After quoting from 2 Nephi 29 and Alma 29, the LDS leader and historian B. H. Roberts wrote:
“This is the Mormon theory of God’s revelation to the children of men. While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is established for the instruction of men, and is one of God’s instrumentalities for making known the truth, yet he is not limited to that institution for such purposes, neither in time nor place.
God raises up wise men [and women] and prophets here and there among all the children of men, of their own tongue and nationality, speaking to them through means that they can comprehend…
“Mormonism holds, then, that all the great teachers are servants of God; among all nations and in all ages. They are inspired men, appointed to instruct God’s children according to the conditions in the midst of which he finds them.
“Hence it is not obnoxious to Mormonism to regard Confucius, the great Chinese philosopher and moralist, as a servant of God, inspired… by him to teach those great moral maxims which have governed those millions of God’s children for lo! these many centuries.
“It is willing to regard Gautama, Buddha, as an inspired servant of God, teaching… the truth…
“So with the Arabian prophet [Muhammad], that wild spirit that turned the Arabians from worshiping idols to a conception of the Creator of heaven and earth that was more excellent than their previous conception of Deity.
“And so the sages of Greece and of Rome.
“So the reformers of early Protestant times.
“Wherever God finds a soul sufficiently enlightened and pure; one with whom his Spirit can communicate, lo! he makes of him a teacher of men.
“While the path of sensuality and darkness may be that which most men tread, a few, to paraphrase the words of a moral philosopher of high standing, have been led along the upward path; a few in all countries and generations have been wisdom seekers, or seekers of God.
They have been so because the Divine Word of Wisdom has looked upon them, choosing them for the knowledge and service of himself…
“…it is nowhere held that [the Church’s Prophet] is the only instrumentality through which God may communicate his mind and will to the world.”
—B. H. Roberts, Defense of the Faith and the Saints (1907), 512–13.
Also recently quoted in part on 13 October 2017 by the LDS Church Newsroom in its article “Treasuring All Truth.”
Wheat & Tares 
Russell M Nelson this October conference: “Never take council of those who don’t believe.”
“…it is nowhere held that [the Church’s Prophet] is the only instrumentality through which God may communicate his mind and will to the world.”
It’s a good think BH Roberts was willing to admit that when many Church members don’t actually believe it. Just do the math: LDS membership constitutes .002 of the world’s population. That’s 2/1000. And if we assume that 1/2 of the LDS population is inactive and the other half is on the covenant path (I’m being extremely generous), that means only 1 out of every 1000 people on this planet are truly in the boat. So it would be pretty outrageous to think that Russel M Nelson is the only one receiving the Lord’s will. If he is, he’s not very convincing (according to the math at least).
Every once in a while it is good to get this reminder. It obviously was the foundation for the 1st Presidency statement in 1978, which President Faust quoted in his talk in 2006, where he noted,
“We believe that the fulness of the gospel of Christ has been restored, but this is no reason for anyone to feel superior in any way toward others of God’s children. Rather, it requires a greater obligation to invoke the essence of the gospel of Christ in our lives—to love, serve, and bless others. Indeed, as the First Presidency stated in 1978, we believe that ‘the great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.’ Thus, we have respect for the sincere religious beliefs of others and appreciate others extending the same courtesy and respect for the tenets we hold dear.”
I remember on my mission (in Italy) I had a companion who would consistently criticize the Pope as a person who was void of God’s guidance. I finally asked him, “If the Pope, the leader of hundreds of millions of Catholics, got on his knees and humbly prayed for guidance for his people, you don’t think God would respond at all?” He was a little taken back by my defense of the Pope, but I could never see God ignoring prayers of any religious leader. It is good to see I was in good company with B.H. Roberts.
The Church in a younger incarnation, preached “best books” included the best literature. Today’s leadership seems to believe the best are the scriptures and GA conference talks, and perhaps a few Deseret Book selections. Why there is this retrenchment, i have no clue. For me, Mormonism includes all truths. If we have something to fear for science or other religions, what does that say about our beliefs and insecurities?
My daughter is serving a mission right now in a part of the world dominated by some of the non-Christian religions mentioned in BH Roberts’ quote from the OP. She has commented to me many times how so many of her fellow missionaries are so critical of the local religions while at the same time being almost completely ignorant of the beliefs of these same religions. These missionaries feel they are there to “save souls” from their terrible, “fallen” religions and are just incredulous at how few “elect” people they are able to find that don’t just immediately “recognize the truth” of the Church when presented to them by an annoying 19-year-old foreigner harassing them at the train station while attempting to speak their local language. I also served a mission in a non-Christian part of the world, so according to my daughter’s reports, nothing has changed with regards to missionary training and attitudes towards other religions since I was a missionary.
LDS missionaries receive absolutely *zero* education and training in the local religions of their assigned missions in the MTC and (unless they have a rogue mission president) in the mission itself. I knew from my personal experience as a missionary that this was likely going to be the case for my daughter, so I sent her off on her mission with a set of books that provide a good introduction to the local religions in her mission. She has to be careful when she reads them in her apartment so that other missionaries don’t see her reading “unapproved” books, but she says that she has found reading this material has made her a much better missionary. For one thing, when she sees locals performing their religious rites, she doesn’t think they’re weird or “satanic” because she understands why they are doing them. When she is teaching people, she now has a better understanding of why the people she is teaching say some of the things they say or believe some of the things they believe, and she can show them how the gospel aligns with some of the beliefs that they grew up with. It just seems so obvious that the Church should encourage missionaries to study the local religions of their missions. They’d be so much more effective and compassioniate with at least a basic understanding of local religions. Why doesn’t the Church encourage missionaries to educate themselves about the local religions of their missions? Is the Church afraid young missionaries will convert to the local religions? Does the Church feel like there is no point in understanding other religions when you already have the “truest” religion of all? There are some nice quotes, such as the BH Roberts quote in the OP, from past LDS leaders stating that other religions teach a lot of truth and do a lot of good for the world. Those are some very nice *words* indeed. However, the Church’s *actions* as reflected in how it trains its missionaries throughout the world shows that it doesn’t really believe what BH Roberts had to say about other religions.
On a related note, one thing big change that I’ve noticed between my daughter’s mission and my mission is that missionaries are now allotted much more personal study time. We used to be up at 6:30 a.m. and out the door at 9:00 a.m. (or was it 9:30 a.m.?). My daughter seems to have about twice as much study and preparation time. Missionaries in her mission are still up at 6:30 a.m., but they don’t leave the apartment until 1:00 p.m. or so (it depends on the day. Some days, it’s even later than 1:00 p.m. because they do a special once a week study or planning session). In any case, the Church is allowing missionaries to have much more study and preparation time then they did when I was a missionary. There is plenty of time available for missionaries to devote to learning the basics of the local religions of their missions, but they definitely are not doing that (in fact, they are explicitly discouraged from doing that with the rules banning missionaries from reading “unapproved” books, which would include any books about other religions).
Mormons simply do not have a corner on the market of truth, goodness, or inspiration.
When I was a missionary we would regularly visit a single man who was devoutly catholic. He had always wanted to become a priest, but due to a disability, the local leadership said it would be best for him not to officially enter the priesthood. He began inviting the missionaries over to his apartment, and we originally thought that he was interested in joining the LDS church. We were thrilled when he quickly absorbed the whole Book of Mormon. When we got to the “get baptized” discussion, he politely and bluntly said that he wasn’t interested in leaving the catholic church, but that he had been curious about what new ideas and truths we might be able to share with each other about God.
I learned so much from that man, both theologically and about living a Christlike life…probably more than from any Mormon source I’ve encountered.
Since he was disabled he was unable to work and since this was Europe, his income came from the government. He lived in a comfortable but small apartment, but would spend all of his time and most of his money helping others. There were several elderly widows in his building, and every morning he would check in on each of them and spent time to visit. He would then go out into the town and help however he could. I specifically remember him going out to search for a homeless teenager he’d met on the street – he would walk around the town until he found the young man, bring him food, and sit with him so he wouldn’t be lonely and would be less likely to get into trouble.
If we get to the gates of heaven and that man is not in line ahead of me because he refused “the covenant path” in this life, I’ll probably leave the line to go wherever that man is headed. I’ve never met another person who tried to live their life so truly in line with Jesus.
When Covid essentially shutdown the missions, many missionaries ended up with nothing to do but attempt to proselyte via social media. I sent my son a stack of books and encouraged him to read them. The stack included titles from N.T. Wright and others. The reading, plus a greater emphasis on service work allowed my son to finish his mission.
Roger, we tend to forget that Joseph Smith taught “out of the best books” as part of a study group and used a Bible Commentary as a part of that study that they worked into the rough draft of what is referred to as the Joseph Smith Translation (and which was acknowledged as incomplete).
These days it gets treated as a statement made in a vacuum.
One of my favorites that fits nicely with BH Roberts quote above.
“Men see the grandeur of the idea of unity in the means, God in the end. That is why the idea of grandeur leads us into a thousand forms of pettiness. To force all men to march in step toward a single goal—that is a human idea. To introduce endless variety into actions but to combine those actions in such a way that all lead via a thousand diverse paths to the accomplishment of a grand design—that is a divine idea.
The human idea of unity is almost always sterile; God’s idea is immensely fertile. Men believe that they attest to their grandeur when they simplify the means; but it is God’s purpose that is simple, while his means vary endlessly.”
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, trans. by Arthur Goldhammer, (New York, New York: The Library of America, 2004), p. 868
Pirate Priest
What an inspiring story, and illustration of the power of one. Reverend Ben Cremer suggests that Christianity should be a message of “Attraction”, instead of a message of “Proclamation”. That man lives his life in a way that, without saying any words, draws people in. It’s the same language we hear Jesus use of “Drawing men unto him”. No duress, coercion, social pressure, or intimidation, just the light of love that draws people close.
Additionally, I want to know what cold-hearted human gave a “thumbs down” on that story?
Amen Brother! Amen! I have a such a strong testimony of what B.H. Roberts has shared. I believe that the Kingdom of God is MUCH bigger than the LDS church, that the LDS church is a small part of the kingdom of God, (I estimate about 0.2% of it). A couple of conferences ago President Nelson expressed that we should embrace all truth, and that is a statement of his that I do believe and follow.
Wow. Thanks for sharing that quote, toddsmithson. That is a keeper.
B.H. Roberts, the man who displayed courage and integrity (and prophetic foresight?) for calling attention to fundamental problems with the Book of Mormon text, only to be shut down and shipped off to a mission for five years to diminish his influence, is one of my favorite figures in church history. His motives were pure: He advocated dealing with the issues then and there in order to make the BoM more cogent under textual analysis. The secret meetings of 1922 are a fascinating chapter in early twentieth-century Mormon history.
Roberts is a great example of self-learning and broadmindedness, but his honest investigation of the BofM was threatening enough to more or less earn him a soft lifetime censure that seems to have continued on after his death. Instead of a leader who should be celebrated in our history, he continues to be maligned to this day. Earlier this year, Elder Christofferson used him as an example of a fallen man who had to seek redemption for being critical of church leaders. Knowing a little about the history of B.H. Roberts, I felt like Christofferson’s use of B.H. was more of a warning to members who think they are smarty pants not to be like Roberts was. The church has pushed revisionist histories of B.H. Roberts several times.
I bring this up because I value the words of wisdom reflected in this OP, and like some of the commenters am discouraged by the church’s commitment not to seeking out, embrace or be informed by broader truths in the world. As I listened to GC earlier this month, the church seems to be committed to an increasingly narrow interpretation of truth and recognizes only those truths which are purely self-serving to the institution.
When I was at BYU in the 1980s, I sought out the scholars (as opposed to seminary teachers) in the department of religion from whom to take courses, and tried to fill my electives with courses I felt were more broadening and rigorous. I took World Religions from Roger Keller, a convert who held a PhD from Duke University in ancient scripture. His class was popular and difficult to add if you didn’t register for it early on. We used Spencer Palmer’s text book. Palmer was a legend and advocated building bridges by understanding truths found in the world’s religions–his life would align with B.H. Roberts’ writings in that regard (e.g., “It is willing to regard Gautama, Buddha, as an inspired servant of God, teaching… the truth…”). Palmer advocated that God’s truth could be found across numerous belief systems, despite many of his religion department colleagues expressing concern over Palmer’s promotion of “heathen religions”. World Religions remains one of my favorite classes to this day–not only because of its fascinating content, but because of the course’s broader underpinnings.
The other department of religion course I loved as much was History of Christianity taught by a man who had been a high ranking official in the Presbyterian church in Korea before his conversion to Mormonism, Dong Sull Choi. He was magnificent despite some spoken English language barriers. Both Keller and Choi offered broad perspectives that expanded my worldview and thinking. Choi was at times a crack up as he would make low-key and sarcastic “observations” about life at BYU and in Provo, Utah. As much as teach us the facts of Christianity, he challenged how we viewed Christianity and our place in it.
I checked BYU’s course offerings, and World Religions is still offered. The History of Christianity appears to be offered, but only within the context of the Restoration. I have no idea how these classes are taught today, or what the texts and course materials look like. If these classes are a reflection of the direction BYU is moving in under the dismal leadership of Clark Gilbert, I’m left feeling pessimistic.
How refreshing, charitable, enlightening, and GODLY such a view of both GOD and MANKIND is. But it does seem to challenge the TEMPLE RECOMMEND attitude of believing/accepting that the prophet of the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS is the sole spokesperson upon the earth for DEITY? I would be interested in Pres Russell M Nelson’s comment on the matter, or are we witnessing here a change in attitude towards other religious FAITHS in terms of beliefs and understandings?
One of the lovely things about someone like BH Roberts, is that his quote can work both ways. Now that I no longer associate with the LDS church, having previously been exposed to this idea thru BH Roberts, it makes it easier to still hold that there are nuggets of goodnesses and wisdom mixed in with so much of the nonsense that is LDS philosophy. So even though I now think 90% of what Joseph Smith taught was without merit, having previously accepted BH Roberts idea, I find that I can still value some of JS’s ideas and honor when he tried to built a beloved community, while still holding him accountable for his selfishness around things like polygamy.
Confucius was a jerk and Gautama was a pessimist. Lao-Tzu’s where it’s at.
Joseph Smith liked some of the better ideas going around the revival circuit at the time, but modern Mormonism as it’s practiced and imposed on its members is basically theistic Confucianism. All about staying in your place and paying respect to your betters, who get to name you and define your essential nature.
Sorry, I’m being kind of flippant and reductive here. I’m just kind of allergic to authoritarian religion and philosophy.
tamanari,
Lest we forget, Joseph Smith also taught that every individual can receive the mysteries of the Kingdom as fast as they’re able.