Some three
years ago (2017), retired BYU professor Noel Reynolds gave
an interview regarding his research about the authorship of the Lectures on
Faith. While not all of his findings were convincing to me, I think the gist of
his main thesis, that the Prophet Joseph Smith was not the main author of the
lectures, is probably mostly accurate. His notions that they reflect the
teachings of Sidney Rigdon who reflected the teachings of Alexander Campbell
(an 1830s Protestant reformist), is less convincing to me (nor do I think we
should assume Campbell’s teachings were all false). But much of Reynolds’
research seems to have some validity and therefore value, and such
contributions, even if partially flawed, are generally welcome.
However, in
one regard, he said some things in the interview that were not accurate and
showed that he had not researched at least one portion of his presentation very
well. This is not a big deal and I don’t overly fault him for missing the mark,
but I have decided to take occasion to do some correcting. (Part of the reason
I do so is because in the last year I have heard a couple of prominent names
voice criticisms of Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s statements on certain matters
where, again, they showed a lack of knowledge.) It is in regards to Elder
McConkie’s views that Professor Reynolds showed some ignorance. This becomes
more clear almost every time President Russell M. Nelson speaks to the Church
about the ongoing status and future of the Restoration.
The issue
at hand relates to what should be defined or categorized as part of the restoration
of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; more specifically, written
texts. Professor Reynolds said: “He [Elder McConkie] seemed to have an
enthusiasm that was fed by having more and more things [inspired writings] be
part of the Restoration. I have to admit that I come from a different
mentality, which is being skeptical and watching out for people who are trying
to import things into the Restoration that really aren’t part of it.”
