😏 Boasting¶
Estimated time to read: 10 minutes
My object is to let you know that I am right here on the spot where I intend to stay. I, like Paul, have been in perils, and oftener than anyone in this generation. As Paul boasted, I have suffered more than Paul did. I should be like a fish out of water, if I were out of persecutions. Perhaps my brethren think it requires all this to keep me humble. The Lord has constituted me so curiously that I glory in persecution. I am not nearly so humble as if I were not persecuted. ...
I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that ever has been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam— a large majority of the whole have stood by me:— neither Paul, John, Peter nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as me— the followers of Jesus ran away from him, the Latter Day Saints never ran away from me yet. You know my daily walk and conversation. I am in the bosom of a virtuous and good people. How I do love to hear the wolves howl: when they can get rid of me, the devil will also go.
— Discourse, 26 May 1844, as Compiled by Leo Hawkins, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed November 19, 2024, p. 1-2 Additional sources: [1], [2]
Reading into the surrounding text in those sources, you'll find the line "President Joseph Smith read the 11th Chap. II Corinthians." Here's a link to 2 Cor 11, if you're interested to see it for yourself.
What stands out to me in the above quote is highlighted for obvious reasons; Joseph seems to be saying "Not even Jesus could keep a church together! And here I am, still holding the LDS church together!" I suppose in all fairness that Smith is talking in the context of keeping a church together, not necessarily performing saving ordinances for all of mankind. Something else to observe is that tone doesn't communicate well via text. I have a hard time imagining a tone that makes "I'm better at managing a church than Jesus" sound less pompous, but maybe you're more imaginative than I am.
I will observe the timeline of this speech being two months before Joseph is killed in Carthage Jail. Maybe getting killed had something to do with Jesus, Paul & Adam not holding a church together? Moreover, the LDS church is founded in 1830, fourteen years before this speech. I haven't looked into specific date ranges for Jesus, Paul & Adam, but... Did their efforts last more than 14 years?
Institute Student Manual¶
As Paul defended his position as an Apostle, he acknowledged that it may have seemed to some like he was boasting of his authority. The word boast in 2 Corinthians 10:8 means “to glory or exult”. Paul’s “boasting” when speaking of his missionary service should not be understood as being prideful; instead it may be seen as similar to Ammon’s expression in the Book of Mormon: “I know that I am nothing; as to my strength I am weak; therefore I will not boast of myself, but I will boast of my God, for in his strength I can do all things. … Who can glory too much in the Lord? Yea, who can say too much of his great power, and of his mercy, and of his long-suffering towards the children of men?” (Alma 26:12, 16).
— New Testament Student Manual, Institute, Chapter 42: 2 Corinthians 6–13
Is this taking the verse out of context? If this is the pretense for Joseph's humble boasting, how should I interpret some paragraphs that sure sound like narcissism, when Institute delineates that it is not?
That's not narcissism!¶
Whenever Joseph says something that could be interpreted as a bad characteristic, you can bet that present-day apologists will find a way to rationalize how "that bad thing was good, actually."
FAIR¶
Joseph's quote, if accurate, is taken out of context
Assuming that the quote is accurate in History of the Church, it is evident that Joseph's quote is taken out of context. What was Joseph's intent, and why did he use this approach? As it turns out, he was drawing from the Bible and applying its lessons to his own situation. In the original context, Joseph was facing intense persecution by many people, including some he had previously considered to be his friends.
By the way, FAIR does make the argument that History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints: History of Joseph Smith, the Prophet, by himself is not actually written by Joseph Smith the Prophet. I am not kidding. The entire volume is suspect now!
I'll get off my soapbox and focus on one topic at a time. FAIR continues on Joseph's "boasting", after quoting 2 Cor 11:
Paul then launches into a literary tirade where he claims many things to make himself look the fool, to contrast himself with those who the Corinthians were listening to for their words of salvation, instead of to him. His words were meant to compare and contrast what the Saints at Corinth were doing against what he was offering.
Do the critics dismiss the words of Paul and deny his calling as an Apostle because he used such a literary approach that included boasting? No, they do not. Yet, they dismiss Joseph Smith when it is clear by his own statements, in context, that he engaged in the exact same literary approach. ...
. . .
Perhaps the critics are unaware of Paul's advice? Or perhaps they apply a double standard where Paul is allowed such literary and rhetorical license, but Joseph is not?
Such double standards are, sadly, the stock-in-trade of sectarian anti-Mormonism.
In case you hadn't gone on the side-quest of reading 2 Cor 11, there's the link for a third time. Go skim through it. Note the chapter heading summarizing the comments as "Paul glories in his sufferings for Christ." What I read from this chapter is Paul describing his persecution, and observing his persistence through it. "Folks have physically abused me for testifying of Christ, but my faith & belief is so profound that I won't back down!"
So... Maybe this is one of those times when the Bible is conveniently not translated correctly. The KJV choice of words feels awkward to us today when reading 2 Corinthians. But don't worry about that, this choice of words means it's totally okay for Joseph Smith to say "I'm better than Jesus Christ at holding a church together."
Deseret News¶
Quotes from Joseph Smith wasn't arrogant or boastful By Daniel Peterson, Sept 4, 2014
First¶
First, the context: Joseph was applying a passage from the apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 11-12) to his own perilous situation. The idea of “boasting” wasn't Joseph’s; it was Paul’s. The critics typically forget that.
Those darn critics, always forgetting who quotes are attributed to. What antics will they get up to next?
I don't think these semantics need to be this complicated. KJV Bible is only as good of a translation as could be produced in 1611. Today, we need to do some additional "translation" from 1611 English to something that we can make sense of in the 21st century. Maybe the only proper interpretation of 2 Corinthians is the one that makes Joseph Smith a humble prophet. Maybe I'm still not clear on what "boasting" means. I have read chapters 10 through 12, as that span seems to be what inspired Joseph's choice of words. How much further do I need to read before I can land on a conclusion for what Joseph Smith meant?
Second¶
Second, Joseph seems actually to be praising his followers’ faithfulness, not himself.
"I am the only man that ever has been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam." "[N]o man ever did such a work as me— the followers of Jesus ran away from him, the Latter Day Saints never ran away from me yet."
— Words from a man who "seems actually to be praising his followers' faithfulness," taken out of context
Third¶
Third, Joseph didn’t write the quotation; it was reconstructed after his death. Thus, it almost certainly doesn’t represent his precise words. Even “History of the Church” (often called the “Documentary History”) says that it rests upon a "synopsis" by Thomas Bullock.
Joseph delivered the sermon on May 26, 1844. A month later, he was dead. So did he supervise or approve this entry? No. Entries in the “History of the Church” for at least his last five years were actually made by others, after his assassination. Like other chroniclers of the period, they reconstructed his speeches from the notes and memories of those who’d heard them. (There were no recordings.) His well-intentioned scribes admired and missed him enormously, and they worked as accurately as they could, but it’s unreasonable to expect verbal exactness from their method.
"Look, anything he is quoted to have said within 30 days of dying just doesn't count. Also, since he had scribes, none of those quotes can be trusted."
Of all the Special Pleadings to invoke, this one is most absurd to me. I feel pretty confident that practically none of the Teachings of Presidents manuals were first hand-written by each titular president. Does that mean we should throw out everything recorded in those books? Does this mean that anything we can't trace back to Joseph's own handwriting is illegitimate?
Can we point to specific things that Jesus Christ wrote Himself? No? We only have second-hand accounts written decades after Christ's resurrection and ascent to the heavens, or vague recollections of His visit to Zerahemla? Why do we give those accounts any credence? They're clearly "reconstructed speeches from the notes and memories of those who'd heard them." There were also no recordings in 34 AD.
Fourth¶
Fourth, Joseph’s authenticated personal statements plainly reveal him to have been a humble and sincere man, struggling to do the will of God as he understood it — and this particular statement should be placed in the context of his overall life and behavior.
"Things that make Joseph look good are legitimate. Anything that suggests he's anything short of being Jesus' special boy is wrong."
There's more to read in the article itself. Dig in for your own edification.