the message delivered through Joseph the Prophet, faith has been established on the only sure foundation ever given: The Word of God—REVELATION. This was done at a time when almost everybody thought revelation a thing of the past. No theologian in the whole wide world had discovered the great secret that faith must be based on a communication from God, given not only to people who belong to antiquity, but to the individual who is required to believe. Let everybody honestly investigate the real cause of the weakness of faith as it exists among men. How is it that, notwithstanding all preaching, faith is almost extinct on earth? It is this, that people are required to believe only that which God said anciently. This is the real cause. We are so constructed that we cannot by any force of will take the same lively interest in what happened thousands of years ago as what happened to-day; nor can we realize in the same way what happens to others as that which immediately concerns ourselves. Hence, naturally, all the preaching about what God revealed formerly has only a weak impression comparatively, and it does not make the effect that it should. The faith it produces is something as powerless as faith possibly can be. In order to produce this, preachers are under the necessity of resorting to all sorts of sentimental anecdotes, death scenes, war scenes, dreams, etc., or even to drums and tambourines. Revivalists know the effects of these artificial methods and prefer them to the simple tale of Him who died on Golgotha—a proof of the poverty, spiritually, of the prevalent systems. Now, how is this changed by the simple announcement: "God has spoken!" This at once stirs the whole world and the whole hell and something definitive comes out of that. It produces either faith or condemnation. Where faith is the result it is a strong faith. What gave the former-day Saints the power to endure all for their religion? What gave the Prophet and his fellow martyrs power to endure all hardship and death at the hands of enemies? This assurance: God has spoken. God has revealed His will. Such faith this assurance will always produce. How had Joseph the Prophet come to discover this fundamental truth? No Catholic, no Lutheran, no Episcopalian, no Presbyterian, no Methodist, no Baptist was in the position of teaching Joseph this truth; none but God.

Let us further consider the great truth revealed in these last days concerning God. While all the world, as far as the influence of Christianity is felt, knows how to repeat the words of the prayer which our Lord taught His disciples: "Our Father, which art in heaven," yet who has understood this one word "Father" in its full meaning? We call upon every honest, believing soul in the whole world to inquire into his own mind and see whether this beautiful prayer before the days of Joseph the Prophet had any more significance than being a beautiful figure of speech? Or was there one single theologian who had understood that God really is what He teaches us to call Him, Father? If there be, we are not aware of it. But here comes a young man, educated in no school, formed according to no existent religious system, and opens up to us an infinite view of eternities past and eternities to come by declaring that God is in reality our Father, that we are His children, and that we are here for certain purposes, which accomplished will bring us back to an eternal home, in a circle of real brothers and sisters. Say, O ye inhabitants of the world, can this glorious truth emanate from anybody but God?

Another peculiarity which marks this message is the importance it attaches to obedience to God. "By the prayer of your faith ye shall receive My law," (Doc. and Cov., sec. xli, 3); "None shall be exempt from the justice and the laws of God" (Ibid, cvii, 84); "Verily, I say unto you, that in time ye shall have no king or ruler, for I will be your King and watch over you; wherefore hear My voice and follow Me, and ye shall be a free people, and ye shall have no laws but My laws when I come, for I am your law giver." (Ibid, xxxviii 21, 22). Had Joseph the Prophet received his instructions from men he would have appointed a pope, a bishop, a presbytery, a synod, or something similar as the highest authority of the Church, but he did not. For God alone obedience is demanded; a proof that he was a messenger of God.

This will be better appreciated when it is considered that, although obedience is required, yet the liberty of man is fully preserved. Obedience is required, but not from fear, not from servitude, but from free choice. In looking over the history of the world we find that it has always been the great trouble of mankind to find the proper middle way in this respect. Nations have had their liberty, but it has not been possible to regulate this so as to give no room for abuses. Liberty has been perverted into lawlessness; the people have been the victims of unprincipled agitators who, under the cover of patriotism, seduced and robbed the masses, until the people, tired of this "liberty," after many sufferings, rose and laid the power down into the hands of a few, or even of one, preferring the chance of having one or a few public robbers to many thousands. But as anciently Scylla avoided, Charybdis was near, so here. What was once done as a safeguard against spoliation and lawlessness became in course of time a curse. It developed into despotism. The people suffered for centuries perhaps, but finally the oppression becoming too great, the burdens too heavy, the people rose and crushed the tyrants under its weight. Freedom was again established, and the progress in the circle again commenced. For these two extremes, equally dangerous, despotism and licentiousness have always been the trouble with mankind. Now, here comes a young man, Joseph the Prophet, who had studied no politics, no history, and teaches us a system by which both these extremes, both these dangers are to be avoided, how to obey without becoming serfs, and at the same time to enjoy personal liberty, without placing us in danger of licentiousness. If God had not taught the prophet this "Doctrine of common consent," who had? Who was his teacher?

Another peculiarity, not less marked, is found in what might be called the rites observed in this last dispensation. Almost the entire world had lost the right form of baptism, for instance, and all had forgotten the true signification and use of that rite. A man who had only human wisdom for guidance would under such circumstances probably have either disregarded the act altogether as a mere outward form or would have attached very little importance to it. Both these tendencies are found abundantly among Christian professors. But here comes a young man and teaches us not only the right form of baptism (although this was the most unpopular one), but also its true signification and its use both for living and dead.

Looking at baptism, the doctrine of gathering, the temple services, all the rites revealed through Joseph the Prophet, as an acceptable worship, we must ask: "Is it possible that all this is from men? Is it likely that a deceiver would have taught doctrines so unpopular, so little calculated to gain public favor?" We think not. When a man wants to deceive he must follow popular roads, flatter the vanity of the masses, yield to their prejudices and establish himself on the very ground of their ignorance. Advanced truth, truth trampled under the feet of men, always comes from God.

People who know the religious observances here spoken of only from representations given by a hostile press, where everything is ridiculed, cannot, of course, appreciate the force of the proof they convey. But every one who is familiar with these to the Latter-day Saint's peculiar rites, and who understands that their sole object is to teach the people "Holiness to the Lord"—any one who shall consider that similar means were adopted under the grand Mosaic dispensation in order to impress the people then living with this same lesson, "Holiness to the Lord," and any one who perceives how wonderfully well these rites, in every detail, are calculated to impress this very idea, that without holiness no one can see the Lord, he will feel in the contemplation of all this that here surely is the wisdom of God revealed to man. No analysis, however, can do full justice to this subject. It must be felt and realized in the experience of man in order to be appreciated.

In conclusion, like Scripture itself, the message of Joseph the Prophet begins its work with a recognition of our fall, our total ruin; it then brings the soul into harmony with God and with itself; it enlightens and educates the conscience, quickens and purifies the feeling, subjects instinct to reason, reason to love, and all to God. It provides us with ample means for reaching happiness never dreamt of, worlds without end. Hence, the conclusion necessarily follows that the man who taught us this must himself have been a scholar of God.

EFFECTS OF THE DOCTRINES.

When investigating the claims of a religious system it becomes necessary also to consider the effects which such a system produces in the lives and characters of those who embrace it, as well as its general influence. If a tree is known by its fruits, so are also doctrines. Those that produce good fruits cannot be evil.

It is, therefore, customary to refer to the effect of the gospel in the first part of our era as an evidence of the truth of its claims. These effects are well-known and worthy of consideration. Paul points out that some of the Corinthians had been "fornicators, adulterers, thieves, drunkards," previous to their embracing the gospel; but now they were "washed, sanctified, and justified" (I Cor. vi, 11). Peter speaks of some of the converts as having once been "walking in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revelings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries" (I Peter iv, 3). But these sinners who lived in a dissolute age and under the worst of governments, became converted, became eminent in virtue above their fellowmen.

This eminence is acknowledged by all unprejudiced writers of the age. Clement of Rome (A. D. 100) says: "Who did ever live among you that did not admire your sober and moderate piety and declare the greatness of your hospitality? You are humble and not proud, content with the daily bread which God supplies, hearing diligently His word, and are enlarged in charity." Justin Martyr (A. D. 165), formerly a Platonic philosopher, says: "We who formerly delighted in adultery, now observe the strictest chastity; we who used the charms of magic have devoted ourselves to the true God, and we who valued money and gain above all things now cast what we have in common, and distribute to every man according to his necessities." It has been supposed that the United Order of which we read, and which was founded in Jerusalem at the commencement of the Church, very soon collapsed. But, judging from this expression of Justin, it appears that that order still existed more than one hundred years after Christ. Minucius Felix, to a heathen opponent, says: "You punish wickedness when it is committed. We think it sinful to indulge in a sinful thought. It is with your party that the prisons are crowded, but not a single Christian is there, except it be as a confessor or apostate."

The influence of the gospel was gradually felt among the heathen nations who heard it. In Greece, men like Lycurgus and Solon had encouraged impurities. At Rome they were openly practiced and approved; and nearly all ancient nations are said to have commended self-murder. Human sacrifices and the exposure of children were allowed. But wherever the gospel was preached and believed all such practices were condemned and finally destroyed. That this was not the work of civilization, but of the gospel, may be gathered from the fact that it was nations far above the humble Christians in refinement and education, who committed the greatest outrages. Suppression of sin never keeps pace with the progress of civilization, but with the triumph of the gospel.

Another effect of the gospel was the many charitable institutions that always followed in its track. The relief of distress and the care of the poor are peculiar to Christianity. The gospel, if rightly understood, would have already abolished the horrors of war, prevented slavery, put down feudal oppression, made all men brethren. For such are its doctrines, that when once understood and practiced, they will naturally exterminate all miseries of the human family.

These effects are truly wonderful, and may justly be appealed to as evidences of the truth of the gospel.

But are such effects less strong evidence of the divine origin of the message of Joseph the Prophet, when it can be proved that they invariably follow the acceptance of this message? We think not. Here are facts open to the inspection of everybody. We need not refer to a bygone antiquity to ascertain the effects of this message upon the people who have accepted it. The Latter-day Saints live to-day and their works may be scanned by all. Every honest investigator will find that the fruits produced to-day, as seen among the Latter-day Saints, are precisely the same as those which were seen among the early Christians, and to which we have above briefly referred.

We do not say that everyone who professes to be a Latter-day Saint is an evidence of the divinity of the gospel. Nor was every individual who professed Christianity an evidence of its truth. On the contrary, many, even in the apostolic age, showed by their deeds that they were nothing but professors; and it is clearly not the profession that is the main feature. A man may profess to be what he is not.

Nor do we contend that the Latter-day Saints, considered as a religious community, are the best people on the earth. This is not for us to decide; nor is that our present question. The Saints may be the best people, taken as a whole, or they may not; yet in their present stage of development they have reached a high standard of excellence that is most desirable. This, however, does not affect our present argument.

What we do contend, and what we urgently invite everybody to ascertain for themselves, is this: that the message delivered through Joseph the Prophet, when accepted and honestly carried out in practice, has a tendency to change men for the better and produce fruits of faith, hope and charity, thus proving its divine origin by its fruits; for no deceptive fraud could produce these fruits. This is what we contend. Facts speak for themselves.

We live in an age when social questions threaten to blast society to its very foundations. Where in the whole world have these questions found their only possible solution to the satisfaction of all parties concerned? Not among the various religious bodies of the world; not among the capitalists, nor among the anarchists, communists, socialists, or nihilists, but among the Saints. Over the thresholds of their peaceful homes these troublesome questions—ghosts at the appearance of which the world trembles—cannot enter. In the valleys of the mountains they are unknown, and must remain so as long as the Gospel is being carried out in practice.

Again, who has solved the question of the true relation between the sexes, at once assigning to marriage its divinity of origin and eternal importance, thereby checking the waves of sin which inundate the world, and securing happiness to all? We answer: The Latter-day Saints. One of the first fruits seen as the result of their doctrines is absolute purity.

Further, who fills the prisons as criminals? Not the Latter-day Saints, but outsiders, those who habitually speak of the degradation of the "Mormons;" those Christian associates give the stuff that contributes to the filling up of the prisons—a fact which of itself ought to be enough to convince the whole world of the divine origin of the message delivered through Joseph the Prophet. It is clear that doctrines which are strong enough to keep humanity from committing crimes—to which every human heart is more or less inclined—must be from God.

It may be asked, who fills the saloons and gambling hells? Who swears and lies and slanders? Who is proud and vain, lazy and filthy? No one who has accepted the Gospel in reality—no Latter-day Saint. The Saints are, as such, temperate, industrious, humble, clean, loving, forbearing, long-suffering, rejoicing, fearing God; in short, bearing the fruits of righteousness. Such virtues the Gospel enjoins and such fruits always accompany its real acceptance.

Could we speak of all the cases where men who were in every respect worldly, walking in sin, accepted the Gospel and became changed in every respect, this evidence would, indeed, amount to demonstration. Thousands are our witnesses to these facts—men who were fallen, on their way down to ruin and hell—families who have been happy by the restoration of their fallen ones to virtue, to society and to God.

Finally, has the world exhibited any nobler examples of self-sacrificing faith, of firmness and endurance under suffering and persecution than have many of those despised followers of the martyred Prophet?

True, persecution has been raging against the Saints; but, like the palm tree, which is said to grow all the higher the more weight there is placed thereon, they have stood firm; in persecution they have been patiently enduring, knowing that, after all, God is the Supreme Ruler, and with this knowledge they have faced all adversity calmly and risen through their faith and hope far above the plots of those who know not God.