[net.religion] Civil War Prophecy

jdj55611@ihuxk.UUCP (09/16/83)

During the course of this debate on `Mormonism,' Jon White indicated that
he felt certain areas ha been slighted. One such topic was that of the
prophecy on wars given to Joseph Smith in 1832. The text of this revelation
is found in the Doctrine and Covenants.  Section 87 verses 1 through 6 reads as follows:

"Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to
pass, beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually
terminate in the death and misery of many souls;

And the time will come that war will be poured out upon all nations,
beginning at this place.

For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern
States, and the Southern States will 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 against other nations; and then war
shall be poured out upon all nations.

And it shall come to pass, after many days, slaves shall rise up against
their masters, who shall be marshalled and disciplined for war.

And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land
will marshall themselves, and shall become exceeding angry, and shall vex
the Gentiles with a sore vexation.

And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed the inhabitants of the earth
shall mourn; and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder
of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightnings also, shall the inhabitants
of the earth be made to feel the wrath, and indignation, and chastening
hand of an Almighty God..."


I now quote from White's article:

>Larry Jonas has shown that Smith could have easily gotten the idea for this 
>revelation from views of his time:
 
   >"...At the time Smith made his prophecy, the Nation expected a war between
   >North and South to begin at the rebellion of South Carolina.  This can be
   >confirmed from a U.S. history book.  Better yet, let me confirm it from a
   >Latter-day Saints Church publication, "Evening and Morning Star",...the
   >issue which came out for January 1833.  The news of South Carolina's
   >rebellion was known...before December 25, 1832 but it was not available
   >in time for the December issue...The example [news article] and the
   >prophesy are strangely similar...Both consider the pending war a sign of
   >the end -- which it was not.  In fact, THE WAR EXPECTED IN 1832 DID NOT
   >COME TO PASS.... [emphasis mine -JW]
   >(Mormon Claims Examined, by Larry S. Jonas, p. 52)

>Smith said that war "will shortly come to pass," and it did not.  The Civil
>War didn't occur until 30 years later.  Smith clearly stated the Southern
>States "will call on all other nations...and then war shall be poured out upon
>all nations..."  There is simply no way that the Mormons can weasel out of the
>fact that Smith predicted world-wide conflict shortly after 1832.  He did not
>predict the Civil War as it happened.
       
First of all, it is importent to note that, as indicated in the beginning
verse, this revelation concerns `the WARS [plural] that will shortly
come to pass.' This revelation as stated is not restricted to the Civil War
but encompasses the many conflicts mankind was destined to endure in the
next period of time. And what was this period of time that the Lord said
would `shortly come to pass?' No man can establish a timetable for God.
Paul, in his second epistle to the Thessalonians, chastened  the saints for
their concern about the eminent return of Christ. What is long or short in
the eternal prespective?

I agree that Joseph Smith was prompted to make the revelation by viewing
the events of his time. Throughout this period revelations were given in 
response to concerns or questions. I do take issue, however with the
statement that `the Nation expected was between the North and the South to
begin at the rebellion of S. C.' Let's look at the events which occurred in
the year of 1832. In response to pleas from the representatives from the
northern industrial areas, Congress instituted a tariff on goods entering
the country; an act which was intended to cut down the flow of imported
goods in competition with the northern states. South Carolina reacted by
issuing an `Ordinance of Nullification' which in essence stated that they
declared the tariff null and void and would prevent any attempts to enforce
the law within the boundries of the state. S. C. also threatened to
separate from the nation and form its own government if pressured. A
compromise tariff was worked out and tensions eased.

In hindsight, it is easy to say that war was expected. There are several
points I want to make:

1. There was no recognized coalition of the southern states as there was at
the beginning of the Civil War. In the document issued by S. C., there is
an indication that Georgia shared their views but none of the 
southern states officially joined with S. C. in its claims.

2. The issue was centered on the right of a state to reject federal fiat.
In Section 131 Joseph Smith stated `that the commencement of the
difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the
Son of Man will be in South Carolina. It may probably arise through the
slave question.'

3.The fact that a news article and Smith's revelation would appear in the
same issue is doublesided. I see it equally likely that the revelation on
wars would prompt the editors of a church-run newspaper to cite current
events in support of the prophecy.

Let's deal with a similar circumstance. Suppose I were to say today that
the third World War would shortly come to pass and that the event
would be born out of the fighting in Lebanon. I would suppose that I am
fairly safe in this pronouncement, especially considering prophecies
are already existing which point to conflict in the Middle East; a luxury
that Joseph Smith did not have. Why doesn't somebody look me up in twenty
years and see if my guess was correct. Think about the many complex
variables involved in this guess.  

Concerning the remnants, it is evident that `remnant' implies those who
remain [Matt 22:6] or who are perserved for the Lord to fulfill His
purposes [Ezek 14:22,23 Rom 9:29].  The Doctrine and Covenants,
in Section 45, talks of a `remnant' "scattered among all nations... they
shall be gathered again; but they shall remain until the times of the
Gentles be fulfilled. And in that day shall be heard of wars and rumors of
wars, and the whole earth shall be in commotion..." This `remnant' is
definately not the Indians since these were not scattered among all
nations. It is importent to note that the scenarios of Sections 45 and 87
are the same; both describing events that are to come. I suggest that the
`remnants' as described in Section 45 are those mentioned in Section 87.

There is much more that could be said about this issue, I hope Jon doesn't
feel slighted. I have run out of time and have the feeling that the rest
of the readers are beginning to suffer also. I suggest all parties
concerned take a six month hiatus and examine the issues on both sides.

			J. D. Jensen
			ihuxk!jdj55611
			BTL Naperville IL