This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.

Fake Quote

“The inhabitants of the moon are more of a uniform size. The inhabitants of the moon are more of a uniform size than the inhabitants of the earth, being about 6 feet in height. They dress very much like the Quaker style and are quite general in style or the one fashion of dress. They live to be very old; coming generally, near a thousand years. This is the description of them as given by Joseph the Seer, and he could ‘See’ whatever he asked the Father in the name of Jesus to see.”

(Joseph Smith, per a source, per The History of Oliver B. Huntington, copy at BYU Harold B. Lee Library)

No Original Source – Both the University of Utah and BYU source for this quote appear to be typewritten copies of the original source. Where is the original hand-written manuscript by Oliver Hunington? Who copied it into these university library sources? When was it copied? How do we know that they copied it correctly? We don’t know, and I can’t find any answers.

Anonymous Quote Source – It also is evident that this transcript allegedly from Oliver B. Huntington is not speaking from a personal experience. He is relaying something that someone else told him. Who told him this? The text does not say. According to a radio host named who allegedly has taken a skeptic’s view of Joseph SmithVan Hale, the source was an early church figure from South America named Philo Dibble. Van Hale claims Huntington wrote it down from Philo in his “personal journal.” Van Hale claims “Huntington acquired Joseph Smith’s moonmen statement from Dibble,” and cites “Utah State Historical Society, typescript, p. 161, 168” as his source. What is that? Is that the source for the journal or is it someone else claiming this? And I don’t even know what this source is. There is an organization called the Utah Historical Society, and they publish various things. But I am not aware of any publication or person with the name “Utah State Historical Society,” so I don’t know where to look to find and verify this source. Why didn’t Van Hale actually quote this source or provide any sort of detail of what it actually said? Instead he just interprets it for us in his own summary. Nope, sorry. That doesn’t work as a reliable or academic method for history.

Philo Dibble’s own autobiography makes no mention of this quote or anything having to do with it. Such an explosive experience with Joseph Smith you would think would get some kind of mention if it were real.

This is why it is important to check up on sources and always use the “smell test.” When I come across something that sounds a little fishy, I track down all the sources for their evidence, and 90% of the time I find that they are unsubstantiated or false. Just because something is published on academia.edu and just because it is accepted by some faithful apologists does not make it true.

Fourth-hand Source (Or More) – I’ve seen several apologists mention that this is unreliable as a “third-hand source.” Well, actually it is a fourth-hand source or more. We have a type-written copy, from a hand-written copy, based on something someone said, based on something Joseph Smith said. Even if Hunington did hear it from Philo Dibble, don’t even know who Dibble heard it from. It could be he heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from someone else. This is entirely just a fantastic rumor.

Mentioned Long After Supposedly Occurred – Another frequent red flag when I’m looking through fishy quotes like this is that they are given many years after the statement was supposedly said, and soon before the second-hand source died. Philo Dibble was almost 80 years old when Huntington supposedly recorded this in 1881. We don’t know what his state of mind was. We don’t know how his opinion of the church or Joseph Smith may have changed. We don’t know his character or his access to Joseph Smith to even hear this in the first place. The same goes for Oliver Hungington. And most importantly, were they still alive and able to refute this if this quote was false?

No Other Sources – The earliest Oliver Huntington could have recorded this statement was 1881, almost four decades after Joseph Smith’s death. Why is there zero records from anyone else if Joseph Smith really said this? Why didn’t Philo say something during that four or more decades? Such a shocking statement would surely be mentioned by someone.

Second Quote

“Astronomers and philosophers have, from time almost immemorial until very recently, asserted that the moon was uninhabited, that it had no atmosphere, etc. But recent discoveries, through the means of powerful telescopes, have given scientists a doubt or two upon the old theory. Nearly all the great discoveries of men in the last half century have, in one way or another, either directly or indirectly, contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a Prophet. As far back as 1837, I know that he said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we do — that they live generally to near the age of a 1000 years. He described the men as averaging near six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style. In my patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph the Prophet, in Kirtland, 1837, I was told that I should preach the gospel before I was 21 years of age; that I should preach the gospel to the inhabitants upon the islands of the sea, and — to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you can now behold with your eyes.”

(Oliver B. Hunington, Young Woman’s Journal 3:263-264)

Oliver B. Hunington also apparently made claims in this church-run journal, with similar details to that first quote which I deem fake. If the first quote was fake, this may have been the basis for it.

Third-hand Source (Or More) – Again, this is based on something someone said, based on something Joseph Smith said. Even if Hunington did hear it from Philo Dibble, don’t even know who Dibble heard it from. It could be he heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy who heard it from someone else.

Anonymous Quote Source – Again, the text does not tell us who Hunington heard this from.

Mentioned Long After Supposedly Occurred – This was written in 1892, almost six decades after it supposedly happened. Why didn’t anyone say anything about it? Why didn’t Hunington or whoever he heard about this from say anything about it that entire time?

No Other Sources – This appears to be based on the same source Hunington used for the first alleged quote in this article. We don’t know where he heard it from or if that source heard it directly from Joseph Smith, or if that source could be trusted.

Misinterpreted Patriarchal Blessing – As for Oliver Hunington’s actual patriarchal blessing, here is what it actually said: “I lay my hands on thee & bless thee with a father’s blessing… thou shalt be called to preach to this generation… before thou art twenty one thou wilt be called to preach the fullness of the gospel, thou shalt have power with God even to translate thyself to Heaven, & preach to the inhabitants of the moon or planets, if it shall be expedient…” (Patriarchal Blessing Book, 9:294-95, LDS Archives)

That’s a lot different than what Hunington portrayed in his journal piece. The patriarchal blessing is not some kind of mystical oracle giving Hunington secret knowledge of alien life; that’s not what patriarchal blessings are for. It was saying God’s support of missionary work is so strong and dependable that if there life on other planets such as the moon he would be given power to go there and access them if that’s what it would take–that’s how strong God’s support for missionaries is. It was like saying, “You will have power to preach anywhere, even if that means being translated to go to Pluto.” It clearly says his missionary work was to be done in his early twenties, and he wrote this article for the Women’s Journal long after that, and obviously he didn’t go on a trip to the moon–so obviously there were no inhabitants of the moon expedient for him to preach to.

The only material I can find on Oliver Hunington’s patriarchal blessing is this quick assemblage of snippets of quotes. What does the rest of the blessing say? We don’t know, and this missing context could shed further insight. It is unfortunate that scholars have given us so little to work with.

Perhaps when Hunington hit 70 years old his mind started to go, and that’s why he wrote this article in the Young Women’s Journal taking his patriarchal blessing the wrong way. Perhaps it was meant as a thinking exercise to keep people open-minded to unexpected truths and he didn’t mean it to be a definitive historical statement. Maybe he heard some crackpot talking about Joseph Smith and aliens and it reminded of his patriarchal blessing. In any case, these quotations of the prophet Joseph Smith are very unreliable and his portrayal of the patriarchal blessing misguided.

Early Church Teachings Confirmed By Modern Science

In 1882, life on the moon seemed ridiculous because astronomers had pretty much demonstrated that the moon was desolate of life–and the other planets likely were as well. They didn’t know about planets outside our solar system yet. As far as anyone knew, the eight planets were all there was. The idea of other solar systems seemed extreme. People were also unaware of other galaxies and had no idea the universe was anywhere as large as we know it is today.

So this ‘Millennial Star’ article often pointed to by Antimormons seemed fantastical, yet it fits what we know about the universe today: “To the question, is the moon inhabited? astronomers have returned a definite negative answer. It has been claimed that the moon is a dead world, without atmosphere, without vegetation, without moisture, and consequently without inhabitants.Scientists tell the story of the moon’s decadence as positively as if they had seen it dry up and die. They differ as to the time it took to breathe its last and the date of its final doom, but of the fact, they are as positive as a heretic-burning theologian was of his dogmas at the time of the Inquisition… If there is a lunar atmosphere there may be lunar vegetation, lunar animals and many more than on ‘man in the moon.’ Perhaps there are canals there as well as in Mars, and other works of an industrial and commercial character, likely to be constructed if the satellite contains a branch of the family of man domiciled on Mother Earth… One thing is very sure, that notwithstanding the supposed certainties of so-called ‘science,’ the established doctrines of one age are often entirely upset by the discoveries and deductions of another, and that which is looked upon as proven to-day may be shown to be erroneous to-morrow. And the shining worlds that revolve in their mighty spaces, each performing its on part in preserving the equilibrium of the system to which it belongs, are just as likely to be the homes of human beings, part of the family of the Universal Father, as to be mere empty masses turning upon their exes and traveling around the sun without intelligent use or purpose. On this subject the Latter-day Saints have the advantage of a little definite information. It comes from the source of all true intelligence. It has been communicated by Him who made the worlds; who knows their times and seasons… ‘That by him and through him and of him the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God.’ In the Pearl of Great Price will be found an account of the word of the Lord to Moses and also to Enoch and to Abraham, revealing many things concerning the worlds and their creation… This little globe is but one small child in the great family of the creations, and its millions of inhabitants but a simple few among the countless myriads of the kingdoms and glories, which are multiplied throughout the dominions of the Almighty to such a vast extent that figures fail to touch the beginning of their numbers, and the most vivid imaginations cannot conjure up the extent and variety of their existence throughout the boundless domains of illimitable space. The worlds are inhabited—millions of them. They form the abode of the offspring of Deity. Birthplaces, probation planets; prisonhouses; spirit spheres; paradises; gehennas; homes for the resurrected; glorified suns for perfected and celestialized intelligences; all moving in their respective orbits, governed by fixed laws adapted to their condition and that of their inhabitants. And the earth is but a tiny speck of dust in the whirling cloud of worlds wherein reigns the Almighty One, controlling all and shaping the destinies of all to accomplish His own grand designs for the education and exaltation of His obedient children, in which is the perpetuation of His eternal glory.” (Anonymous Deseret News journalist, Latter Day Saints’ Millennial Star, vol 44 July 10, 1882)

Antimormons take snippets of quotes out of this too, and associate the part declaring “the worlds are inhabited” with the first part about the “moon.” But luckily the entire thing is accessible, and we see what this anonymous Deseret News journalist was really saying. They agree that science has found the moon to be desolate, and other stars around us as well, but there is always the possibility that science got it wrong, and scriptures indicate that other stars have planets that do have life.

Interestingly, this article appeared just months after Oliver Hunington supposedly heard the moonmen rumor that was the basis for his article, suggesting that there was brief interest in alien life from 1881-1882. But I do not find anyone else talking about this. Just these two sources.

Since the 19th century, scientists have become more sure that the other planets in our solar system do not have conditions suitable to sustain life. There may be some moons of Jupiter or whatever with water that could contain life and evidence that conditions suitable for life once existed on Mars, but scientists have not found any conclusive evidence for life. We now know that the chances of conditions being right for life is so small, and the probability of a ‘spark’ occurring that would start life is so unlikely, there is little chance of life existing in our solar system or anywhere near us in our galaxy. But today, scientists have also found that our universe is so immense, statistically there must be life somewhere out there, even if the chances for any given solar system are so small. It is unlikely that you will roll a 20 on a 20-sided dice if you roll it once or twice, but if you roll it 10,000 times the chances are overwhelmingly good. Likewise, with so many starts and planets out there, it is likely that some have circumstances suitable for maintaining life. So no, this Millennial Star article is not science fiction. It fits scientific understanding today, though scientists had no idea at the time it was written.

But imagine you are a 19th century cowboy in Utah with little education, you read this Millenial Star article. You would have no idea about anything except the 8 planets of our solar system, so would assume this would mean there could be life on those planets. The moon would be the first thing that would pop into your head since that’s the big celestial body you see in the sky every night.

Interest In Moonmen In Joseph Smith’s TimePeople in Joseph Smith’s day early in the 19th century speculated quite a bit about men living on the moon. This may have seemed silly in the late 19th century, and there may be only these two late 19th century Latter-day Saint sources talking about this–zero in Joseph Smith’s time–but people of other faiths were going nuts about it. William Herschel who discovered Uranus said he was certain of life on the moon. A popular news media hoax in 1835 had people convinced that scientists with a telescope found a civilization of humans living on the moon. Our Pearl of Great Price scripture delves into cosmology and the relationship of stars and planets, but there was no speculation of life existing in our solar system outside of earth.

It could be that Joseph Smith said some off-hand remark about alien human life in the universe and that somebody, who naturally knew nothing about planets outside of our solar system, assumed he was talking about our moon and planets. That’s what happens when you “play the game of telephone” instead of getting quotes first-hand as real academics do.

Alien Life In The Book Of Abraham?

Dan Vogel is one agent of confusion who Antimormons cite to attack Latter-day Saints with this moon inhabitants nonsense. He alleged:
 
 

“The statement in Abraham 3:5 that the moon is greater than the earth would hardly make sense if the moon were a desolate globe.”

(Dan Vogel. The Word of God, p. 209-210)

But this takes the verse completely out of context. What Abraham 3:5 actually says is, the moon is “above or greater than that upon which thou standest in point of reckoning, for it moveth in order more slow.” Verse 7 makes it clear that this is talking about the time of orbit: “Now the set time of the lesser light is a longer time as to its reckoning than the reckoning of the time of the earth upon which thou standest.” What does that have to do with whether it is inhabited with life or desolate? The relativity of celestial bodies’ rotations has nothing to do with life, and nothing in the scriptures indicates that it does.
 
 

“Later in the nineteenth century, when science began replacing supposition regarding an inhabited moon, Mormons refused to give up their belief, which they believed was rooted in revelation… First-generation Mormons resisted any changes in their cosmological concepts. To them these were not just ideas or theories; they explained reality as they knew it.”

(Dan Vogel. The Word of God, p. 209-210)

Total nonsense.

He provides zero evidence except the anonymous gossip spread by Hunington, the quote attributed to Hunington, and that Millenial Star article–which as we have seen makes no claim of life on the moon. So pretty much one source.

Vogel also gets the timeline backwards. It was actually the late 19th century that these alleged quotes supposedly date to, a time of scientific skepticism about life on the moon, not in the early 19th century. There is no evidence for anything from the early 19th century. There is no evidence the early church believed it. There is zero evidence or alleged evidence that anyone ever considered this an explanation for “reality as they knew it” rather than just an interesting idea or theory. Vogel invented this jab toward Latter-day Saints out of thin air. As the Millennial Star article explained, we believe in the possibility of life on other worlds in the universe, created by the same God who created all the universe, and that is it.

It is unfortunate that Latter-day Saint history and scholasticism has been infiltrated and dominated by such incorrect and damaging speculation. This is what I’ve seen “Mormon studies” become–ridiculous speculation–and it has really damaged our attitude toward our pioneer ancestors, our attitude toward Joseph Smith, and our confidence in priesthood leaders today. It demoralizes Latter-day Saints and squashes our relationship to members of other faiths. Non-members read the lies and immediately think we are wacko. It is time for this kind of shameful, hate-inspiring rhetoric to stop.

‘Inhabitant’ Refers To More Than Animal Life

Hyrum Smith – Skeptics and Antimormons point to quotes from early Latter-day Saints about life on the moon and other worlds to insist on what we really believe. According to a third-hand source, Hyrum Smith allegedly said:
 
 

“…every Star that we see is a world and is inhabited the same as this world is peopled. The Sun & Moon is inhabited & the Stars & (Jesus Christ is the light of the Sun, etc.). The Stars are inhabited the same as this Earth… They are under the same order as this Earth is undergoing & undergoing the same change. There was & is a first man Adam and also a Saviour in the Meredien of times, the same computing times and all things in order. Many things are to be considered that will bring knowledge to our understanding, but the foolish understand not these things for this world was patterned after the former world or after Mansions above.”

(Hyrum Smith, per George Laub, per Eugene England: ‘George Laub’s Nauvoo Journal,’ BYU Studies 18, 177)

This quote is not trustworthy, as it is third-hand and the context is not provided. The first part of the first sentence has been snipped away. But if it turns out to be genuine, it sounds alright to me. This is talking about suns, not planets, and obviously the sun is too hot for people to live there–people have always known that–so this is apparently talking about other solar systems. Other planets are governed by other stars. There are other suns with planets that have inhabitants very similar to ours, he is saying. The moon belongs to our sun and is part of our system, and there are other systems inhabited in much the same way.

Brigham Young – Brigham Young said:

“It has been observed here this morning that we are called fanatics. Bless me! That is nothing. Who has not been called a fanatic who has discovered anything new in philosophy or science? We have all read of Galileo the astronomer who, contrary to the system of astronomy that had been received for ages before his day, taught that the sun, and not the earth, was the centre of our planetary system? For this the learned astronomer was called “fanatic,” and subjected to persecution and imprisonment of the most rigorous character. So it has been with others who have discovered and explained new truths in science and philosophy which have been in opposition to long-established theories; and the opposition they have encountered has endured until the truth of their discoveries has been demonstrated by time… I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon, a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us. We are called ignorant; so we are: but what of it? Are not all ignorant? I rather think so. Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed ‘the man in the moon,’ and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized. Every planet in its first rude, organic state receives not the glory of God upon it, but is opaque; but when celestialized, every planet that God brings into existence is a body of light, but not till then. Christ is the light of this planet. God gives light to our eyes.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 13:270)

Either intentionally or for lack of critical thought, skeptics totally miss his point. He is not sharing some mystical inside information about aliens living in the sun. He said himself: “Who can tell…?” Scientists couldn’t tell. He couldn’t tell himself. He was talking about the relationship between philosophy, science, and religion. The point was questioning what you consider “life.” Does the coincidence that the texture of the moon’s face looks like a man’s face indicate life? Does the existence of mountains indicate life? He was saying despite scientific advances in exploring for life abroad, it is clear in any case that “life” does exist in these far-off celestial bodies because they have a purpose. The function of the thing is life. Brigham Young was saying spiritually we should reconsider what life is. That’s also why Hyrum Smith would say stars are “inhabited” with life if they have planets and moons. The light of our nearest star illuminates to animate them into life.

The 1828 dictionary defined “inhabitant” as: “one who dwells or resides permanently in a place, or who has a fixed residence… brute animals are inhabitants of the regions to which their natures are adapted; and we speak of spiritual beings, as inhabitants of heaven.” A thing becomes a habitat if there is something else dwelling there, whether human, animal, or spiritual. Do the planets occupy a place in the solar system? Does the moon? Yes. It moves and is part of an interactive relationship with other objects serving their own utility and purpose; therefore it “lives.”

The scriptures sometimes treat the entire earth as a living being within this kind of context. The earth mourns and “groans” because of the wickedness of its inhabitants, and cries out to God for deliverance. We read the same kind of thing in the Bible. The sun is “inhabited” by the planets as the earth is “inhabited” be animals and humans. This is not to say the rocks and materials that make up celestial bodies are made up of cells and building blocks of animal life. It’s just a different way of considering the definition of “life.”

Animal, Vegetable, Mineral Life – When talking about the categories of “life,” Brigham Young often included “animal, vegetable, mineral.” “Many spirits are gone out into the world. We hear of spirits that rap, and spirits that knock, and spirits that write, and numerous others that perform a great variety of other things… There are multitudes of spirits in the world. Everything we see, and have a knowledge of has got its own peculiar spirit, or else there is no Life in it. The Spirit constitutes the Life of everything we see. Is there Life in these rocks, and mountains… There is a spirit nicely adapted to the various productions of the vegetable kingdom. There is also a spirit to the different ores of the mineral kingdom, and to every element in existence. And there is a spirit in the Earth. I am inclined at this stage of my remarks to expose my ignorance. I am not aware that any of the philosophers, or astronomers have told you that the Earth is a Living Creature. If people understood true philosophy–eternal philosophy, they would understand that there is an eternity of matter.. and it is all acted upon and filled with a portion of divinity. Matter is to exist; it cannot be annihilated. Eternity is without bounds, and filled with matter; and there is no such place as empty space. And matter is capacitated to receive intelligence.” (Brigham Young, via ‘President Brigham Young’s Doctrine on Deity’ vol. 1)

Brigham Young said of disobedience, “Are these great weaknesses to be found in the birds of the air, in the fishes of the sea, or in the beasts of the field? No. The animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms abide the law of their Creator; the whole earth and all things pertaining to it, except man.” He considered mineral a category of life. So if he talked about “life” in the sun or moon, are these celestial objects not made up minerals?

This is full context that you won’t find on Antimormon websites, pseudo-intellectual academic papers, or even from a lot of faithful sources, because the false narrative about aliens in the moon is just too juicy. It’s risky to delve into Brigham Young’s philosophic musings as they are quite deep and it is easy to get lost and arrive at a crazy conclusion. But people need to understand that he was not talking about green space men dressed up as Quakers. As a defender of the faith, it is easy to dismissively say, Well there could be Quaker men somewhere on the moon. We haven’t explored every inch.” Sure, anything is possible. But when you actually explore the validity of these quotes and find full context for what church leaders have actually said and explore the fuller context of these quotes, it is clear that there is no contradiction with modern scientific understanding and no need to take such a speculative position. Any reasonable amount of investigation shows clearly that this is just a half-based and dishonest attack on Latter-day Saints.

Categories: Apologetics