The term false prophet originates in the New Testament.

If you do a Google search of the term “false prophet”, you get a little over 3 MILLION hits and 2.1 MILLION if you do a more narrow search using quotation marks.

Interestingly, the term fallen prophet cannot be found in the New Testament yet a cursory examination suggests that the term very possibly originated or at least gained traction during and from the LDS restoration movement of the 1800′s.

A general Google search of the term brings up a little over 15 MILLION hits with 41,000 resulting from a more narrow search using quotation marks!

The very first listing for fallen prophet on Google, regardless of which way you search the term, is a page accusing Joseph Smith of being a fallen prophet… it is listed below with the three lines, exactly as it shows up on Google-

LDS Mormon Joseph Smith American Prophet
www.i4m.com/think/history/fallen_prophet.htm
This page lists five good reasons Joseph Smith died a fallen prophet.

Following that first listing you get lots of contemporary uses of the term mingled with sites pertaining to Mormonism both pro and con. A Google search brings up everything from music groups and songs, to video games, software platforms and even YouTube videos all incorporating the term fallen prophet, or variations thereof.

Again, the term fallen prophet never shows up in the Old or New Testament and when goggling it, virtually all of the top ranking religious sites mingled in with the contemporary sites using the key words “fallen prophet” seem to be LDS related.

Traditional Christianity virtually never uses the term nor does it show up in the Bible. This is not surprising since traditional Christianity does not put a huge emphasis on the importance of prophets, particularly in a contemporary context.

Of course Joseph Smith was accused in Kirtland of being a fallen prophet and again in Far West and finally in Nauvoo, he was accused of being a fallen prophet.

His accusers were believers in the LDS restoration who believed in his original calling as a prophet and associated revelations but felt he had eventually fallen into transgression and departed from his original calling.

The first major apostasy took place in Kirtland shortly after the special conference at the Morley Farm when some of the leading brethren who were called to be high priests denied the faith and others accused Joseph of being.

During the second main apostasy in Kirtland some people were upset about the name change of the church while others became angry about the affairs of the Kirtland Safety Society.

During the Far West period some of the most prominent leaders of the Church actually signed affidavits accusing Joseph of some very serious things. These charges landed Joseph and others in jail.

Finally in Nauvoo, people were concerned for a multitude of reasons including the fact that he was no longer receiving revelations. Section 124 was the last major revelation of doctrinal significance to be canonized. Some of the saints felt that Joseph Smith began teaching doctrines that conflicted with his earlier teachings. They saw Joseph Smith’s teachings about the progression of the Gods and his involvement in masonry and polygamy as contradicting the teachings of the gospel in the Book of Mormon and the early revelations in the D&C.

On the other hand, many of the saints interpreted the new doctrines and practices as proof of continued revelation and further enlightenment.

According to one online commentary-

“In the stormy spring of 1844, the King Follett discourse rose like a castle in the weeds, a splendid, mysterious heterodoxy standing amid the bitterness in Nauvoo. The sermon thrilled many of the city’s Mormons. Joseph Fielding, one of the Prophet’s listeners, said, “Any one that could not see in him the Spirit of inspiration of God must be dark, they might have known that he was not a fallen Prophet even if they thought he was fallen.“

People like Fielding loved accounts of the heavenly order. Not so the Laws, Fosters, and Higbees. William Law said the annual conference brought out “some of the most blasphemous doctrines… ever heard of,” such as “other gods as far above our God as he is above us.”

I have already discussed in previous blogs how some people believe that the Nauvoo era of the church represented further enlightenment while others saw it as a time of great darkness and backsliding.

There was actually a great polarization taking place at this period of time within the church.

So great was the heat on Joseph Smith by his critics that he made mention of their deliberations publicly in a sermon.

In it he said-

“my apostate enemies say that I have been a true prophet–& I had rather be a fallen true prophet, than a false prophet” May 12 1844

Joseph was pointing out that there is a very significant distinction between a false prophet and a true prophet that becomes a fallen prophet.

What does it mean to be fallen?

Fallen from what?

The probable answer to that is provided by the Lord in section 20 of the D&C.

“And we know that justification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true; And we know also, that sanctification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true, to all those who love and serve God with all their mights, minds, and strength. But there is a possibility that man may fall from grace and depart from the living God;“

Based on the above passage, I would submit that a fallen prophet is a person who was a true prophet at first, who has since Fallen from Grace.

That being the case, it causes one pause that Joseph would rather be a fallen true prophet than simply a false prophet from the beginning because we are taught in the church that those who fall from the greater light receive the greater condemnation.. Obviously a true prophet who transgresses and falls from grace would have fallen from a state of greater light than someone who was never a true prophet to begin with.

I am going to suggest that Joseph would rather be a fallen prophet simply because it is possible to return to a state of grace after falling from it!

Grace Vs. Mercy

It is often said that “Grace is what God gives that we don’t deserve. Mercy is what God doesn’t give that we do deserve“. (God often withhold his wrath even though we deserve it)

It is interesting to observe that according to the ancient prophecy about the future Davidic servant, even though he would transgress and be chastened by the rod of men, the mercy of the Lord would not depart from him.

“If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.” 2^nd Samuel 7:15:

Is it possible that the latter day servant of God and his associates spoken of in 2^nd Samuel and Leviticus 16 temporarily fall from grace while the mercy of God never departs from them?

I would suggest that one can remain within the mercy of God even while temporarily falling from grace.

Perhaps that is why Joseph said he would rather be a true fallen prophet than a false prophet. Perhaps he understood that falling from grace does not necessarily denote an eternal or unchangeable condition of damnation.

When Satan fell from heaven, he was not only falling from grace, but he was eternally falling from the mercy of God.

It is unfortunate that some of us view prophets as infallible and others of us assume that if a prophet does fall from grace they cannot repent and be returned to their former state. Such assumptions prevent us from using their lives and the counsel God gives them as examples of the human condition and the mercy of God.

Again my purpose in addressing this topic is not to Judge (condemn) Joseph Smith but rather to judge (observe and learn from ) the events of his life and from the council and prophetic instruction that the Lord gave him.

It is truly significant that the term fallen prophet is mainly only relevant in Mormonism and that Protestantism and Catholicism seldom if ever use the term.

Although the term fallen prophet does appear to originate from the Kirtland era of the restoration movement, it did not originate from the accusations that were being made by the critics of Joseph Smith.

It actually originates from a revelation from God to Joseph Smith!

First, a little context.

The storyline begins in mid 1828.

The 116 pages of the Book of Mormon had been lost because Joseph had feared man more than God and had allowed himself to be influenced by the persuasions of men.

The Lord was upset with Joseph.

In a revelation directed solely to Joseph Smith, before the church was even organized, the Lord proclaimed this very profound truth-

“Remember, remember that it is not the work of God that is frustrated, but the work of men”

The Lord then gave Joseph a hypothetical scenario-

” For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him.”

One has to wonder how modern day Mormonism has embraced the infallibility of prophets doctrine, when the above passage so clearly states that prophets CAN fall!

The above passage in section 3 of the D&C very possibly constitutes the very first introduction of the “fallen prophet” term and the fact that a true prophet can in fact fall from grace.

It is this revelation that haunted Joseph throughout his public ministry because it alerted the membership of the church to the fact that a prophet of God can fall from grace after receiving a long string of revelations and doing many mighty works.

It is this passage that caused many of the converts to Mormonism to watch Joseph Smith with a very critical and accusative eye anytime he did or said something that seemed out of harmony with the prior revelations..

Clearly the hypothetical given in section 3 was not referring to the historical Joseph Smith of 1828 for indeed the pattern given did not reflect the life of Joseph during that period of time.

Take a look at the six point hypothetical the Lord gave to Joseph in section 3-

• A prophet can have many revelations
  
• A prophet can do many mighty works
  
• Following the revelations and mighty works the prophet can begin boasting
  
• Following the revelations and mighty works the prophet can set at naught the counsels of God
  
• Following the revelations and mighty works the prophet can follow his his own will and carnal desires
  
• Following the revelations and mighty works the prophet can FALL (and have no more gift of prophecy)
  

At the time this revelation was given in 1828 Joseph had not yet received very many revelations. He had mainly been blessed with the ministering of angels. The many revelations now canonized in the D&C were to come in later years.

At that time, Joseph had not done very many mighty works.

He was not a boastful person at that early time in his life.

He did make a bad judgment call with regard to Martin Harris and the 116 pages but he was tormented by his mistake and quickly became contrite and repentant.

He clearly did not fall from grace at that time, or if he did, he did not fall from grace for very long because God assured him-

“thou are still chosen, and art AGAIN called to the work” (vs 10)

(admittedly, the “again” in the above passage implies that in fact Joseph may have temporarily lost his calling even though he had not lost his status of being  “chosen”.

The Lord in his mercy forgave him and accepted his repentance.

All in all, the six-part hypothetical really did not fully apply to the historical Joseph Smith of 1828 even though the hypothetical was incorporated within a revelation that was being clearly and specifically directed at him.

Lets review in greater detail what the Lord said to Joseph after giving the hypothetical.

Notice how the dialogue changed from hypothetical to personal once again.

“Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them.

And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.

For, behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise his words—

Yet you should have been faithful; and he would have extended his arm and supported you against all the fiery darts of the adversary; and he would have been with you in every time of trouble.

Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.

But remember, God is merciful; therefore, repent of that which thou hast done which is contrary to the commandment which I gave you, and thou art still chosen, and art again called to the work;

Except thou do this, thou shalt be delivered up and become as other men, and have no more gift.

The Importance of Being AWARE

What an interesting statement-

“..if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.”

That is the second time in the revelation that the Lord uses the word FALL.

The word “fall” is first used in the six point hypothetical, demonstrating that a true prophet can still fall from grace if he transgresses.

Secondly, it is used referring directly to Joseph, as the Lord gives Joseph the warning that if he is not aware, he will “fall“!

This passage is what I have taken as the theme of this post because the message is so profound and yet so subtle.

Have you ever really considered the importance of being aware?

Have you ever read about the doctrine of AWARENESS?

I have written other posts in which I have attempted to show that Joseph, Sidney and others were acting as intercessory servants who were artificially taking upon themselves the transgressions of the apostate latter day saints.

In those articles I emphasized that Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon and their associates committed transgression in a different way than many others commit transgressions.

It is one thing to take upon you your own sins. It is quite another to act as intercessory servants who have the sins of latter day Israel artificially placed upon them and therefore act them out!

In the above mentioned posts I have always stopped short of calling Joseph Smith a fallen prophet because in my mind, the transgressions he took on were artificially placed upon him and he simply acted out the sins that were in the hearts of apostate Israel.

During the Far West period the Lord gave a strong rebuke to those who were accusing Joseph and Sidney falsely-

“Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them. But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves.“

How interesting that the Lord made it clear to the church in section three and section twenty and other revelations that Joseph had sinned and that he could fall in the future if he was not AWARE, yet during the Far West period he gives such a strong warning to those who falsely accuse Joseph and others of the Lords anointed servants!

Another interesting possibility that surfaces in this study is that the terms “sin” and “transgression” may not mean the same thing. It is possible that the anointed servants of the Lord that artificially took upon themselves the sins of the people were under transgression but not sin.

Nevertheless, after pondering section 3, I believe there is strong reason to believe that the six part hypothetical given in section 3, followed by the direct warning to Joseph that he will fall if he is not aware, is in fact more than a hypothetical. It appears to be a prophecy regarding the future historical Joseph smith of the 1840′s and perhaps even earlier.

There is an uncanny resemblance between the six-part hypothetical in section 3 and the life of Joseph during the Nauvoo era.

First of all, Joseph had published and canonized over 100 revelations by the time he began his involvement in Masonry and polygamy in Nauvoo. He had truly received “many revelations”.

Secondly, Joseph had done “many wonderful works“, including healings, the restoration of the Melchizedek priesthood, the completion of the Kirtland Temple and the associated ushering in of the gospel of Abraham, etc.

Thirdly, the humble and contrite Joseph of the early years became bold and brash and “boastful” very possibly in fulfillment of the prophecy in section 3.

Perhaps one of the most arrogant, obnoxious and blasphemous pronouncements he made is contained in a sermon he gave in front of thousands of people in 1844 when he said-

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever 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 I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.” History of the Church, Vol. 6, pp. 408-409 (Sunday, May 26, 1844) http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1844/26May44.html

Prior to understanding the atonement statute and the effect it had on Joseph Smith I would read the above quote and other similar ones made during the Nauvoo era and just shake my head in disbelief.

At first I simply rejected the possibility that Joseph ever made such statements even though they appear to come from credible sources. These types of statements are so repugnant that I simply didn’t believe a prophet of God could utter them.

I now see them as a reminder of what happens when a person looses their spiritual equilibrium and state of spiritual awareness. The ego runs unrestrained. I believe such pronouncements from Joseph Smith represent a remarkable fulfillment of Gods warning and prophecy in section 3.

I see them as a sign that Joseph lost his awareness, causing him to fall. (Isaiah informs us that God covers the eyes of the seers because of the iniquity of latter day Israel. Would that not constitute losing ones awareness?)

Fourth and fifthly, at the time that Joseph was boasting in his accomplishments he was contradicting the previous revelations about the importance of the celestial law of monogamy. In doing this, he was truly setting at naught the councils of God and following after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires.

According to some accounts, Joseph spoke openly about his enjoyment of the young wives he had taken on… according to William Law-

“Joseph was very free in his talk about his women. He told me one day of a certain girl and remarked, that she had given him more pleasure than any girl he had ever enjoyed. I told him it was horrible to talk like this.“ – Joseph Smith’s close confidant and LDS Church First Councilor, William Law, Interview in Salt Lake Tribune, July 31,

As mentioned on other posts, Joseph later confided in William Marks that he and the saints had been deceived into embracing the spiritual wife doctrine but this was not until it had deeply infected the quorum of the Twelve, other leaders and many members of the church.

Lastly,  point number six of the prophecy is arguably the most profound and remarkable part of the prophecy to come true  if this scenario I am presenting is accurate; he fell from grace, resulting in falling from his position and from his gift of prophecy.

The Lord had warned Joseph that if he boasted, he truly would become as other men, and have his gift of prophecy taken away.-

“Except thou do this, thou shalt be delivered up and become as other men and have no more gift“

When Joseph publicly announced to the Church in Nauvoo that he would no longer be prophesying for the church, I don’t believe he was exercising his own prerogative to become an emeritus prophet. I believe he was in essence acknowledging that he didn’t possess the gift of prophecy anymore.

Did he fully understood what had happened? I don’t know.

Did he realize that the prophecy in section 3 had been fulfilled and that he had lost the gift and become as other men?

I don’t know.

He seemed to indicate that he was moving forward in his own personal progression while his brother Hyrum would remain as the prophet for the church.

I believe the prophetic and historical evidence strongly suggests Joseph had become as other men… and the Lord had taken the gift of prophecy from him.

It is not a coincidence that he did not receive any revelations during the last three years of his life.

In part four of this series we shall view the remarkable prophecy in section 3 in the context of two other supporting prophetic revelations contained in the D&C.

We shall then take a look at the meaning behind the Tree of Life vs the Tree of Knowledge and continue our attempt to gain a better understanding of the doctrine of awareness.

I believe most people who have studied the life of Joseph Smith assume that either he was a true prophet, or a false prophet, period.

It is a very black or white issue for them.

They believe he was either virtually always inspired and acting prophetically whenever he gave a high profile doctrinal sermon or revelation OR he was virtually never inspired when giving a doctrinal sermon or presenting a revelation.

That view seems logical to most people.

Latter day saints have been brain washed into a system of prophet-worship and indoctrinated into the doctrine of infallibility.

Believers feel safe in believing EVERYTHING he said.

Conversely, those who reject the LDS restoration feel safe in rejecting EVERYTHING he said if they can find just one doctrine he taught that appears to be false or one thing he did that appeared to be out of character for a holy prophet of God.

This all or nothing belief takes the need for personal revelation and discernment out of the equation.

It feels so much safer to believe that the Lord’s anointed servant will never make a mistake and that all we need to do is mindlessly “follow the prophet” like dumb sheep instead of actually thinking things through, studying them out in the scriptures and praying about them for personal revelation on every given topic.

Brigham Young once said, (I am paraphrasing), that anyone who blindly followed a prophet was not worthy of the celestial kingdom even if they were valiantly following a true prophet.

I agree.

The scriptures make it clear that having oil in our lamps (the Holy Spirit) is what enables the wise virgins into the marriage feast, not blind obedience.

Only those who take responsibility for treasuring up the word of God and taking the Holy Spirit for their guide (which is to receive personal revelation) will receive the gift of eternal life in the highest kingdom of God.

I believe that the doctrine of blindly following a true prophet is a very dangerous and un-scriptural way of thinking. It is a false premise and a slippery slope.

I believe the all or nothing belief system is just exactly how old Scratch wants people to think because that way of thinking prevents both believers and non-believers from entering into the straight and narrow path.

Joseph Smith entered the following statement into his journal

“This morning . . . I visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that ‘a prophet is always a prophet’; but I told them that a prophet is a prophet only when he was acting as such” (Joseph Smith,_History of the Church, 5:265).

We have reviewed countless other supporting scriptures and inspired statements related to this topic on other posts but don’t have the time to beat a dead horse right now… there is too much other stuff that we need to cover in this series. Suffice it to say, prophets are mortal men who sometimes provide true messages from God, sometimes share their fallible opinions and yes, as documented in the scriptures, they sometimes offer false revelations.

God sometimes uses them to test the Saints, to see if the Saints will stay true to God and the commandments and truths that God has previously taught or whether they can be deceived by worshiping a wayward messenger.

“…if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.”

I began this series by providing the following quotation from section 3

I then provided several definitions including the following one.

aware

AWA’RE, a. [See Ware and Wary.]

Watchful; vigilant; guarded; but more strictly in modern usage, apprised; expecting an event from information, or probability; as, the general was aware of the enemy’s designs.

I then pointed out that I believe the doctrine of awareness pertains to both outward events such as the events of the third watch (which my three watches blog is about) and it also pertains to the inward events that take place in our mind and our hearts. (which my onewhoiswatching blog attempts to address from time to time)

In this series we are going to dissect section 3 of the D&C to get some context for an amazing event in LDS church history having to do with a high profile prophet of God and his tragic, but prophesied departure from being in a state of spiritual awareness.

Before tackling section 3, let me share a few things that have really helped me in my journey to better understand the doctrine of awareness.

Eckhart Tolle

One of the profound teachers of our day is a fellow by the name of Eckhart Tolle

You may be familiar with his best selling book, “A New Earth- Awakening To Your Life’s Purpose” in which he contends that humanity is ready for a transformation of consciousness.

Oprah Winfrey became so enamored with the teachings of Eckhart Tolle that she began promoting him and his work a few years ago and they have attracted millions of followers. In essence, some people feel that she and he are starting a new church/religion.

Unfortunately, Eckhart Tolle doesn’t appear to appreciate the significance of the atonement and the literal Godhood of Christ and yet he builds many of his teachings largely around many of the things Christ taught.

Because Eckhart appears to reject the deity of Christ and the atonement, evangelicals have become violently opposed to his teachings and to the church that he and Oprah seem to be establishing.

My personal philosophy is that I try to adhere to the admonition of Paul and I try to “prove all things and hold fast to that with is good.”

Translation: Even though I see some very serious deficiencies in what Eckhart Tolle and Oprah are teaching and promoting, I can still appreciate some of the profundities that they are sharing.

I have four very close friends who have all told me within the last month that the teachings of Eckhart Tolle have profoundly changed their lives for the better.

They have all said that once they begin to understand how mind chatter works and how the ego adversely influences our lives by painting inaccurate mental images, they can never think in the same destructive way again without catching themselves and their destructive egoic thought patterns.

The comedian, Jim Carey is one of Eckarts enthusiastic and passionate followers. In this short youtube video, he briefly shares his perceptions of Eckhart Tolle and his teachings-

In another youtube video Carrey shared his experience of getting a glimpse of what awareness feels like-

“I woke up and I suddenly got it… I understood about how thought was an illusory thing and how thought is responsible for most of the suffering we experience and then I suddenly felt as if I was looking at these thoughts from another perspective and suddenly I was thrown into this amazing feeling of freedom from myself from my problems.

I saw that I was bigger than what I do and from my body and from everyone.. I was no longer a fragment of the universe.. I was the universe.. and ever since that day I’ve been trying to get back there. It comes and it goes… its like riding a wave, sometimes I an on and sometimes I’m off but at least I know where I want to go and I want to take as many people with me as I can because the feeling is amazing..”

I have listed below a few quotes about awareness by Eckhart Toll

“Awareness is the greatest agent for change.”

“Awareness is the power that is concealed within the present moment.”

“The moment you become aware of the ego in you, it is strictly speaking, no longer the ego, but just an old, conditioned mind-pattern. Ego implies unawareness. Awareness and ego cannot coexist.”

“As soon as you honor the present moment, all unhappiness and struggle dissolve, and life begins to flow with joy and ease. When you act out the present-moment awareness, whatever you do becomes imbued with a sense of quality, care, and love – even the most simple action.”

“It is when we are trapped in incessant streams of compulsive thinking that the universe really disintegrates for us, and we lose the ability to sense the interconnectedness of all that exists.”

“Once you have had a glimpse of awareness or Presence, you know it firsthand. It is no longer just a concept in your mind.”

“If you are in a state of intense presence you are free of thought, yet highly alert. If your conscious attention sinks below a certain level, thought rushes in, the mental noise returns, stillness is lost, you’re back in time.”

“thinking without awareness is the main dilemma of human existence”

“some people never forget the first time they disidentified from their thoughts and thus briedly experienced the shift in identity from being the content of their mind to being the awareness in the background”

“The moment you become aware of the ego in you, it is strictly speaking no longer ego, but just an old, conditioned mind-pattern”

“The good news is: If you can recognize illusion as illusion, it dissolves. The recognition of illusion is also its ending”

― Eckhart Tolle

If you take the time to listen to or read some of Eckarts stuff about “awareness” and “awakening”, you will see how many of the associated topics that he addresses are also addressed in scripture.’

For instance, he identifies ego as being the condition of perceived separateness that clouds our ability to enter into an enlightened state of awareness.

Is that not closely related to what the Book of Mormon and other scriptures address time and time again as the natural man and the sin of pride?

Is that not closely related to what the New Testament and other scripture address as the state of the natural man?

Ego results in pride, separateness and class distinction instead of the Zion principles of humility, unity, equality and oneness.

Ego produces ( or IS) mental noise that prevents the stillness.

The Lord admonishes us to “be still and Know that I am God”.

One of the things I hope to accomplish in this series is to further expose and thus dissolve the illusion that results in prophet worship.

The following graphic illustrates how correlated Mormons prioritize doctrinal authority or truth.

The above graphic illustrates the fact that most members of the corporate church use the correlated teachings of the current and modern presidents of the church as the highest level of authority followed by the teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith. After that, they accept the scriptures in the four standard works. In there minds they believe they also receive some degree of personal revelation from the promptings of the Holy Spirit however, they would never question the correlated teachings and therefore  rarely find a need to pray about doctrine.

What this means is that if the teachings of the current correlated lesson manuals contradict the teachings of Joseph Smith or the scriptures, they discard the teachings of Joseph Smith and the Scriptures and follow the current correlated teachings of the modern presidents of the church.

This constitutes taking the scriptures lightly and results in being condemned (See Section 84:54)

Conversely the following graphic illustrates how the Lord expects us to discern and prioritized truth. Our center and foundational method of identifying truth is thru the Word of God which comes in two different forms-

a) The Written words of Christ and his servants as contained in the scriptures

b) Personal Revelation from the Holy Ghost

Every other source of doctrinal information must be tested against this foundation and discarded if it fails the test.

Anyone claiming to get personal revelation who does not seriously study and search the written word of God and whose personal revelation contradicts the written word of God is deceived. Anyone who does search the scriptures but fails to received personal revelation will fall short of celestial law. The two must work together synergistically.

PMA vs Life Changing Knowledge vs The Rebirth

I have come to the conclusion that there is a huge difference between some of the motivational “feel good” stuff that is taught and the life changing concepts that others are teaching.

And yet, even the enlightened information dealing with our “state of awareness” that many of the great self help gurus and some of their followers have experienced is still quite different from the spiritual awareness spoken of by the Lord.

Regardless of whether your self help philosophies come from Zig Ziggler, Steven Covey, Wayne Dyer, Tony Robins, Deepak
Chopra, Eckhart Tolle or Buda himself, your inner awakening and level of awareness will be terrestrial at best until you become spiritually born again.

There simply is no substitute for the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the spiritual rebirth that takes place via the baptism of water, fire and Holy Ghost. (Which is not currently available at this time… but will be in the near future)

As we study section 3 we need to see the relationship between awareness vs. ego. We need to appreciate how ego leads to pride boasting and destructive mind noise. All of these things disintegrate when spiritual awareness takes place.

Another fascinating author that brings much to the study of this topic is Max Skousen.

Years ago I read many of his books including “a Blessing Hitherto Unknown” (part one and two).

While I disagree with some of his ultimate conclusions, I highly recommend his books. They will challenge the way you interpret many passages in the scriptures and hopefully motivate you to dig a little deeper into the deeper doctrines of the kingdom. (thank you for reminding me of his work Ryan)

He compares the tree of knowledge to the Tree of Life concluding that the one leads to death and the other to life.

My perspective if the the Tree of Knowledge represents a temporary phase and that it can lead to life or death depending on the choices we make.

I don’t believe the tree of Knowledge is categorically evil, it actually enabled Adam and his posterity to avoid living forever in their sins.

We will discuss this in more detail later in this series.

Nonjudgmental Judgment

My interpretation of section three of the D&C is no doubt going to offend some people’s sensitivities if they are not familiar with the fact that prophets are fallible human beings and further, if they are not familiar with the atonement statute and the intercessory offering that Joseph Smith and several of his brethren made in behalf of the WHOLE WORLD.

Let me state up front that I believe Joseph Smith became sanctified and had his calling and election made sure in or before 1833.

He is clearly one of the greatest prophets that ever lived and he is going to return to the earth and complete the work the Lord has given him to do in the third watch..

Therefore, as I present my interpretation of section three and some corresponding events that took place in Joseph’s life, please don’t think I am condemning him from an eternal perspective.

On the contrary, I want to understand section 3 and the doctrine of awareness and its application in the life of Joseph Smith because the Lord made this revelation public for the purpose of teaching the Saints about how God’s plan works, Joseph’s role in the restoration and also to teach us about ourselves.

This study is more about us than about Joseph.

He simply played a grand part in this probation that required him to fall just as Adam was required to fall.

Believe it or not, the Lord used the life of Joseph Smith as a quasi-allegorical template for teaching each of us about the human condition and our own struggle to enter into and maintain a state of spiritual awareness.

If you are not familiar with the atonement statute and how it relates to the life of Joseph Smith, you may want to read the following articles

The Return of Sidney Rigdon Final

Four Steps in Losing Your Innocence- Part 6

The Atonement Statute

Another powerful reference to the atonement statute is provided in section 84 and points out that verse 57 speaks about how the church was under condemnation until they remember the NEW COVENANT, “even the book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them“

The keywords “new covenant” in verse 57 links up with the keywords “the covenant” in verse 48 which the “Father has renewed and conferred upon you” speaking to the seven elders who had gathered together in prayer to petition the Lord.

In that passage the Lord makes an observation that is perhaps one of the greatest references to the atonement statute and the doctrine of the three watches.

The Lord continues-

“..which is confirmed upon you for your own sakes, and not for your sakes only, but for the sake of the whole world.”

WOW!

Have you ever heard anything like that before?

Can you ever remember the Lord telling any of the prophets or apostles in the New Testament or the Book of Mormon that the father was renewing and conferring the covenant upon them for the sake of the whole world?

Do you believe what the passage is saying?

Do you believe that somehow these seven servants were receiving the renewal and confirming of their covenant with the Father for YOUR SAKE and the sake of the WHOLE WORLD?

Born again evangelicals would probably feel those passages are blasphemous because they don’t think that a prophets role is to do anything beyond delivering a message from God.

They don’t think that any human being can take upon themselves a covenant in behalf of other people or provide an intercessory atonement.

I believe the key word phrases in verses 58 and 47-48 continue to lead us to other verses in section 84 which are very instructive.

What is the NEW COVENANT that God has just renewed and confirmed upon the seven elders?

Look at how verse 42 links up with verse 48 via the keyword “confirm”

“And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels charge concerning you.”

The priesthood that was confirmed upon the seven that day is the same thing as the covenant that was confirmed upon the seven that day.

COVENANT = PRIESTHOOD

The “NEW COVENANT” – “OATH AND COVENANT OF THE PRIESTHOOD”

The keywords in sections 58, 47-48, and 42 lead us to the key words describing the OATH AND COVENANT OF THE PRIESTHOOD as described in verses 33-41

33 For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.

34 They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.

35 And also all they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord;

36 For he that receiveth my servants receiveth me;

37 And he that receiveth me receiveth my Father;

38 And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto him.

39 And this is according to the oath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood.

40
Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.

41 But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.

As you can see, once you receive one or both of the first two earthly patriarchal priesthoods and magnified them thru faith, the father enters into covenant with you.

This brings about the renewing of your body.

That is what was being spoken of later on in verse 48 when the Lord spoke of the Father teaching them of the covenant which was RENEWED and CONFIRMED upon these seven individuals.

In other words, you become renewed into a new creation. You experience the spiritual rebirth. You become spiritually born again.

Once you are taught the covenant by the Father and have been reborn, God cannot break the covenant with you, only you can break the covenant.

The ultimate goal of awareness is to lead us to a contrite heart and broken spirit through the re-birthing process of the spirit

Having laid a foundation for the topic of awareness and the role of Joseph Smith, in part three of this series we will finally get down to dissecting section 3.

I had meant to do it in this part but realized that I needed to provide greater foundation before showing the prophecy regarding the fall of one of the greatest prophets that ever lived

aware

AWA’RE, a. [See Ware and Wary.]

Watchful; vigilant; guarded; but more strictly in modern usage, apprised; expecting an event from information, or probability; as, the general was aware of the enemy’s designs.

wary

WARY, a. [See Ware and Warn.] Cautious of danger; carefully watching and guarding against deception, artifices and dangers; scrupulous; timorously prudent. Old men are usually more wary than the young. It is incumbent on a general in war to be always wary.

watchful

WATCHFUL, a. Vigilant; attentive; careful to observe; observant; cautious. It has of before the thing to be regulated, as to be watchful of ones behavior; and against, before the thing to be avoided, as to be watchful against the growth of vicious habits.

vigilant

VIG’ILANT, a. [L. vigilans.] Watchful; circumspect; attentive to discover and avoid danger, or to provide for safety.

Take your places and be vigilant. Be sober, be vigilant.

1Peter 5.

Long before the restored church was legally organized in 1830 the Lord gave Joseph Smith the following warning-

“…if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.”

The mystical and ineffable doctrine of AWARENESS is as subtle as it is profound.

It really doesn’t perceivably show up very often in the scriptures and when it does, it is often described using an array of differing terminology and those terms are often hidden in a seemingly larger message.

Not only are there differing terms associated with it, there are also overlapping doctrines that it intercepts with.

The doctrine of awareness apparently has to do with being watchful, and vigilant regarding external,
situational events and things in this temporal world around however it also has to doing with being watchful and vigilant with regard to internal things taking place in our mind and heart.

We Think, Reason and Feel In Both Mind And Heart

The scriptures inform us that the human soul has two separate and distinct thinking and feeling organs, with minds of their own.

One mind is contained in the brain.

The other mind is located in the heart.

The Lord has told us that he communicates to us in both of these cognizant, thinking organs and that the Holy Ghost dwells in the hearts of the righteous-

“I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart“. D&C 8:2

The first commandment involves loving the Lord with both of our minds… the mind in our hearts and the mind in our brains.

“And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.” (Mark 12:30)

While the King James Version of the Bible quotes Jesus as saying

“As a man thinketh so is he…”

The Inspired Version of the Bible makes a profound correction to the translation-

“As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he…”

Although he brain is always thinking and chattering and and providing thoughts, the heart appears to be listening and observing and having thoughts of its own. Sometimes it believes the chatter coming from the brain-mind and sometimes it doesn’t.

From the above passage in the JST It appears to be the thought conclusions formulated within the heart of man that ultimately constitutes what the man is.

While the brain entertains a myriad of thoughts during the day of our conscious lives, it is what we think in our heart that determines who and what we are in the spiritual realm and ultimately how we will be judged and what degree of glory we will be able to abide in the eternal realm. This is perhaps why it is important that we invite the Holy Spirit into our hearts and allow it to dwell in our hearts.

Scripture also informs us that there are two superhuman intelligences that govern and inspire the world of thoughts that the intelligence of man is subjected too.

One source is often referred to as LIGHT and TRUTH.

Section 93 and other scriptures inform us that all truth comes from God and the Holy Spirit (which, according to Lectures on Faith, is the mind of God.)

“Therefore, in the beginning the Word was, for he was the Word, even the messenger of salvation— The light and the Redeemer of the world; the Spirit of truth, who came into the world, because the world was made by him, and in him was the life of men and the light of men… The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. Light and truth forsake that evil one.” (D&C 94)

The other thought source that provides the opposing force in the universe is referred to as LIES.

Scripture informs us that all lies come from
Satan.

“the devil.. is the father of all lies“.

If the Devil is the father of all lies, then it is His spirit and thought force that emanates throughout this world darkening and seducing the minds of all men that tell lies.

The Book of Mormon makes the very simple and plain declaration that “There is nothing which is good save it comes from the Lord; and that which is evil cometh from the devil.”

We must be vigilant in watching and aware of what is going on around us externally and we must be vigilant in watching what is taking place in our own hearts.

There are external events that we have been commanded to watch for, such as the events of the second coming, however, during this outer watch of things going on in the external world, we must also watch out for the deceptions that Satan plants in the hearts of men when they least expect it.

Satan Wants To Put A Data Feed Into Your Mind and Heart

The scriptures remind us that we need to beware of Satan and his desire to enter into the inner chambers of the heart of man.

why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost (Acts 5:3)

And Satan put it into the heart of the serpent, (for he had drawn away many after him,) and he sought also to beguile Ev… wherefore he sought to destroy the world. (Moses 4:6)

And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him; (John 13:2)

Suffer not yourself to be led away by any vain or foolish thing; suffer not the devil to lead away your heart again after those wicked harlots (Alma 39:11)

God Created Satan and Controls Him

It is essential for there to be opposition in all things and the creation of Satan was necessary to provide that opposition. We are informed that God actually creates both good and evil and it is the Lord God Almighty that actually created and controls Satan-

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.(Isa 45:7)

O Lord God Almighty, maker of heaven, earth, and seas, and of all things that in them are, and who controllest and subjectest the devil, and the dark and benighted dominion of Sheol— (121:4)

(The 1828 Websters informs us that control means “To check; to restrain; to govern… To overpower; to subject to authority; to counteract; to have under command…. To direct or govern in opposition; to have superior force, or authority over.)

The cares of the world

In the fourth chapter of Mark, we read about the parable of the sower. In this parable the Savior observed that the word of God is like unto a sower who is sowing seed in an array of places.

In some instances the fowls of the air devoured the seed before it could take root.

“And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up.”

In other instances it fell on stony ground where it had not much earth. It therefore sprang up because it had no depth of earth. Therefore, when the sun came up it was scorched because it had no root. It therefore withered away.

Some of the good seed fell among thorns which chocked it so that it yielded no fruit.

The seed which fell on good ground yielded fruit that sprang up and increased and brought forth, some thirty, some sixty and some an hundred.

After informing his disciples that it was given unto them to know the mystery of the kingdom while others must be taught in parables, he revealed that the thorns represented the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in.

These cares of the world, the deceitfulness of riches and the lusts of other things are what, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.

Spirit filled Awareness

When the scriptures speak of the importance of being aware and of watching.. I believe they are speaking about spirit filled awareness and spirit filled watching. In other words, those passages are speaking of awareness and watching in the spirit filled context, not in the level of awareness and watching that takes place in the natural man.

The natural man is an enemy to God because he is unable to access the Godly state of awareness. In a sense, one might define awareness as having the Holy Ghost dwelling in the heart, creating a contrite spirit and broken heart.

The broken heart and contrite spirit takes place during the spiritual rebirth, after we have become spiritually born again.

True Knowledge Is a State Of Being

When Christ said that it was life eternal to know God, he again taught the behavioral principle that true knowledge is a state of being. (Study 2 Peter 1:3–11 and John 7:16–17.)

In this series we will review the importance of being aware externally and internally.

The term aware only shows up in the four standard works about 13 times.

One of these times is in section 121 wherein we are informed that when a person is not in a state of awareness, they are “left unto themselves” rather than being harmonious with the spirit and the will of God-

34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?

 35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—

 36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

 37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

 38 Behold, ere [BEFORE] he is AWARE, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

 39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

 40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

Another instance we find the doctrine of awareness in Modern Revelation is found in a very personal revelation given to Joseph smith.

It is section 3 of the D&C and it contains an ominous warning to Joseph Smith, informing him that if he is not AWARE, he will fall. Some might argue that the admonition of the Lord to Joseph Smith is more than a warning… that in fact, it was a prophecy.

Despite the personal nature of this revelation and the fact that it was received before the church was even legally organized, the Lord apparently commanded Joseph Smith to include it in the canonized Book of Commandments and the Doctrine and Covenants.

I suspect that the reason for this is that the principles and lessons to be learned from this revelation apply to all of us. Additionally, God wanted the world to know that Joseph, and prophets in general, can fall from grace.

In part two of this series we shall focus on that section. You may want to read it and ponder it before you read part two of this section.

I recently made a Walipini (earth sheltered greenhouse) and it has really been a fun project. We should get our first freeze in this neck of the woods within the next three weeks and then I will see if all of my hard work has paid off. I hope to provide pics on one of my posts some time in the future.

I want to share a few things that have been happening and/or things that have been on my mind lately.

In this post I will be rambling about various related and unrelated things-

A month or two ago NEPT send me the following link to a newspaper article which I found very interesting.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52412444-78/polygamy-mormon-hudson-lds.html.csp

It is also very timely since it is about polygamy and lots of people have been blogging about polygamy lately…

A fellow by the name of Mark recently sent me the following heads up

“Hi Watcher,

Not sure if you ever read Denver Snuffer’s posts – but his latest I thought you may find interesting: his conclusion that Joseph never taught that plural wives was a requirement for exaltation – that only came from Brigham.

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2011/09/joseph-smiths-limited-plural-marriage.html

_____

Snuffer presents an interesting case that Joseph did not teach the multiple wives was necessary for the highest salvation.

By the way, Rock has been threatening to revisit the topic of polygamy again.. It will be interesting to see if he changes his stance on whether JS participated in the practice or not…. I always find his articles entertaining and thought provoking.

Anyway,

The above newspaper article is about a paper presented at the recent FAIR conference. It was given by a prominent BYU professor who is a high profile Mormon feminist.  Valerie Hudson is really quite a high powered gal… here is her website…. http://vmrhudson.org/

She has created an organization to promote LDS scholarship. You can read about it along with some interesting article here http://squaretwo.org/

At the FAIR conference Hudson proposed a different interpretation of section 132. One that suggests that polygamy was given as a temporary sacrifice, not an ongoing blessing.

If I felt that section 132 was a valid revelation I would be sorely tempted to take her interpretation of it seriously.

I would love to see the actual transcript of the talk she gave. I noticed a comment on a blog that indicated that it was retty much the same as what is in this article on her site http://www.squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleCasslerPolygamy.html (I don’t know if that is true)

I believe she has an amazing amount of courage to publicly dictate why the doctrine of polygamy will never be lived again by the Latter day Saints.

Rumor has it that she has really pissed of some of the brethren by her remarks.

While checking out some of her article I read an interesting one she wrote entitled

The Curious Appeal of Roman Catholicism
for Certain Latter-day Saint Intellectuals

 In that article she references that fascinating conversion to Catholicism of  Mormon professor Richard Sherlock.

Click on the following link to here USU philosophy professor Richard Sherlock explain why he left Mormonism and converted to Roman Catholicism   http://usu-shaft.com/2011/audio-of-dr-sherlocks-conversion-story/

Frankly, I was underwhelmed with the guy and his deductive reasoning abilities. I suspect he is a Jesuit plant who never understood the Mormon religion.

The only thing of interest in his entire talk was that he made reference to the unscriptural doctrines that Joseph Smith introduced in the 1840′s.

Of course, I have pointed out in several blogs why the gospel and associated doctrines of Mormonism in the 1830′s is so incredibly and radically different than the gospel and related doctrines of Mormonism of the 1840′s… which reminds of another interesting event.

The folks at Mormon stories sponsored a tribute to D. Michael Quinn. I really appreciate the research and integrity Quinn has put forth in getting the truth out about Mormon history. I owe him big time for providing critical historical information that has helped me get down the rabbit hole more quickly and to find missing pieces of the prophet puzzel.

If you are interested in hearing Quinns story and answers to questions during his recent visit to the City of Salt, click here.  http://mormonstories.org/?p=1787

When someone asked Mike about the future of the church, he said, “Historians don’t make good prophets”.

After hearing some of Quinns personal beliefs and his love for Brigham Young, I would add that “historians don’t make good theologians” either!

Speaking of the huge change between the 1830′s and 1840′s, the folks over at Mormon Expression had an essay contest where they invited folks to send in a 10 minute audio essay about anything related to Mormonism.

The Mormon Expression Podcast is largely directed to those who have lost their faith relating to Mormonism. I was curious to see if there were any disenfranchised Mormons over there that were well read in church history and the scriptures and I wanted to see what kind of response I would get if I summarized what happened at the special conference at the Morley Farm.

Hence, I sent in an audio summary of the Special Conference.

You can hear it by clicking on the link below (if I did this correctly)

ests]

Sadly, the recording did not generated much discussion. However, there was one person by the name of Jason that made a comment.

In responding to him I was able to chrystalize in my mind how differently the process and methodology is of how believers and non believers interpret LDS history. I was also able to respond to the false idea perpetuated by anti-Mormon scholars that JS never mentions the first vision or restoration of priesthood until 1835 (the comments will make more sense if you listen to the recording first).

I thought some of you might find the exchange between me and Jason interesting. I have provided our exchange below-

JASON: The June 1831 Conference always fascinated me since I first read about it for the first time in Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling. I appreciate your faith-promoting interpretation because you remain consistent with the facts.

However, I believe an alternative explanation is more plausible. Namely, Smith actually believed the Melchizedek Priesthood was restored for the first time in 1831 when he declared it so at that time.

It isn’t until later that Smith retroactively claimed that he received the Melchizedek Priesthood from Peter, James, and John in 1829. In his traditional fashion, Smith fashioned a more charismatic, more grandiose story of priesthood restoration to gain a following at a time when members were leaving in droves.

Martin Harris and David Whitmer had never heard of angelic beings who restored the higher priesthood until quite later. Indeed, few members had ever heard of this account until well after the alleged date of the priesthood’s restoration in 1829. Indeed, Oliver Cowdry and others later retrofitted the Book of Commandments with the higher priesthood’s restoration by the hands of Peter, James, and John. D. Michael Quinn thoroughly addressed this problem in the first Mormon Hierarchy book.

However, Smith’s problem was that he already claimed to have received the Melchizedek priesthood “for the first time” in June of 1831. It’s a quandary that even Bushman couldn’t really comfortably resolve in Rough Stone Rolling.

OWIW:  That is an interesting theory Jason.

Can you be more specific about when Joseph changed his story at a “later” time, because people were leaving in droves?

I don’t think he ever changed his story, I think there was perhaps a problem with semantics. Joseph did say that all priesthood was Melchizedek. In that context, it is true that the patriarchal priesthood restored by PJ&J was a portion of Melchizedek, however, I think it is easily documented that Joseph did not deviate from the concept that there were three separate and distinct divisions of priesthood, nor did he deny that the Melchizedek priesthood was restored for the first time at the Morley Farm.

Joseph Smith gave a very detailed explanation of the three divisions of priesthood very late in his life, during the Nauvoo period, on August 27 1843. http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parall…

Additionally, section 124 also indicates that the fulness of the priesthood had been lost from the earth, yet the second priesthood which governs the saving ordinances was clearly still on the earth and being used and spoken of in revelation during the Nauvoo period.

JASON: OWIW,

Richard Bushman raises this theory in Rough Stone Rolling when he writes, “the late appearance of these accounts [referring to the accounts of restoration by Peter, James and John] raises the possibility of later fabrication.” (Pg. 75).

The current version of Priesthood restoration does not appear until around 1835. The Book of Commandments was a chronological recording of all of Joseph Smith’s revelations and would have covered the time that Smith alleges to have received the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829. However, such an account makes no appearance.

Grant Palmer writes in, An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, that “Accounts of angelic ordinations from John the Baptist, and Peter, James, and John are in none of the journals, diaries, letters, or printed matter until the mid-1830s.” Pgs. 223-24).

When Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery complied the 1835 D&C, they added a significant amount of verses to D&C section 27 from the original chapter in the Book of Commandments. Of the 649 added words, Smith and Cowdery provided account of the visit from Peter, James, and John. This link provides a comparison of the later additions and alterations of the 1835 D&C with the original Book of Commandments: http://www.saintswithouthalos…..

Anyway, Mormonthink.com provides a comprehensive review of this problem and raises other significant issues that suggest Smith retroactively added the angelic account of priesthood revelation after the June 1831 conference. As for the members leaving at this time, I believe that information is generally accepted, but I cannot provide an immediate source.

As discussed above, we know that no account of the angelic restoration appeared until the mid 1830s, and I believe that this was a time of great upheaval in Kirkland. It’s also the same year in which Smith tells more grandiose stories of the First Vision and purchases the Egyptian Papyri and announces that he found a text written by the hand of Abraham. Add all of these events together, and we see a pattern of Smith making grandiose claims as a method to instill zeal and belief in its membership during a time when doubts and disenchantment with Mormonism pervaded.

OWIW:  Jason-

Thank you for a more detailed response.

I am not questioning that people left in droves during the Kirtland era. Indeed I have seen estimates of up to 50% of the membership and 30% of the leadership that left during the Kirtland apostasy.

My point was that the Kirtland apostasy was pretty much completed by 1838-9 and yet we have Joseph still teaching about the three levels of priesthood in 1843. Joseph was still clearly teaching about the three levels of priesthood long after the Kirtland apostasy.

I also agree with you that Joseph did not speak about certain things until later in his ministry which understandably causes lots of people indigestion.

One of the intriguing aspects of the LDS restoration movement is how Joseph intentionally withheld information at times and then revealed it later.

I realize this makes him look like a deceiver who is back tracking and trying to revise history… Your logic is very understandable… I get it.

I am simply suggesting that there is another possibility. Not the sanitized possibilities provided by the corporate apologists, but rather a third possibility.

In one of the very early meetings of the church, 1830 or earlier, Hyrum got up in front of the first elders and invited Joseph to get up and give all of the particulars of what had happened to bring the church up to the point of having it ready to be legally organized. Hyrum saw this as an incredibly fortuitous opportunity for Joseph to strengthen the testimonies and knowledge base of the new converts who were to take the gospel to the nations.

To the shock and dismay of Hyrum, Joseph flatly declined and said something to the effect of “it is not necessary that the elders should know all of the particulars at this time”.

I apologize for not having the exact quote and the reference handy on that event, I suspect that you may be familiar with it since you appear to be pretty well read in the history of the church.

Again, Joseph’s decline to take that opportunity to clearly lay out what happened in the first vision and the visitation of angels restoring the priesthood is disconcerting at best.

A similar scenario took place with the visitation of angels in the Kirtland Temple many years later.

How strange that the two people who experienced the visitation and the scribe who recorded it NEVER ONCE PUBLICLY MADE MENTION OF IT DURING THE REMAINDER OF JOSEPH’S LIFE!!!!

It would be published for the first time about 16 years later and not canonized for 40 years!

There was apparently a congregation of people sitting on the other side of the veil during the visitation and yet Joseph and Oliver quietly got up and left instead of sharing the event with the congregation… go figure.

Why would Joseph not want to the contemporary saints that event??

They had labored hard to complete the Temple and the Savior accepted their efforts… why not publish the event?

Yet he obviously wanted future generations to know about it by virtue of the fact that he had it recorded and documented in the history which obviously had a good chance of surviving him.

I believe that skeptics of the restoration movement, who reject it, view and judge the scriptures in modern revelation through the eyes of their own interpretation of the associated historical events… thereby assuming that Joseph was simply making up the revelations.

Conversely, I  believe that skeptics of the restoration movement (like myself), who accept the basic storyline, as presented in the scriptures, view the history through the eyes of modern revelation.

I believe that is why skeptic believers and skeptic non-believers interpret historical events in an opposite way.

I really appreciate the fact that you have researched these issues and that you have sound reasons why you are rejecting the storyline.

Although there is little chance of either of us changing the views of the other, I love to dialogue with people like you because I love having my views challenged and I love challenging the contrary views… that is how we all pick up additional information that we may not have previously had and we have the ability to examine things at a deeper level.

Regarding the claim that Joseph really did not make mention of the first vision or the restoration of the priesthood by angels until years after the fact,.. I agree. However, regarding the claim that he did not do so until approximately 1835ish, I don’t think that is accurate.

Here is a quote taken from one of the journals of Joseph Smith. I believe he is in fact alluding to the first vision, the restoration of the priesthoods by angels and, interestingly enough, he then alludes to the restoration of the third priesthood, making a distinction between the third priesthood and the previous two priesthoods.

The statements in brackets are provided by believing contributors of Boap.org who seem to be somewhat baffled by what is being said…

“When Joseph Smith dictated his first attempt at a personal history in 1832 he made this remark:

‘A History of the life of Joseph Smith Jr an account of his marvilous experience and of all the mighty acts which he doeth in the name of Jesus Christ the son of the living God of whom he beareth record and also an account of the rise of the church of Christ in the eve of time according as the Lord brought forth and established by his hand firstly he receiving the testimony from on high

[The first vision]

secondly the ministering of Angels

[Moroni -Book of Mormon plates]

thirdly the reception of the holy Priesthood by the ministring of Angels to adminster the letter of the Gospel – the Law and commandments as they were given unto him – and the ordinencs

[John the Baptist (are Peter, James and John included here?)],

forthly a confirmation and reception of the high Priesthood after the holy order of the son of the living God power and ordinence from on high to preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit the Kees of the Kingdom of God confered upon him

[visit of Peter, James and John, or is this a reference to the restoration of the office of high priest?]

and the continuation of the blessings of God to him &c”

http://webcache.googleusercont…

As you can see from the comments in brackets, it was difficult for traditional Mormon scholars to believe what they were reading but they had no other alternative than to accept the possibility that the reception of the “holy” priesthood, by angels, (plural), had to probably be referring to BOTH of the first two priesthoods since the Aaronic priesthood was the first to be restored, and it was restored by just one angel.

This set up the next part of Joseph’s statement which speaks of the restoration of a “high” priesthood which is separate and distinct from the two previous priesthoods that were both restored by angels.

He identifies it as the “High Priesthood after the holy order of the son of God“

Again we see question marks in the brackets from the LDS scholars postulating that the third priesthood was possibly referring to the restoration of the office of “High Priest” which is how the modern corporate church inaccurately defines the event that took place at the Morley Farm.

Finally, notice how the first two priesthoods were for the purpose of administering the “letter of the Gospel – the Law and commandments.. and the ordinencs” while the priesthood after the order of the Son of God was to “preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit”

I believe the above entry by Joseph Smith in 1832 demonstrates that he did in fact make reference to these experiences long before 1835.

————-END OF EXCHANGE BETWEEN WATCHER AND JASON

Next item..

Tomorrow is the 22nd of September which is a very special and holy day. It is the day of the year that Moroni came to visit Joseph Smith seven years in a row!

According to author and self proclaimed Davidic Servant, Dr. David B. Cohen MD, a major event will be marked by September 22 2011. I have noticed other prophecy enthusiasts claiming that we will have three days of darkness and earthquakes, etc. some claim it marks the opening of the sixth seal while other claim it will be the opening of the seventh seal… they claim that much of the turmoil this month will be because of the so-called commet Elinen.

I guess we don’t have long to wait and see if anything of significance happens.

Lastly, I have been pondering the tree of life vs the tree of the knowledge of good and evil lately… naturally my finding are quite heretical…

Many people thing that the tree of life represents love and grace while the tree of knowledge represents works and law.

I disagree.

I hope to do a short post about it in the future.

One is because the concept of the literal return from the dead of Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, Lyman Wight, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and others of the first laborers of the last kingdom before the second coming in glory, would be such a huge undeniable evidence that the restored gospel is true, that it would take away from the test of faith for the rest of the world.

I have speculated from time to time whether Joseph and Sidney would be taking a high profile stance or a low profile, behind the scenes, stance,  when they return.

I can see it taking place either way.

Here is a description of how Brigham Young sees it happening. As usual, I don’t necessarily agree with him… but I find his remarks facinating-

“How long will it be before the resurrection commences again? I know not, but I am proud to believe that it is not long; I am happy to believe that the resurrection of the last days is at hand. Who will be raised? The Saints—those who sleep in Jesus; those that have manifested to the Father, to the Son, to the holy angels, and to all their acquaintances upon the earth, that they believe in God, and acknowledge His hand in all things, and have served Him according to the best of their ability. Will Jesus come? Yes.

We will suppose a case. Let this congregation be prepared to receive a visit from the Son of Man; suppose our hearts are sanctified before the Lord, or we have sanctified the Lord God in our hearts, and we are met here to worship Him, to praise Him, where we are enjoying the society of each other, and the gift of the Holy Spirit, secluded from the rude gaze and confused bustle of the world, retired from all the business transactions of human life, with the doors closed, and Jesus comes into our midst, casts off the vert from our eyes, as he did from the eyes of the two disciples that journeyed from Jerusalem, for they did not know him until he broke bread at supper—suppose he appears in our midst, and rends the veil from our eyes; we shall know Him: he says, “Here are the prints of the nails in my hands, here is the place where my side was pierced; look at them, my brethren and sisters, for I am he.” Every eye will be upon him, and every heart will love him. He remains with us for a time, and he is gone.

We spread abroad upon the earth, and bear testimony of what we have seen. I ask, who will believe our testimony? None, unless the Lord designs to reveal it to them, by an holy angel, or by the manifestation of His own person. We may testify of it until we drop in the grave, to no purpose, unless the Spirit manifests it to them; no person can possibly know it unless God makes it known to him.

This is an item of doctrine I feel to impress upon the minds of this people continually, viz., to live in the light of the Spirit of God, so that every man and woman may have revelations for themselves; for the Spirit of the Lord can instruct you, that you can know for yourselves.

Will the Saints arise from the dead?

Yes.

Who will know it?

But a few.

When the resurrection commences, I say but few will know it; and allow me to inform you, when you have seen Joseph, and Hyrum, and Father Smith, and many others, risen from the dead, and you Elders go abroad preaching, you will not tell the world of their resurrection, for they will not believe it.

You may testify that father Smith has arisen, that Joseph and Hyrum again possess their bodies; that they again live in the flesh, and they will laugh you to scorn, and persecute you to the death, if they have the power, for your testimony’s sake.

Will the Saints rise from the dead before the world is converted?

Yes.

You may despair of ever seeing all creation converted to the Lord Jesus, or to the faith of the holy gospel.

Will you see the resurrection?

Yes: you will be in it, and enjoy it; you will be in the first resurrection.

Will the world believe it, and know of it?

They will not.

Zion will be redeemed, the great Temple of the Lord will be built, whereupon the glory of the Lord will rest, and a cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night; the Saints will be gathered from all nations, and will walk into the temples of God, to do the work of redemption for their dead, and saviors will be upon Mount Zion to save the house of Esau.

But will the nations know of it?

They will not.

And when the Lord reigns King of nations as he does King of Saints, the inhabitants of the earth will not distrust but that it is the power of some great one, that it is the plans of wise men brought into action.

Thus they will be governed and controlled, and overruled, and led by the principles of the holy Priesthood, and they will never mistrust but that it is the doings of wise men at the head of a powerful nation, schooled in governmental affairs, who know to control their own nation, and then bring into subjection their neighboring nations, until the whole earth has become subject to them.

They will not know that it is the Savior who is ruling King of nations as He does King of Saints. A great portion of the inhabitants of the earth will never mistrust but that it is the effects of the wisdom of men.“

William Marks was one of the great leaders of the LDS restoration movement, having served on the high council in Kirtland, then being called to preside as the president of the church in Far West and finally, he was called by revelation to preside over the church in Nauvoo.

As the Stake President of Nauvoo, Marks became a pivotal player in the Nauvoo drama caused by the succession crises.

Marks was seen in vision by Joseph Smith

According to Smith’s own record on March 29, 1838. Smith wrote that he saw Marks:

“... closely pursued by an innumerable concourse of enemies, who pressed upon him hard; and when they were about to devour him, and had seemingly obtained some degree of advantage over him, a chariot of fire came, and near the place, even the angel of the Lord, put forth his hand upon Bro. Marks and said unto him: ‘Thou art my son, come here.’ And immediately he was caught up in the chariot and rode away triumphantly out of their midst. And again the Lord said, ‘I will raise thee up for a blessing unto many people.‘”(1 Millennial Star. Volume 16, page 131.)

As Stake President, William Marks assisted in the laying of the corner stones of the Nauvoo Temple in April, 1841.

Although Marks was a close friend of Joseph Smith, he occasionally found himself at odds with the prophet. Smith presented evidence of why Sidney Rigdon should be rejected as first counselor in the First Presidency of the church during the October 1843 General Conference. He accused Rigdon, the long-time friend of Marks, as having lost his “integrity and steadfastness” and stated that he had no confidence in Rigdon’s abilities as a leader in the church or as his counselor. Regardless of these accusations Hyrum defended Sidney and encouraged the Saints to uphold him in his calling. Following that, it was Marks that motioned that Rigdon remain in his station as a counselor in the First Presidency. Rigdon was then sustained to the position by the membership of the church.

Smith later realized that he had over reacted to some false reports he had heard about Rigdon.

Initially, it was commonly assumed and agreed upon at the death of Joseph Smith that William Marks, as the president of the Nauvoo Stake, should be the “successor and trustee” but because of Marks rejection of the secret measures that had infiltrated the church, several leaders of the church manipulated things and appointed someone else to that most important task. Here is what a historian had to say-

“The majority of a certain “Quorum” in Nauvoo at this time opposed the appointment of William Marks as successor and trustee. They believed that because William Law, Emma Smith and William Marks (all members of this “Quorum”) were opposed to Joseph and the Quorum on certain matters — in fact, as they put it, on “the most important matters” — if Marks were permitted to be Trustee, they and the Quorum, and the Church would have it’s highest “spiritual blessings destroyed”.

In other words, the false secret endowments and the false spiritual wife doctrine would be exercised from the church and those unrepentant souls would be cut off.

The unusual thing about Marks rejecting “the most important matters”, was that he had been part of the secret cabal that Joseph was introducing them to.

He was initiated into Masonry in April 1842 and received his secret endowment on May 4, 1842 as a member of the Council of Fifty. Nevertheless, Marks was able to keep his spiritual and doctrinal equilibrium as Joseph Smith was leading an inner circle of intimates away from the straight and narrow- indeed, Marks seemed to realize that Joseph was no longer “abiding in the Lord” and that the succession prophecy in section 42 had been fulfilled.

On with the Trial

Ok, in our last installment we discussed how Brigham Young and his fellow accusers of Sidney Rigdon basically incriminated themselves by trying to justify their secret meetings, ordinations, and polygamous abominations as the “measures” of Joseph Smith the prophet.

It is amazing that even though these men were not on trial themselves and even though Sidney was sick and did not show up to defend himself and bring to light the secret acts of these brethren, their own remarks attempting to justify their secret acts revealed what this trail was really about.

We also reviewed how William Marks valiantly stood up and began defending the character of Sidney Rigdon and pointing out that the court was not acting consistently with divine protocol as contained in section 102.

Furthermore, William Marks pointed out that most of the charges being brought up against Rigdon had already been brought up in the previous trial in which Rigdon was found innocent and re-sustained by the church to his calling.

It is now, in this installment that we will review the rest of William Marks testimony.

Prepare yourself for one of the most illuminated summaries of what the true doctrine of succession really is and how it played out in the succession crisis in Nauvoo. William Marks was able to use passages from the D&C to clearly substantiate the doctrine of succession and yet he did so without even referencing section 43. It is this author’s opinion that Marks intentionally avoided section 43 because he did not want to tarnish the reputation of Joseph Smith in a high profile church trial that might possibly color how generations to come would view the prophet Joseph Smith.

William Marks took modern revelation very seriously and was undoubtedly one of the greatest students of modern revelation of his time and this is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the Lord called him to preside over the saints in Far West and Nauvoo.

One of the things Brigham and his fellow conspirators wanted to accomplish was to dissolve the quorum of the First Presidency and have the quorum of the Twelve Apostles preside over the church.

The following declaration by William Marks must have really pissed off brother Brigham!

“I had always been taught that the First Presidency would remain and always be with the Church. I have always understood that the Church would be imperfect without a quorum o three to stand as the First Presidency, and I cannot find any law to say that this quorum should ever by dropped” (see D&C 107:2-22 , 65-66)

Obviously Marks was right. There is always supposed to be a first Presidency to lead the Church until the Savior returns. Brigham and his brethren wanted to disband it because they wanted to continue in the secret measures they were doing and didn’t want to deal with Rigdon.

It appears that they didn’t want anyone over them holding them accountable for their actions. They had become a law unto themselves.

The next bombshell that President Marks laid on the Twelve was this-

“I laid my hands on Brother Sidney with Brother Joseph and he ordained him to be a ‘Prophet Seer and Revelator”, and to be equal with him in holding the Keys and Authority of this Kingdom. I have known this for two years” (See also section 90:6)

This amazing testimony is powerful. An eye witness was testifying that he had participated along with the prophet Joseph Smith in ordaining Sidney Rigdon to be a prophet seer and revelator AND to be equal with Joseph in holding the keys and authority of the kingdom.

The testimony of William Marks was consistent with the published record of the event which was inconspicuously recorded on page 431 of the Times and Seasons for the date of June 1 1841-

“We have to announce that Sidney Rigdon has been ordained a Prophet, Seer and Revelator“

The testimony of William Marks and the documentation of the event in the Times and Seasons are consistent with the calling of Sidney Rigdon by the Lord in D&C 90:6 to be equal with Joseph in holding the keys of the kingdom

“THUS saith the Lord, verily, verily I say unto you my son, thy sins are forgiven thee, according to thy petition, for thy prayers and the prayers of thy brethren have come up into my ears. Therefore, thou art blessed from henceforth that bear the keys of the kingdom given unto you; which kingdom is coming forth for the last time. Verily I say unto you, the keys of this kingdom shall never be taken from you, [Joseph Smith] while thou art in the world, neither in the world to come;

Nevertheless, through you shall the oracles be given to another, yea, even unto the church. And all they who receive the oracles of God, let them beware how they hold them lest they are accounted as a light thing, and are brought under condemnation thereby, and stumble and fall when the storms descend, and the winds blow, and the rains descend, and beat upon their house. And again, verily I say unto thy brethren, Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams, their sins are forgiven them also, and they are accounted as equal with thee in holding the keys of this last kingdom;

Did you notice how the Lord warned the church to beware not to hold the revelations of God as a light thing?

In other words, you better use the holy word of God to direct the church in all things. If you discard the callings of people and divine protocol contained in the holy word of God, you are guilty of taking the word of God lightly.

That is what William Marks was trying to point out at the trial.

He was quoting from the revelations in the D&C and showing the accusers of Sidney Rigdon that they were taking the word of God lightly, not only with regard to succession protocol, but with regard to the calling of Sidney Rigdon by the voice of God through his servants.

Marks was documenting the fact that Rigdon had been set apart and ordained as a member of the first Presidency as a prophet seer and revelator and was equal with Joseph in holding the keys of the kingdom.

But notice also how the Lord paraphrased Isaiah in the above passages-

And all they who receive the oracles of God, let them beware how they hold them lest they are accounted as a light thing, and are brought under condemnation thereby, and stumble and fall when the storms descend, and the winds blow, and the rains descend, and beat upon their house.

Keep this ominous warning in the above passage in the back of your mind.

In a later installment we will show that the succession crisis was the culmination of that very prophecy in section 90 and Isaiah 28! It was the crescendo of when the saints cumulatively stumbled and fell backwards.

Marks continues with his testimony-

“I always felt that there was a power and responsibility in that quorum which did not exist anywhere else.”

Marks is exactly right.

The first presidency has a power and responsibility that no other quorum has, hence, no other quorum has the right and power to create a first presidency and ordain members of it .

Many apologists attempt to suggest that the quorum of the twelve held the same power authority and position as the first presidency but that is a lie and a misinterpretation of scripture… otherwise, the quorum of the Lord would not have been expressly prohibited by the Lord from presiding in an organized stake of Zion.

Paraphrasing modern revelation, the Prophet Joseph Smith made the following declaration about the Twelve Apostles-

“The president then stated that the Twelve will have no right to go into Zion or any of its stakes and there undertake to regulate the affairs thereof where there is a standing High Council. But it is their duty to go abroad and regulate all matters relative to the different branches of the Church..”

Modern revelation makes it clear that the Twelve are under the direction of the Presidency of the church-

“The Twelve are a Traveling Presiding High Council, to officiate in the name of the Lord, under the direction of the Presidency of the Church“, (107:23)

Marks then quoted from section 90:3 and said-

“This is what I ever supposed would be the case that through him the oracles should be given to another who should be a Prophet, and a Seer and Revelator, and through him to the Church. I have always felt since last special conference that the order was not according to this pattern.

Sidney Rigdon and Fredrick G. Williams were appointed to stand equal with Joseph in this kingdom and I always supposed that one [of them] would receive the oracles from Joseph and give them to the Church. Now brethren, I have searched diligently to get at the right of the matter, and I know I am honest and wish to know how it should be.”

Brigham and his brethren must have been ready to explode as they had to stand there and hear the pure doctrine of succession flowing from this man of integrity as he quoted from modern scripture.

William Marks continued-

“I will read another extract from the Doctrine and Covenants which you will find on the ninty sixth page.

I never supposed that this quorum could be disorganized while there was one or two left.

I have ever felt that Elder Rigdon sustains his authority.

I never believed he had lost it through transgression.

I believe he is the man to receive the oracles from Brother Joseph and give them to the Church.

All I want is to have the thing right, and when I believe it is right , I am as ready to confess it as any other man”

He then read extracts from section 102:9-11

The president of the church, who is also the president of the council, is appointed by revelation, and acknowledged in his administration by the voice of the church. And it is according to the dignity of his office that he should preside over the council of the church; and it is his privilege to be assisted by two other presidents, appointed after the same manner that he himself was appointed. And in case of the absence of one or both of those who are appointed to assist him, he has power to preside over the council without an assistant; and in case he himself is absent, the other presidents have power to preside in his stead, both or either of them.

The above passage contains one of the most misunderstood doctrines of the kingdom.

The quorum of the first presidency does not need a quorum of three or even two to act.

Any member of it may act when the other two are not present.

Furthermore, the quorum does not become disorganized or dissolved when the President or a member of it dies or transgresses. The other two remain as members of the quorum with the power to replace the missing member(s)

Indeed, the remaining member of the quorum is the only one who has the right to receive revelation as to who should be called into the quorum. He is the one with the power and authority to ordain and replace the missing members of the quorum!

The following entry in the history of the church during the Kirtland years provides yet another testimony to this great truth-

“On 19 april 1834 at the organization of the Kirtland Council, the Prophet spoke of the role of counselors in the ancient church: “he had two men appointed as counselors with him, in case Peter was absent, his counselors could transact business alone….

Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and Zebedee Coltrin “laid hands upon brother Sidney and confirmed upon him the blessings of wisdom and knowledge to preside over the church in the absence of brother Joseph.”

From the above declaration of Joseph Smith it is clear that James and John continued to have the keys to preside in the church after Peter was crucified. (some accounts of the restoration of the 2^nd priesthood by Peter James and John reveal that it was just one angel, not three that restored this priesthood and that the angel was John, not Peter. If this is true, it provides another testimony that all three members of a first presidency may act singularly without the other two)

How ironic it is that Joseph gave this instruction as Sidney was being ordained with blessings of wisdom and knowledge and to be able to preside over the church in the absence of Brother Joseph.

As you can see, Sidney had been given the authority to preside in Joseph’s absence as early as 1834!

How incredibly refreshing it is to actually hear the voice of reason and the quoting of scripture as the standard… Something Brigham Young and his brethren failed to do at all during the trial and something that became a trademark of Brighams future administration.

The accusers at the trial did not base any of their remarks on the law of succession as contained in the scriptures, it appears that all they wanted to do was destroy the credibility and reputation of Rigdon and characterize him as being delinquent in his duties so that they could cast him aside, dissolve the quorum of the first presidency and become the presiding quorum of the Church.

Marks wasn’t finished.

He continued on to make sure that his testimony on the succession issue was complete and fully understood.

He wanted to make sure that they understood that the quorum of the twelve did not have the authority to organize another first presidency and they would not be able to preside over the church because their calling was to be a traveling missionary quorum of life, to take the gospel into the mission field-

“When this organization is broken up there is a quorum broken up which is of great power and authority, and I always thought it ought to have been continued.

The Church has always supposed the Twleve were to bear the gospel to all the world and when they are absent, who will preside over the church? (107:23,33)

We know that it is necessary for individuals to preside over the whole church.

Now we are losing this office and power and authority, but I feel as though we don’t want to lose anything.

I feel that we ought to keep up the organization, if it is right to do so.”

If the sound doctrine being preached by William Marks is true, it stands as a condemnation not only against Brigham and his brethren of the Twelve at that time, it stands as a condemnation of the current quorum of the twelve of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints.

For indeed, they base themselves out of what they claim is the main stake of Zion and they fly all over the world organizing stakes of Zion and presiding in “stakes of Zion” instead of focusing their efforts exclusively on preaching the gospel to none members in the mission field as they have been commanded to do by revelation.

By dissolving the first presidency that was set up by revelation and then eventually reorganizing it themselves, the quorum of the Twelve have taken unto themselves a power and calling that was never given to them!

They are doing something they have been expressly forbidden to do!

They are not allowed to preside in Zion!

They had no authority to organize a portion of their missionary quorum into the first presidency of the church!

Within 3 ½ years after the church sustained the Twelve as the presiding quorum over the church, Brigham and his brethren  would create a first presidency to preside over the church and the quorum of the Twelve.

Wilford Woodruff would be the first person that Brigham would confide in about reorganizing the First Presidency. Here is what Wilford Woodruff writes in his personal diary-

“I had a question put to me by President Young: What my opinion was concerning one of the Twleve Apostles being appointed as the President of the Church with his two counselors. I answered that a quorum like the Twelve who had been appointed by revelation, confirmed by revelation from time to time, I thought it would require a REVELATION to change the order of that quorum..“

We must give Wilford Woodruff credit for understanding that a change in the quorum of the Twelve would require a revelation from God. Indeed, the creation of a First Presidency would require a revelation from God, if indeed it was even possible for a lesser priesthood quorum to create a higher priesthood quorum.

Despite the concerns of Wilford Woodruff, Brigham Young would eventually move forward without a revelation and have himself elected as the President of the Church.

Back to the trial, William Marks continued-

“When Elder Rigdon first came from Pittsburgh he said it was his place to receive the oracles, but there was a delicacy in Brother Rigdon in presenting his claims to the people; he supposed there would have been some individuals who would have taken up the case.—

What does it mean to “receive the oracles“?

One way to interpret the revelation is that the successor to Joseph Smith would be responsible for being the steward over the existing canonized revelations and be responsible for teaching what they mean.

Another way to interpret it is that the successor to Joseph Smith would be responsible for receiving additional revelation for the church.

It would appear as if both interpretations may be correct.

Marks then says that he is willing to sustain the actions of the court if it can be proven that Rigdon was worthy of being severed from the church, reiterates that he can find nothing that Rigdon has done wrong-

“It appears from what has been stated this morning, that the questions have been put which seems to bring a contradiction. If Elder Rigdon has done anything worthy of being severed from the church, I feel to go with the church, and to be satisfied with what they do. I dont [don't] know that I can see anything worthy of cutting him off at the present time. Probably I am prejudiced in his favor; if it is wrong I hope the brethren will forgive me.

When I have set with the High Council I have always tried to divest myself of prejudice. I am willing that the High Council and church should act on his case, if they think best. I felt as though there was a great many men here who were saying hard things against him and nobody to speak a word for him, and I have volunteered to say a few words in his defence [defense].

I have had a conversation with Elder Rigdon and I cannot find that he has committed a crime. The church has never cut off any person without a crime was proven against him.

The following question by Marks may well be the most important question he asked during the trial-

“Now is there a man in the church who has received the ordination of a prophet, seer and revelator? [other than Sidney Rigdon] If there is I want to see him.—”

“There has men been ordained prophets, priests and kings, but I have never heard of anyone [except Sidney Rigdon] being ordained a seer and revelator. I think I am knowing to all the ordinations, but I dont [don't] know of a man who has been ordained to the office and calling Brother Sidney has; and if he is cut off, who will we have to obtain revelations?”

Again, one of the reasons that William Marks testimony is so powerful is that he was actually one of the members of the secret quorums where men were being ordained as “prophets, priests and kings“. Yet he clearly understood that those callings did not have the power to act as a prophet seer and revelator for the church.

He was a member of the quorum of 50 and he was also involved in receiving the secret endowment ….. so he was aware of the ordinations that Joseph had done regarding being a prophet priest and king but he understood that those ordinations did not give someone the power and authority to preside over the church nor did any of Joseph’s “secret measures” supersede the protocol written in the scriptures.

Marks then made the following declaration-

“A man must be in possession of this power to be able to ordain a prophet, and a seer and a revelator. If there is a man ordained to lead this people, [other than Sidney Rigdon] I do not know it.”

” I dont [don't] believe there are sufficient revelations given to lead this people, and I am fully of the belief that this people cannot build the kingdom except it is done by revelation”

The Importance of Revelation in Leading the Church

Marks declarations really bring us to the bottom line of what the trial was all about. The church was going to be making a decision about whether they would submit themselves to a prophet seer and revelator and be led by divine revelation or whether they would rather follow the council of a quorum of men who had not been ordained to act as prophets seers and revelators in behalf of the entire church.

In wrapping up this installment and the magnificent pontifications of William Marks, let us review the 18 points he made during his defense of Sidney Rigdon-

1- The court was not proceeding according to the protocol provided in modern revelation

2- Straws must be drawn to see who defends the character of the accused and makes sure he gets a fair trial

3- It is improper to bring up old charges that Rigdon has already been tried for and found innocent of

4- The First Presidency of the Church always presides over the church

5- It does not become unorganized or dissolved when one or two members die

6- Any member of the quorum can conduct business when the other two are not present

7- The First Presidency has “power and responsibility” no other quorum has. They preside over the quorum of the Twelve

8- The quorum of the 12 are a traveling missionary quorum that has no right to preside in an established stake of Zion (with no authority to organize the First Presidency)

9- He personally helped Joseph Ordain Sidney to be a Prophet Seer and Revelator

10- A person must be a prophet seer and revelator in order to ordain another person to be a prophet seer and revelator (Marks could not have ordained Sidney himself, he could only participate in the circle while Joseph performed the ordinance)

11- Marks was aware of every ordination and Sidney was the only living person was ordained to be a prophet seer and revelator

12- A “prophet, priest and king” does not have the same authority as a “prophet seer and revelator” and does not have the right to receive the oracles for the church

13- Sidney was equal with Joseph in holding the Keys and Authority of the Kingdom

14- Sidney has sustained his authority and has not lost it through transgression

15- Sidney is the one to receive the oracles from brother Joseph and give them to the church

16- If Sidney is cut off from the church, there will be no one to obtain revelations for the church

17- Continuous revelation was essential to guide the church

18- The kingdom cannot be built without revelation

Finally, let’s review what Joseph Smith had said regarding the importance of revelation-

The essence of Mormonism is revelation from God to man. It is by revelation that God is known. The prophets have consistently taught this throughout the ages.

Joseph Smith taught “Jesus in His teachings says, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’ What rock? Revelation.” Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Five 1842–43, p.273.

“Salvation cannot come without revelation; it is in vain for anyone to minister without it. No man is a minister of Jesus Christ without being a Prophet. No man can be a minister of Jesus Christ except he has the testimony of Jesus; and this is the spirit of prophecy.” Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith (1976), 160.

“No man can receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations. The Holy Ghost is a revelator.” Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith (1976), 328.

In our next installment we shall take a look at the amazing man who led the scapegoat out of the congregation of Israel and then positioned himself to become the sole president of the church.

We shall now address some of the major doctrinal issues that came out in the trial of Sidney Rigdon which was recorded in the Times and Seasons.

I wish I could provide the entire proceedings that were reported in the Times and Seasons but this article and series has already become too long.

Those wanting to read the whole account may acquire a copy of it from Colliers Publishing or look it up in the Times and Seasons or check here.

Although section 102 states that a court may be held by the “Bishop’s Council” OR the “High Council of the Church of Christ“, it appears as if the trial for Sidney Rigdon’s was an amalgamation of those two options.

Apparently, Bishop Newel K. Whitney presided over the court but the High Council of the Church of Christ of the Nauvoo Stake acted as the council of twelve high priests in the Bishops Council.

As the stake President, William Marks acted as a member of the High Council but did not preside over the church court.

Unlike courts held today in modern times, Marks did not preside over the court, he simply participated as the presiding member of the high council.

Brigham Young and his brethren of the Quorum of the Twelve did not have the authority to preside in a stake of Zion. That is why Brigham Young stated in his opening remarks, that “The Twelve are to be regarded as witnesses in this trial, and not Judges: we present ourselves before this court as witnesses, and we are prepared to bring other testimony forward if necessary.”

Obviously, Bishop Whitney and the High Council were being coerced and controlled by the quorum of the Twelve and it appears that Brigham was directing the hearing even though it should have been the presiding officer over the high council or Bishop Whitney. If not for the conflict of interest between Brigham and the Twelve and Rigdon, there is no reason to believe that the local leaders would have ever called a court.

It should also be understood that the quorum of the twelve was actually not united in their beliefs at the time of the succession crisis.

It appears that there were actually only six members of the quorum who testified at the trial of Sidney Rigdon, they are-

• Brigham Young
  
• Amasa Lyman
  
• Orson Hyde
  
• Parley P. Pratt
  
• Heber C. Kimball
  
• John Taylor.
  

In additional to those six, W.W. Phelps also testified.

Several members of the quorum that appear to not be present at the trial and ultimately rejected the authority of Brigham Young were as follows;

• Lyman Wight
  
• William Smith
  
• John E. Page.
  

The quorum of the Twelve

It is important to remember that many changes had taken place in the original quorum of the Twelve by the time that the death of Joseph and Hyrum took place.

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the quorum of the Twelve and the adjustments that were made-

” In 1835, the Three Witnesses were asked by Joseph Smith, Jr. to select the original twelve members of the church’s Quorum of the Twelve. They announced their choices at a meeting on February 14, 1835.^[1] The Three Witnesses also ordained the twelve chosen men to the priesthood office of apostle by the laying on of hands.^[1] Below is a list of members of the quorum prior to the succession crisis of 1844.

Ten of the eighteen followed Brigham Young to Utah Territory and remained part of the Quorum in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (indicated below as “LDS after 1844″). Thomas B. Marsh and Luke S. Johnson later rejoined the Latter-day Saints in Utah, but did not resume their former places in the Quorum. Three of these apostles went on to be apostles in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite). One, John E. Page, went on to be an apostle in the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) or “Hedrickite” church. Another, William Smith, later asserted his claim to head his own “Williamite” church organization before ultimately joining what is now the Community of Christ (where he did not resume his place in the quorum). Lyman Wight, likewise, organized his own branch of the church. William E. M’Lellin joined with multiple post-1844 church organizations in succession, each of which recognized his apostleship.

The list includes the dates when each apostle was ordained. In some cases, the date of the calling is used when the actual date of ordination is unclear.

• Thomas B. Marsh (April 26, 1835) – excommunicated 1838, later rejoined LDS in 1857
  
• David W. Patten (February 15, 1835) – killed 1838
  
• Brigham Young (February 14, 1835) – LDS after 1844
  
• Heber C. Kimball (February 14, 1835) – LDS after 1844
  
• Orson Hyde (February 15, 1835) – LDS after 1844
  
• William E. M’Lellin (February 15, 1835) – excommunicated 1838, Rigdonite, Strangite, Whitmerite and Hedrickite after 1844
  
• Parley P. Pratt (February 21, 1835) – LDS after 1844
  
• Luke S. Johnson (February 15, 1835) – excommunicated 1838, later rejoined LDS in 1846
  
• William Smith (February 15, 1835) – Strangite and Williamite after 1844
  
• Orson Pratt (April 26, 1835) – LDS after 1844
  
• John F. Boynton (February 15, 1835) – excommunicated 1838, joined Parrishites
  
• Lyman E. Johnson (February 14, 1835) – withdrew from LDS in 1838
  
• John E. Page (December 19, 1838) – Strangite, Brewsterite and Hedrickite after 1844
  
• John Taylor (December 19, 1838) – LDS after 1844
  
• Wilford Woodruff (April 26, 1839) – LDS after 1844
  
• George A. Smith (April 26, 1839) – LDS after 1844
  
• Willard Richards (April 14, 1840) – LDS after 1844
  
• Lyman Wight (April 8, 1841) – Wightite after 1844
  
• Amasa M. Lyman (August 1842) – LDS after 1844 and Godbeite after 1870
  

Sidney Rigdon Claimed to have the Spirit of Revelation & Prophecy

When Sidney Rigdon returned to Nauoo after the death of Joseph and Hyrum and locked horns with the Twelve, he claimed to have had a vision while he was in Pittsburgh. He claimed that the vision was a continuation of the Vision that He and Joseph had had which is documented in section 76.

Among other things he claimed that it was shown to him in vision that the Twelve would withdraw fellowship from him, the temple would not be completed and the church would be rejected with their dead.

Orson Hyde accused Rigdon of intimating that he, Sidney was the stone that the builders rejected (see Psalms 118:22, Matt 21:42, Mark 10:12, Luke 20 :17, Acts 4:11; 1 Peter 2:7, Isaiah 22:25)

Sidney was obsessed with great battles to take place in the future and that he would become a great conqueror.

We will touch again on the significance of Sidney’s vision later on as we review accusations made by the Twelve however, keep in mind that when Joseph Smith presented greater clarification to section 76 by writing a poem about it, he revealed that verse 29 was not speaking about a past war with Satan but rather about a future one in which Satan would encompass the saints round about.

“For Satan, old serpent, the devil’s for war,-
And yet will encompass the saints round about.”

Perhaps one of the most intriguing statements that Sidney made was an innuendo that the Lord had shown Sidney what would befall himself (Sidney) as a result of the apostasy of the church… A possible implication having to do with the sins of latter day Israel being artificially put upon the head of the Lords scapegoat servant. That statement, as it applies to Sidney’s role as the scapegoat in the atonement statute, may explain why Sidney would have such a strange and troubled history after he is rejected by the church led away from the congregation of Israel -

Perhaps the most important significance of the vision that Sidney claimed to have had is that Sidney was claiming to have the spirit of prophecy which is consistent with his calling as a prophet seer and revelator of the church.

Elder Hyde defends the Secret “Measures” -

The first accuser to follow the opening remarks of Brigham Young was Elder Hyde.

According to Elder Hyde’s testimony, Sidney had said to Elder Hyde and his brethren of the Twelve-

“You are not led by the Lord, and I have known for a long time that you were not led by the Lord“

Elder Hyde attempted to defend the actions of the Twelve, claiming that the “measures” they were involved in had come from Joseph Smith-

“I defy any man to show that we have adopted any measure, only what Joseph has directed us“

Elder Rigdon was obviously making a categorical observation that the twelve were not being led by the spirit. He was also accusing the Twelve of departing from the pure and simple gospel of Jesus Christ that had been restored to the earth.

Elders Hydes use of the term “measures” was alluding to the secret quorums and secret ordinations and secret teachings about spiritual wifery and the associated practice of practice of polygamy, the secret revelation that would eventually become known as section 132, secret council meetings where secret ordinations were being introduces, etc.

In essence, Rigdon was confirming that another gospel, one that was contrary to the true gospel of Christ, had been introduced to the saints and that the prophecies in 2^nd Thess the and the original text of section five of the D&C had come true, the Lord had sent strong delusion upon the church for believing a lie and therefore, because of their hardened hearts the Lord had turned them over to Satan-

It is interesting that the primary debate during the succession crisis was not focused on the doctrine of succession and the pure gospel as documented in the accepted scriptures or the importance of the church being led by revelation, rather, Orson Hyde was defending the actions of the Twelve by stating that the secret “measures” they were following were given to them by the Prophet Joseph Smith.

Why would the Lord Contradict Himself?

Orson quoted the Prophet Joseph as saying-

“The Lord bids me to hasten and give you your endowment before the temple is finished“

This hastening to give the endowment was supposedly done so that the keys of the kingdom could be transferred from Joseph to the Twelve and so that the Twelve could bear off the kingdom triumphantly even if Joseph were to be killed and the temple not finished.

There are several very serious doctrinal problems with the alleged pronouncement of Joseph Smith.

Perhaps the most obvious one is that the logical and doctrinal choice for handing over the keys of the kingdom would be other members of the first presidency and just about anyone other than the missionary quorum of the Twelve who had been expressly forbidden by the Lord to ever preside in a stake of Zion.

Another point is that Joseph Smith was no longer the prophet seer and revelator of the church and therefore was not even authorized to receive new doctrine and new covenants for the church, especially new doctrine and new ordinances and covenants that contradicted previous revelations.

If anyone would have been revealing new doctrine and new ordinances and covenants and secretly handing the keys of the kingdom to anyone in the church, it would have been Hyrum who was the only presiding member of the presidency who was authorized to act as a prophet seer and revelator of the church at the time!

Even if Joseph had been the acting prophet seer and revelator of the Church, the saints would have been duty bound to reject the new “measures” being introduced since they contradicted the previous revelations and the four standard works of the church which had been voted on and sustained by the church as the LAW of the CHURCH.

The reason that the Lord provides a protocol for excommunicating the president of the high priesthood is because no mortal person is infallible! That would include Joseph Smith, who according to the succession prophecy in section 42, would not always abide in the Lord.

Fourthly, the Lord had commanded the saints to not add to or diminish from the doctrines contained in the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. (D&C 124:119-120)

Lastly, Orson’s claim that Joseph had been inspired by the Lord to reveal and bestow the temple endowment BEFORE the temple was finished, so that the kingdom could roll forth, contradicted what the Lord said in sections 124.

Clearly, section 124 stated that if the temple was not finished, the church would be rejected with their dead. How could the kingdom roll forth if the church is rejected with their dead? Hence, there was nothing gained by prematurely revealing the “full endowment” just in case the temple was not finished by the appointed time.

Further, the prophet Hyrum Smith had clarified the warning in section 124 and made it clear that the key of knowledge that unfolds the dispensation of the fullness of times cannot be turned until the temple was completed and the baptismal font finished.

“…they have neglected the House of the Lord, the Baptismal Font, in this place, wherein their dead may be redeemed, and the key of knowledge that unfolds the dispensation of the fullness of times may be turned, and the mysteries of God be unfolded, upon which their salvation and the salvation of the world, and the redemption of their dead depends, for ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ ‘there shall not be a general assembly for a general conference assembled together until the House of the Lord shall be finished, and the Baptismal Font, and if we are not diligent the church shall be rejected, and their dead also,’ ‘saith the Lord,’ therefore, dear Brother, any proceedings otherwise than to put forth their hands with their might to do this work, is not according to the will of God, and shall not prosper; therefore, tarry not in any place whatever but come forth unto this place from all the world, until it is filled up and polished, and sanctified according to my word…”

In another sermon given in May of 1842 Joseph Smith stated that there were

“keys of the kingdom,” and “certain signs and words by which false spirits and personages may be detected from true, which cannot be revealed to the Elders till the Temple is completed.“

Obviously all of the above documentation testifies to the fact that there would be no advantage to the so called endowment and special keys being given to anyone before the completion of the temple.

If Joseph had made the declaration that Brigham claimed he made, it would have contradicted previous revelations and statements of Joseph Smith.

Everything was predicated upon the completion of the temple.

If Joseph really did make the proclamation that Orson (and Brigham) claimed he made, Joseph was contradicting himself, Hyrum and the Lord.

Nevertheless, it makes sense that Joseph may have done these things in fulfillment of the original prophecy in section 5 foretelling that God would turn the saints over to Satan.

The Testimony of Parley P. Pratt

The next accuser of Sidney Rigdon was Parley P. Pratt, a previous disciple of Rigdon’s who had helped to bring Rigdon into the church.

Pratt quoted Rigdon as saying-

“I shall now take the liberty to publish to the world, all the secret works of this church… I now the result both on you and the Church, and myself…”

Again, we see from the testimony of Pratt that the central issue of the succession crisis had to do with the secret acts of many of the leading brethren of the church, including most of the twelve apostles.

Rigdon was threatening to expose the secret abominations that were being practiced by Young, Hyde, Pratt and their brethren.

Again, when Rigdon said he knew what the result would be on the church and even himself, one has to wonder if in fact the Lord had shown him in vision that the sins of the church would be artificially placed upon his own head and he would himself eventually be turned over to delusion, per the prophecy in the atonement statute. (Lev 16)

According to the testimony of Pratt, Sidney Rigdon claimed that the vision he had in Pittsburgh revealed that the twelve apostles would withdraw fellowship from him.

The Testimony of Amasa Lyman

Next, Amasa Lyman attached the character of Sidney Rigdon by claiming that he had not been valiant in his calling for 4 or 5 years. He also said ,

“Now where has this individual been for these years past? Has he been laboring to support and uphold the man whom God has appointed to bring forth His work? Has he been endeavoring for the last four or five years to build up the principles taught and laid down by the man of God? There are men here present who have travelled through the length and breadth of these united states, and to Europe, and some who have travelled as far as the Palestine to carry out the establish the principles which have been laid down by our deceased prophet, and yet the Great God has not made known to any of these men the wonderful things made known in this revelation.

Neither has Elder Marks nor the twelve received any such wonderful revelation. but this man who has been asleep[ all the while, when he was not too sick to sleep and smoke his pipe, and take his drink; correspond with John C. Bennett, and other mean, corrupt men. This is the character of the man on whom shines the light of revelation, this is the man who says that the Twelve have gone astray and this Church is not led by the Lord!”

Wow!

What interesting charges these are!

Apparently Sidney Rigdon, like Joseph Smith and many others of the elders living in Nauvoo was known for enjoying an occasional smoke and an occasional drink.

This is fascinating.

The accusers were actually the ones that really should have been on trial for fornication and adultery and yet they were suggesting that Sidney Rigdon should be excommunicated for not obeying the word of wisdom!

With regard to the fact that Sidney Rigdon had not been overly active during the last five years, if you have not read my tribute to Sidney Rigdon to understand why Rigdon had been largely silenced for a period of time, please read the article here.

Furthermore, as we will see as we progress further into the details of this kangaroo court, President Marks would later stand up and declare that it is not appropriate according to church procedure to retry someone for something they have previously been tried for and exonerated from.

Sidney Rigdon had already been accused of corresponding with Bennett and for not being active in his calling in the Presidency and had been exonerated by the Church and by Hyrum Smith and by Joseph Smith.

Sidney Rigdon had already previously been accused of not being active in his calling in the first presidency for the last five years and he was forgiven, and President Hyrum Smith had led the vote in sustaining President Rigdon in his calling.

According to Amasa, Sidney Rigdon had testified that he had seen in vision that the “the temple must be forsaken and not be finished, and all that Joseph has done must be rejected.”

That prophecy of Rigdon’s about the saints eventual failure to complete the Temple is really quite remarkable since the saints had every intention of finishing the temple when Rigdon arrived at Nauvoo. At that time there was no apparent reason why the temple would not be finished.

In conjunction with this, Sidney quoted Isaiah “The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner”

Another interesting thing that came out of this trial is that Sidney Rigdon had said that the “vision was a continuation of the vision recorded in the book of doctrine and covenants“

Sidney was linking his credibility as a prophet to the fact that he had been the co-testator with Joseph Smith in providing the testimony of the Father and the Son as contained in section 76.

After Brigham and his six conspirators had finished making their accusations, Brigham Young said-

“I shall now wait and see if there is anyone to produce testimony in favor of the opposite side of the question.”

At this point in time, “President William Marks arose and said he felt disposed to say a few words in defense of Elder Rigdon“

“there has been a strong team against him. They all seem to speak against him and there I nothing said in his favor. If feel to take up the opposite side of the question and say something in his defense, for I have always been a friend to Elder Rigdon.”

William Marks was pointing out that bishop Whitney and/or Brigham Young, whoever was conducting the trial, was not following the protocol given in section 102 which requires the council to draw straws to see which members of the quorum defend the accuser and make sure that his character and reputation are not tarnished.

Marks made the bold declaration that revelatory protocol was not being followed as it had been in past trials-

“It has always been the case before this High Council, that there are two sides to the question, there are some to speak in favor of the accused, but there seems to be only one side to this subject.”

… it has always been the case before the High council that some should speak in the defense of the accused, I feel to volunteer to speak in his behalf. It is no more than right that both sides should be represented.”

“in regard to his character, there are many things said which appear to be objectionable“

“I hear objections to his authority and to his conduct for four or five years past. There charges brought before the conference, last fall, and one or two days spent in hearing of them, and it seemed to me, that every exertion was made that could be made, to criminate him and cut him off.

There was time given to bring all the charges that could be got at, but there was not a single particle of the charges sustained, if I recollect right, as to proving him guilty of committing any of the acts specified in the charges.

Now I think if Brother Rigdon was restored at that time we ought not to go beyond the conference to fetch up charges today, but here are charges fetched up for years back. It is known that he was restored to full faith and fellow ship last fall. I have heard Brother Joseph say repeatedly since that time that all things was right between them….”

Incredible!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Marks was standing in the gap!

He was calling out the accusers and pointing out the inappropriate things they were doing and saying.

He declared that the church court was not in accordance with the protocol in the scriptures.

He was boldly stating that most of the things that were being brought up had already been brought up in a previous hearing and that Rigdon had been found innocent and restored to his calling.

Imagine the courage it must have taken to stand up against the crowd, realizing he was putting his own standing in jeopardy!

The reason Marks had to get up and “volunteer” to defend Rigdon is because nobody else was doing it. The court had neglected draw straws and appointed members of the high council to defend and protect the rights and the character of Rigdon.

One the things missing in the trial was any volunteered comments from any members of the high council!

Why?

Because they all knew that Brigham and the Twelve were orchestrating the Kangaroo trial and they knew that the outcome of the trial had been predetermined. They understood that if they spoke favorably about Rigdon, it could cost them their membership, as it eventually did cost Marks his.

Praise God for the integrity of President William Marks, one of the most honest, steady, valiant leaders of the LDS restoration movement.

In the next part of this series we shall finish hearing the testimony of William Marks. In my opinion, he provides the most clear and scripturally sound explanation of the law of succession and his testimony will stand as a witness against the seven accusers the members of the high council, Bishop Whitney and the apostate members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter days.

Clearly the saints who chose to follow Brigham Young and the majority of the twelve chose to be led by rulers rather than prophets. They chose to be led by dogma and the teachings of man rather than by revelation.

They chose to discard the man who had been chosen by revelation and ordained to be a prophet seer and revelator according to the voice of God out of heaven in favor of a man who openly proclaimed that he was not a prophet.

More on the testimony of William Marks in the next installment.

Keep Watching

In part three of this series we discussed how the gospel was fully restored and then rejected sometime between June of 1831 and the end of 1834. Because of this, Hyrum was commissioned to reform the church.

One cannot understand the truth about what happened during the LDS succession crisis without understanding what the fulness of the gospel is, the fact that it was fully restored and then rejected by the end of 1834. The context in which the saints gathered to Nauvoo is that they were a fallen and apostate people who had lost the fullness of the priesthood as documented in section 124.

I documented that the gospel law of monogamy had clearly been established by the Lord in modern revelation in sections 42, 49 and the article on Marriage and that it was an eternal law, not a temporal or temporary law. There is no higher marital law that the law of monogamy.

I did this because the secret practices pertaining to spiritual wifery and polygamy that were taking place in Nauvoo at the time of the succession crisis are the crux of what the succession crisis was really all about regarding the struggle between Sidney Rigdon and the majority of the Twelve Apostles under the leadership of Brigham Young.

The primary issue in Nauvoo was that the saints had collectively strayed from the original gospel ordinances and covenants.

It is critical to understand that every ordinance and covenant necessary for salvation is contained in sections 20 and 42 and that the saints were commanded to not add to or take away from what had been revealed in those two revelations. (The “Baptisms for the Dead” that would be introduced in Nauvoo are a subcategory of baptisms and the ordinance of “washing of feet” that was done in the Kirtland Temple and also before the Kirtland Temple was completed, is not an ordinance of salvation, but rather an ordinance for those in the ministry.)

It is because the saints had stayed from the ordinances, covenants and commandments that the Lord commissioned the prophet Hyrum Smith to lead a reformation of the church.

The Lord had acknowledged in section 124 that the saints were practicing abominations during the Nauvoo era-

“..And it shall come to pass that if you build a house unto my name, and do not do the things that I say, I will not perform the oath which I make unto you, neither fulfil the promises which ye expect at my hands, saith the Lord.

For instead of blessings, ye, by your own works, bring cursings, wrath, indignation, and judgments upon your own heads, by your follies, and by all your abominations, which you practise before me, saith the Lord…”

.

The practice of secret combinations and secret abominations began infiltrating the church shortly after the fulness of the gospel was rejected in Kirtland.

Secret doctrines and secret oaths were infiltrating the restored church. They were bringing darkness upon the saints.

Although Joseph was being accused by some people of his day of organizing the Danites and some historians believe that Joseph Smith at least encouraged the creation of the Danites and other secret organizations within the church shortly after the Kirtland Temple was defiled and the saints had to flee from Kirtland, we find him condemning secret bands as late as 1839.

“I would further suggest the impropriety of the organization of bands or companies, by covenant or oath, by penalties or secrecies; but let the time past of our experience and sufferings by the wickedness of Doctor Avard suffice and let our covenant be that of the Everlasting Covenant, as contained in the Holy Writ and the things that God hath revealed to us. Pure friendship always becomes weakened the very moment you undertake to make it stronger by penalty oaths and secrecy.”

Joseph was publicly testifying against the practice of secret oaths by “penalties or secrecies” and encouraging people to stick with the EVERLASTING COVENANT.

Indeed, the only covenant the church members should be involved in was the EVERLASTING COVENANT of baptism.

Shortly after the death of Joseph and Hyrum, Apostle William Smith, their brother, and his supporters publicly condemned the secret doctrine of secret oaths and covenants that Brigham Young and other leading brethren were participating in.

“… we do solemnly protest against the doctrine of secret oaths and covenants and we also view this as among the principal causes that have overthrown our brethren…”

William saw the practice of secret oaths as the primary thing that led the leaders of the church into apostasy.

Emma Smith made a profound observation shortly after the death of Joseph and Hyrum. She said-

“…secret things… cost Joseph and Hyrum their lives!“

The Real Succession debate was about the Spiritual Wife Doctrine
and the False Masonic Covenant- Temple Endowment

It appears to me from my study that Brigham Young and his brethren of the Twelve would very probably have found the leadership of Sidney Rigdon acceptable if Rigdon would have embraced the spiritual wife doctrine and the Masonic secret oaths and covenants that were being intertwined with each other.

I believe the following testimony by Joseph Newton is accurate-

“I was at Nauvoo during all the time that Elder Rigdon was there on his last visit to that place, and am well acquainted with the cause of all the difficulties that existed, and now exist between him and the twelve and their adherents. It was said to me by many that they had no objection to Elder Rigdon but his opposition to the Spiritual Wife System.”

The Saints departed from the Ordinances during the Kirtland Years

After the saints arrived in Nauvoo Joseph Smith published the following statement-

“We have been chastened by the hand of God heretofore for not obeying His commands… we have treated lightly His commands, and departed from His ordinances, and the Lord has chastened us sore, and we have felt His arm and kissed the rod; let us be wise in time to come and ever remember that ‘to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.” (HC 5:65)

Joseph was primarily paraphrasing and combining two passages of scripture.

He was addressing the chastisement from the Lord in section 84 when the saints were brought under condemnation for taking lightly the Book of Mormon and modern revelation.

He was also paraphrasing Isaiah 24 and acknowledging that the latter day saints were the express people that Isaiah had identified in prophecy as the culprits who would bring about the defiling of the earth in the end times by breaking the everlasting covenant. This was done by transgressing the laws and changing the ordinance-

“The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.” (Isaiah 24:5 See also section one wherein the Lord prophesies that it was the saints of the restored church that would fulfill this prophecy of Isaiah)

The saints were defiling the true everlasting covenant of baptism by replacing it with the Satanic everlasting covenant of spiritual wifery and associated masonic oaths and covenants and swearing by the neck. The redefinition of what the “New and Everlasting Covenant” is given in section 132.

The Joseph Smith we read about in Nauvoo is a very different Joseph Smith than the one we read about in the early Kirtland era.

The Kirtland Joseph was confident and full of the spirit of revelation. His personal life was quite consistent with his public teachings. During the first years of Joseph Public ministry he would bring forth about 100 revelations.

The Nauvoo Joseph was schizophrenic, erratic and paranoid and there is evidence that seems to indicate that his personal life was not congruent with what he was teaching.

One day he would appear to be confident, prophetic and chastising the saints for departing from the ordinances and failing to complete the temple. The next day, according to multiple testimonies, he would be off secretly teaching the spiritual wife doctrine, conducting secret polygamous marriage ceremonies and introducing doctrines and rituals that contributed to leading the saints into further darkness.

Less than ten significant revelations directed to the church were received by Joseph during the last seven years of his life, after the saints defiled the Kirtland Temple and fled from Kirtland.

Only one significant revelation was received during the Nauvoo years.

Again, it would be easy to place the blame on Joseph, but those who understand the prophetic aspects of what was being enacted in the atonement statute (Lev 16) will realize that it was the rebellious saints, beginning in the Kirtland era that rejected the fulness of the gospel and brought darkness upon Joseph and his brethren during the Nauvoo era.

Truly it was the saints of the restored church Isaiah was speaking about when he acknowledged that the revelatory gifts of the latter day prophets and seers would be covered because of the iniquity of the people-

“For behold, the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep. For behold, ye have closed your eyes, and ye have rejected the prophets; and your rulers, and the seers hath he covered because of your iniquity.” (2 Nephi 27:5)

Did Joseph wake up and try to Repent Before his Death?

There are many evidences that make it appear that the Lord was allowing Joseph to begin to wake up and see that his eyes had been covered and that he had been deceived shortly before his death. It also appears that Joseph finally acknowledged that he had been involved in some abominable practices and he was trying to repent.

Although he had been taking on spiritual wives at a break-neck pace in 1843, he completely stopped taking additional wives during the last 8 month before the martyrdom.

William Marks testified that Joseph realized that spiritual wifery was a sin and that he had been deceived.

He wrote in a July 1853 letter to the Zion’s Harbinger and Baneemy’s Organ that he met with the prophet a short time before his death.

He quoted Smith as saying privately, “This doctrine of polygamy, or spiritual wife-system, that has been taught and practiced among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow. I have been deceived; it is a curse to mankind , and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down, and its practice stopped in the Church.

Several others that knew Joseph Smith during those trying times also claimed that Joseph was trying to repent including Issac Sheen who became affiliated with the RLDS movement in 1859 and edited the church periodical Saints’ Herald, wrote in the first issue of that paper (March 1860) that though “Joseph Smith taught the spiritual wife doctrine,” he “repented of his connection with this doctrine, and said it was of the devil.“

Although Brigham Young vehemently denied ever hearing Joseph Smith proclaim that he had been deceived and that the spiritual wife doctrine was false, he conceded in a discourse given in 1866 that “joseph was worn out with it“.

Joseph Has the Spiritual wife Revelation Destroyed

LDS historian Michael D. Quinn acknowledged that “Smith was, in fact, willing to destroy the original manuscript of the 1843 polygamy revelation.

Joseph F. Smith wrote that the prophet “consented for her [Emma Smith] to burn the paper containing the original copy of the revelation.”

An obscure 1853 publication also reported that the original text of the polygamy revelation “by Joseph Smith’s command was burned.”" (Quinn page 147) Quinn references Letter of Joseph F. Smith to William E. McLellin, 6 Jan. 1880, fd21, box 5, Scott G. Kenney Papers, Manuscripts Division, Marriott Library.

“Emma Smith remembered that the prophet did more than consent to the revelation’s destruction. According to her 1847 account, while alone in their Mansion House bedroom, Smith “told her that the doctrine and practice of polygamy was going to ruin the church” and then he burned the revelation.

According to Quinn, “It makes sense that while he was alone with her the night of 23 June 1844, only hours before surrendering for trial, he directed his attention to destroying the written evidence of polygamy.”
(Quinn page 147)

Joseph Smith destroyed the Council of Fifty Minutes

There is an abundance of historical documentation that indicates that Joseph Smith was using masonry, the Danites, secret anointed quorums and the counsel of 50 to try to establish the kingdom of God that Daniel prophesied about.

The diary of William Clayton shows that Joseph Smith told his secretary to burn the Council of Fifty’s minutes.

A possible reason for destroying the minutes of the council of fifty is that Joseph Smith had had himself ordained and anointed as the King in those secret meetings. It would appear that that act may have been a very grievous sin.

In the Book of Mormon the Lord warns that there will be no kings upon the land of America until Zion is established and Christ himself reigns as king and that he who attempts to rise up as a king shall perish-

“And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.

And I will fortify this land against all other nations.

And he that fighteth against Zion shall perish, saith God.

For he that raiseth up a king against me shall perish, for I, the Lord, the king of heaven, will be their king, and I will be a light unto them forever, that hear my words.

Wherefore, for this cause, that my covenants may be fulfilled which I have made unto the children of men, that I will do unto them while they are in the flesh, I must needs destroy the secret works of darkness, and of murders, and of abominations.” (2^nd Nephi 10)

Modern revelation confirms that during “time” there are to be no mortal kings ruling over the latter day saints but in eternity Christ will be the king-

“But, verily I say unto you that in time ye shall have no king nor ruler, for I will be your king and watch over you.” (D&C 38:21)

Smith Removed his own Garments
and admonishes the apostles to do the same

Another aberration of the secret rituals that Joseph Smith was implementing was the temple garment. It is very revealing that Joseph had instructed the members of his secret quorum to remove them shortly before his own death-

“Heber C. Kimball said Smith sent word to the apostles on the east coast to destroy their garments they had received in the endowment since 1842.” (Quinn page 147) Quinn references History of the Church 6:519 which mentions the letter, and Heber C. Kimball’s diary, 21 Dec. 1845, found in the book “Smith, An Intimate Chronicle, page 224″

“Smith removed his own endowment “robe” or garment before he went to Carthage Jail and told those with him to do likewise.

His nephew Joseph F. Smith later explained, when Willard Richards was solicited [by Smith] to do the same, he declined, and it seems little less than marvelous that he was preserved without so much as a bullet piercing his garments.”"
(Quinn page 146) Quinn references Heber J. Grant journal sheets, 7 June 1907, LDS Archives.

While Joseph F Smith puts a positive spin on Williard Richard’s refusal to remove his own garments, it should be remembered that it was masons that stormed the jail and murdered Joseph Smith. The fact that Williard Richard’s fellow masons murdered Joseph Smith and left Willard unharmed could simply be because he is not the one they wanted to murder. Others might suggest that his being left unharmed hardly bodes well for his role in the Carthage conspiracy to murder Joseph Smith.

Was it a marvelous miracle that saved Willard’s life, or his involvement in a secret brotherhood and possibly even his own participation in a secret plot?

Again, the words of Emma ring loud and clear. “It was indeed secret things” that caused the murder of Joseph and Hyrum.

Joseph Smith sent an order for the Nauvoo Legion to Attack Carthage

“The morning of 27 June, Smith sent an order (in his own handwriting) to Major-General Jonathan Dunham to lead the Nauvoo Legion in a military attack on Carthage “immediately” to free the prisoners.

Dunham realized that such an assault by the Nauvoo Legion would result in two blood baths – one in Carthage and another when anti-Mormons (and probably the Illinois militia) retaliated by laying siege to Nauvoo for insurrection.

To avoid civil war and the destruction of Nauvoo’s population, Dunham refused to obey the order and did not notify Smith of his decision. One of his lieutenants, a former Danite, later complained that Dunham “did not let a single mortal know that he had received such orders (from Smith).”

“[Later that same day] Around 5 p.m., more than 250 men approached the Carthage Jail. When informed of this by the panicky jailer, Joseph Smith replied: “Don’t trouble yourself, they have come to rescue me.” (Quinn, Page 141) Smith quickly discovered that the mob wasn’t his rescue army. After exchanging gunfire with the mob, Smith was killed.

Jonathan Dunham Commits Suicide

On July 28^th 1845, Jonathan Dunham, despondent about disobeying Smiths orders to rescue him from jail, commits suicide.

Later disclosures indicate that Dunham, who was a captain of Nauvoo’s police, major-general of the Nauvoo legion, and a Council of Fifty member, accomplished the suicide by asking a native American friend (Lewis Dana, a fellow member of the fifty) to “kill and bury him”. (Mormon Hierarchy- Origins of Power pg 652)

Joseph Smith Kills Two Men in a Shoot Out?

Amazingly, many members of the restored church are not even aware that Joseph had a pistol when the attack in the Carthage Jail took place.

According to several accounts, some contained in Quinn’s above mentioned book, Joseph shot three members of the mob. According to some accounts, two of the three eventually died from the wounds inflicted at that time-

“Elder Cyrus H. Wheelock came in to see us, and when he was about leaving drew a small pistol, a six-shooter, from his pocket, remarking at the same time, ‘Would any of you like to have this?’ Brother Joseph immediately replied, ‘Yes, give it to me,’ whereupon he took the pistol, and put it in his pantaloons pocket.”

“I shall never forget the deep feeling of sympathy and regard manifested in the countenance of Brother Joseph as he drew nigh to Hyrum, and, leaning over him, exclaimed, ‘Oh! my poor, dear brother Hyrum!’ He, however, instantly arose, and with a firm, quick step, and a determined expression of countenance, approached the door, and pulling the six-shooter left by Brother Wheelock from his pocket, opened the door slightly, and snapped the pistol six successive times; only three of the barrels, however, were discharged. I afterwards understood that two or three were wounded by these discharges, two of whom, I am informed, died.“

“I had in my hands a large, strong hickory stick, brought there by Brother Markham, and left by him, which I had seized as soon as I saw the mob approach; and while Brother Joseph was firing the pistol, I stood close behind him. As soon as he had discharged it he stepped back, and I immediately took his place next to the door, while he occupied the one I had done while he was shooting.”

Reporter John Hay, of the Atlantic Monthly identified three men who were shot by Joseph Smith: John Wills in the arm, William Vorhees in the shoulder, and William Gallagher in the face. Hay was a son of Charles Hay, a surgeon of the Carthage militia and apparently a member of the mob.

“Smith had two loaded six-barrelled revolvers in his room. How a man on trial for capital offences came to be supplied with such luxuries is a mystery that perhaps only one man could fully have solved; and as General Deming, the Jack-Mormon sheriff, died soon after, and left no explanation of the matter, investigation is effectually baffled. But the four shots which I have chronicled, and two which had no billet, exhausted one pistol, and the enemy gave Smith no time to use the other. Severely wounded as he was, he ran to the window, which was open to receive the fresh June air, and half leaped, half fell, into the jail yard below.”
- John Hay, “The Mormon Prophet’s Tragedy,” Atlantic Monthly (December 1869) 671-678.

In another contemporary account from a faithful Latter-Day Saint:

“Of the three barrels discharged by Joseph, it is believed he hit three men: an Irishman named Wells-who was in the mob from his love of a brawl-in the arm; Voorhees-an oversized kid from Bear Creek known for his lack of good sense-in the shoulder; and a man named Gallagher-a Southerner from the Mississippi Bottom-in the face.”

“Two other men were known to get hit in the hall, one a man named Townsend from Fort Madison, Iowa Territory, who died nine months later from the arm wound that wouldn’t heal, and another named Mills, who was shot in the arm.”
- Elder Reed Blake, 24 Hours to Martyrdom, p. 129

D&C Section 135 is part of John Taylor’s account of the incident. It states: “Joseph leapt from the window, and was shot dead in the attempt, exclaiming ‘O Lord my God!’”

That “canonized” version of events gives one the false impression that Smith was praying to God. The edited D&C version omits Heber C. Kimball’s details of Smith’s actions:

“When the enemy surrounded the jail, rushed up the stairway, and killed Hyrum Smith, Joseph stood at the open window, his martyr-cry being these words, ‘O Lord My God! This was not the beginning of a prayer, because Joseph Smith did not pray in that manner. This brave, young man who knew that death was near, started to repeat the distress signal of the Masons, expecting thereby to gain the protection its members are pledged to give a brother in distress.”
- Mormonism and Masonry, p. 16-17

“President Young said the people of the United States had sought our destruction and they had used every Exertion to perfect it. They have worked through the masonic institution to perfect it. Joseph & Hyrum Smith were Master Masons and they were put to death by masons or through there instigation and he gave the sign of distress & he was shot by masons while in the act.” – Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, August 19th, 1860, Volume 5

“The mob forced the door open. Joseph dropped the pistol, sprang to a big windowsill and stood there glaring down at a crowd of men below with their bayonets at the ready. Some reports say he tried a final ploy with the Gentiles, giving the Masonic hand signal of distress and uttering the accompanying code, “Is there no help for the widow’s son?”

There were, almost certainly, Masons in the crowd below. But Smith’s appeal to members of that fraternal order was probably a very bad decision on his part. As he teetered on the windowsill, a rifle ball fired from upstairs slammed into Joseph’s back, sending him to the ground below as he shouted, “Oh Lord, My God.”

Joseph landed on his shoulder with a snap of cartilage. A disguised militiaman with his face painted black dragged the wounded Joseph across the yard and propped him up against the side of a well. An officer ordered a firing squad, and four men sent rifle balls into the Prophet, killing him at last.”

One of Joseph Smith’s alleged polygamous wives, Zina D. Huntington, declared:

“I am the widow of a master mason, who, when leaping from the window of Carthage Jail pierced with bullets, made the masonic sign of distress.” – Latter-day Saint Biographical Encyclopedia, Andrew Jenson, Volume 1, page 698

The Nauvoo Environment

Ok, I covered several of the chaotic events of Joseph’s last months for several reasons.

One is that they give context to the fact that Joseph’s eyes had been covered, he had sinned as foretold in ancient and modern prophecy and it appears that he began to realize the awful state that he and the saints were in and wanted to repent and set things right.

Ironically, he had been a major part of the reason that his brother Hyrum had been called to try and reform the church. (of course, ultimately it was not his own sins but rather the sins of latter day Israel that caused him to do what he did. He was part of the literal fulfillment of Lev 16))

Another reason that I covered this most painful sequence of events is that they are important in understanding the psyche of the inhabitants of Nauvoo. It appears that many of the leaders of the church had been publicly teaching one thing while secretly teaching contrary doctrines.

Some of the saints were privy to the secret things going on while others were not. It depended on which circles you were in and whether you were called into one of the “anointed quorums”. This created havoc and division among the saints.

If you are a seasoned student of church history you probably didn’t learn anything new in this post.

If you are someone who has just recently begun to wake up, you may be in shock right now.

Perhaps you have just learned that Joseph’s last several months and the events surrounding his death are a little different than the LDS lesson manuals depict.

Please notice that the following passage in the Book of Mormon. It clearly states that directly after the Lamanites that dwindle in unbelief are smitten by the gentiles, restored gentile church will be lifted up in the pride of their eyes.

No, it does not actually say the “restored gentile church”, it simply says gentiles… but if you read the whole thing in context, it is referring to the believing but apostate gentiles not the unbelieving gentiles.

Speaking of the restored gentile church, it says-

They will “stumble”.

They will build up many churches (congregations)

They will put down the power of miracles from God

They will preach up to themselves from their own wisdom to get gain

They will be infested with secret combinations (this is an incredible link between Masonry and Mormonism)

19  And it shall come to pass, that those who have dwindled in unbelief shall be smitten by the hand of the Gentiles.
20  And the Gentiles are lifted up in the pride of their eyes, and have stumbled, because of the greatness of their stumbling block, that they have built up many churches; nevertheless, they put down the power and miracles of God, and preach up unto themselves their own wisdom and their own learning, that they may get gain and grind upon the face of the poor.
21  And there are many churches built up which cause envyings, and strifes, and malice.
22  And there are also secret combinations, even as in times of old, according to the combinations of the devil, for he is the founder of all these things; yea, the founder of murder, and works of darkness; yea, and he leadeth them by the neck with a flaxen cord, until he bindeth them with his strong cords forever.
23  For behold, my beloved brethren, I say unto you that the Lord God worketh not in darkness.

Is it a coincidence that the restored church embraced the flaxen cord of Masonry?

Is it a coincidence that in Nauvoo many of the saints were involved in secret works of darkness?

Is it a coincidence that the saints were involved in secret councils and secret doctrines and secret covenants and secret ordinances when in fact God does not do his work in darkness?

Okay… now that we have a little context for what was happening leading up the murder of Joseph and Hyrum, we are ready to address the trial of Sidney Rigdon when we get to part five..

In part two of this series we discussed the prophetic role of Hyrum Smith.

We addressed his calling by revelation in section 124 to act in concert with Joseph Smith as a prophet seer and revelator.

Shortly thereafter his calling to be a prophet of the church in section 124, Joseph made a public declaration in a church conference that Hyrum held the office of prophet to the church and that Joseph was not going to prophesy any more. 

By the time Joseph had made that announcement the heavens had already begun to close over his head. It had been nearly two years since he had received section 124 and he had not received canonized revelation concerning the church since that time, although some of his epistles have since been entered into the D&C.

The calling of Hyrum Smith to be a prophet seer and revelator to the church in concert with Joseph Smith and the declaration at the church conference that Joseph would no longer prophesy to the church represented a literal fulfillment of the succession prophecy in section 43.

The Lord was replacing Joseph with Hyrum as the prophet of the church.

Why?

Because according to section 43, if Joseph ever revealed his own successor by revelation, it would be because Joseph was no longer going to be “abiding in the Lord“.

“And this ye shall know assuredly—that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me.

But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him; for if it be taken from him he shall not have power except to appoint another in his stead.”

Clearly, the unconditional prophecy in section 43 states that no one else was to be appointed to receive commandments and revelations for the church until Joseph Smith was taken by the Lord, UNLESS Joseph fails to ABIDE in the Lord!

And yet, if Joseph fails to abide in the Lord, necessitating a successor, it would be Joseph himself that would still be given power to appoint another to succeed him, by revelation.

So strange was the wording and apparent chronology of events pertaining to that prophecy that it hardly made sense how Joseph could reveal his successor if indeed he was no longer abiding in the Lord!

It is only in hindsight that it all makes sense how this strange phenomena took place.

Remarkably, before the Lord gave the succession prophecy in section 43, containing the key word “abide”, he had already informed the church in a canonized revelation pertaining to the calling of Sidney Rigdon in section 35, that if Joseph fails to abide in the Lord, he will plant another in his stead-

“And I have sent forth the fulness of my gospel by the hand of my servant Joseph; and in weakness have I blessed him;

And I have given unto him the keys of the mystery of those things which have been sealed, even things which were from the foundation of the world, and the things which shall come from this time until the time of my coming, if he abide in me, and if not, another will I plant in his stead.

Wherefore, watch over him that his faith fail not, and it shall be given by the Comforter, the Holy Ghost, that knoweth all things.”

Incredible.

The Lord was making it pretty obvious that Joseph was eventually going to stop abiding in the Lord.

Once the saints received the fulness of the gospel back in Kirtland, they had to either progress, receive the spiritual rebirth and become a Zion people OR the Lords Spirit was to withdraw and not abide with them.

There are multiple examples in the scriptures of times when the spirit of the Lord has been withdrawn from God’s people.

Notice the words of the prophet Mormon as he describes how the spirit of the Lord had ceased to abide with his people-

“And it came to pass that when they had fled we did pursue them with our armies, and did meet them again, and did beat them; nevertheless the strength of the Lord was not with us; yea, we were left to ourselves, that the Spirit of the Lord did not abide in us; therefore we had become weak like unto our brethren.

27 And my heart did sorrow because of this the great calamity of my people, because of their wickedness and their abominations…”

Less than three months after the Melchizedek priesthood was restored and the 23 newly ordained High Priests went on missions, preaching the fulness of the gospel on their way to the land of Zion, the Lord made the following ominous declaration

“I, the Lord, am angry with the wicked; I am holding my Spirit from the inhabitants of the earth…“

That is how quickly the Lord can determine if the world is going to respond to the fulness of the gospel. God was withdrawing his spirit from the world because of their cumulative rejection of the fulness of the gospel!

“Inhabitants of the earth” is all encompassing. The Spirit of the Lord was being somewhat withheld even from the saints who are part of the inhabitants of the world. This explains why even during the 3 to 3 ½ years that the saints were trying to comprehend the greater light that very few miracles and spiritual endowments were actually being enjoyed.

The Intercessory Atonement Offering

Why was Joseph no longer going to be abiding in the Lord?

It would be easy and logical to write Joseph Smith off as a fallen prophet because of his own personal sins, like many people were doing during the last years of his life, however if we dig a little deeper there is another reason why Joseph was not able to abide in the Lord.

This topic has been addressed in detail in another article which can be read here

To summarize, it was because the saints had rejected the fulness of the gospel/priesthood and that resulted in their sins being placed upon the heads of Joseph and several of his brethren.

Joseph and some of his brethren, like Moses and Aaron of old, provided an intercessory atonement offering for the latter day saints so that the Lord would not destroy them from off of the face of the earth!

You will recall that after the children of Israel rejected the higher law, God was going to destroy them from off of the face of the earth, but Moses interceded for them and made an intercessory atonement offering for them in their behalf.

Because of the atonement that Moses offered in their behalf, the Lord prolonged their days upon the earth.

As an atonement offering, Moses and Aaron took upon themselves the sins of Israel and as a result, Moses sinned the same sin against the Lord. He got involved in idolatry just like the children of Israel did. He took credit for a miracle instead of giving credit to the Lord as the Lord had commanded him to do. This action encouraged the sin of Idolatry among the children of Israel.

His punishment for acting out the sins that were artificially placed upon his head, was death and he was prohibited from crossing over into the promised land with Israel.

His atonement offering prevented him from abiding in the Lord for a season.

Nevertheless, the Lord continued to love his servant Moses as one of the greatest prophets.

The atonement offering that Moses made was a type and shadow of the offering that would be made by the latter day prophet that would be “like Moses”. Joseph Smith made a similar intercessory offering in behalf of latter day Israel.

You can read about the atonement statute that provides a prophetic enactment of the latter day atonement in Leviticus 16.

Sometime after the rejection of the fulness of the gospel by the gentile church, Joseph offered himself as an offering and the Lord acknowledged and accepted it in the first verse of section 124.

“VERILY, thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Joseph Smith, I am well pleased with your offering and acknowledgments, which you have made; for unto this end have I raised you up, that I might show forth my wisdom through the weak things of the earth.”

Hyrum Attempts to Reform the Church

In the last installment of this series we also briefly discussed the reformation that was offered to the saints in Nauvoo.

You simply cannot make sense of the succession crisis in Nauvoo until you understand the reformation prophecy.

In 1829 the Lord prophesied that the saints would need to have a reformation at a future time.

“And thus, if the people of this generation harden not their hearts, I will work a REFORMATION among them… ,

And now if this generation do harden their hearts against my word, behold I will deliver them up unto Satan..”

Again, one December 5^th 1834, the Lord acknowledges that the leaders and the saints were under condemnations and needed to reform in all things.

‘Verily, condemnation resteth upon you, who are appointed to lead my Church, and to be saviors of men; and also upon the Church; and there must needs be a repentance and a REFORMATION among you, in all things..” (Unpublished revelations Pg 73)

Finally, On July 16^th 1843, nearly 10 years later, The prophet Joseph Smith “stated that Hyrum held the office of prophet to the church … &he was going to have a REFORMATION and the saints must regard Hyrum for he has authority“

The 1828 Websters Dictionary tells us that reformation is “The act of reforming; correction or amendment of life, manners, or of anything vicious or corrupt…

It further informs us that to Reform is to “restore to a former good state” and to “abandon that which is evil or corrupt, and return to a good state”

The purpose of the Nauvoo era under the direction of the Prophet Hyrum Smith, was not to introduce contradictory esoteric doctrines, covenants and rituals that contradicted earlier revelations but rather to return the church back to the pure and simple doctrines of salvation that were originally taught in the early years of the restoration movement.

Probably the primary single most profound thing Hyrum began doing to reform the church and restore the church to it’s former state was to try and stamp out the practice of polygamy and the spiritual wife doctrine that had taken root in the church.

There are many documented historical journal entries and public admissions from the Nauvoo era that document Hyrum’s campaign against polygamy and the spiritual wife doctrine.

Even the Brighamites admit that Hyrum stubbornly rejected the spiritual wife doctrine at first.

They claim however that Hyrum finally embraced it.

Others like Richard and Pamela Price make a compelling case for the fact that the spurious information about Hyrum eventually entering into polygamy was a fabrication and that he held true to the foundational doctrines of gospel law.

It is not the purpose of this series to try to prove of disprove whether Hyrum finally embraced polygamy or the spiritual wife doctrine. One can make a compelling case either way.

What we do know is that publicly, both Joseph and Hyrum were preaching against the doctrines of polygamy and spiritual wifery.

“By February 1, 1844, they had cut off Elder Hiram Brown from the Church for, among other things, “preaching Polygamy.” They published the following announcement to the Saints:

NOTICE.

As we have lately been credibly informed, that an Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ, of Latter-day Saints, by the name of Hiram Brown, has been preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan. This is to notify him and the Church in general, that he has been cut off from the church, for his iniquity; and he is further notified to appear at the Special Conference, on the 6th of April next, to make answer to these charges.

JOSEPH SMITH,
HYRUM SMITH,
Presidents of said Church.
(Times and Seasons 5 [February 1, 1844]: 423)”

Following that event, Hyrum heard rumors from Richard Hewitt that elders had been preaching about polygamy in outlying branches and claiming that it was being lived in Nauvoo. Hyrum immediately wrote the following letter to the brethren in China Creek

Nauvoo, March 15,1844.

To the brethren of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints, living on China Creek, in Hancock County, Greeting:—Whereas brother Richard Hewitt has called on me today, to know my views concerning some doctrines that are preached in your place, and states to me that some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may have as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here [at Nauvoo]: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practised here. And any man that is found teaching privately or publicly any such doctrine, is culpable, and will stand a chance to be brought before the High Council, and lose his license and membership also: therefore he had better beware what he is about…. “

“Hyrum Smith addresses conference “on Spiritual wife system. The first one we heard reporting such stories we will report him in the Time[s] and Seasons to come and give up his licence. He was decided against it in every form and spoke at length.” (April 8 1844)

There are several dairies that make mention of the April 1844 conference wherein Hyrum spoke against polygamy and spiritual wifery.

“Elder Levi Graybill, who joined the Church in 1833, and was with the Saints at Kirtland, Ohio; Independence and Far West, Missouri; and at Nauvoo testified that he heard President Hyrum Smith speak against polygamy at the April 1844 Church Conference. Elder Graybill wrote:

I was present at the April conference in Nauvoo in 1844….

I was well acquainted with Joseph and Hyrum Smith, and most all of the early leaders of the church…. At the conference of April, 1844, Hyrum Smith said from the stand that some had been teaching spiritual wifery, which meant polygamy, and addressing the sisters he said: “If any man makes such a proposition to you, if you will put a dagger to his heart I will plead your cause in the day of judgment.” (Journal of History 4 [January 1911]: 108) “

Again, the Brighamite faction that went to Utah concede that Hyrum was “stubbornly” against polygamy when he was made a prophet of the church but they claim he was eventually persuaded by Joseph and that he was living a dual life, publicly speaking against it and even excommunicating people for practicing it while secretly living it.

It is difficult to believe that this man with “integrity of heart ” according to the Lord, was such a hypocrite as to publicly testify against the practice of polygamy and excommunicating people for preaching about it, while privately engaging in it. But again, if that did happen, it fits with the atonement prophecy in Leviticus 16.

Whether Hyrum did or did not finally fall into a darkened state or not before he was killed with Joseph, really is not of huge consequence in understanding the truth and in understanding the controversy in Nauvoo because we have indisputable proof that section 132 is contrary to sections 42, 49 and 101 (the Article on Marriage).

If Hyrum did transgress and eventually begin practicing the spiritual wifery, it would be consistent with his part in the prophetic atonement statute that Joseph, Oliver, Sidney and Hyrum all play a part in.

The Prophet Oliver Cowdery

There is a very interesting statement in the section 124 regarding the relationship between the calling of Hyrum Smith during the Nauvoo era, and the previous calling of Oliver Cowdery during the Kirtland era-

And from this time forth I appoint unto him [Hyrum] that he may be a prophet, and a seer, and a revelator unto my church, as well as my servant Joseph;

95 That he may act in concert also with my servant Joseph; and that he shall receive counsel from my servant Joseph, who shall show unto him the keys whereby he may ask and receive, and be crowned with the same blessing, and glory, and honor, and priesthood, and gifts of the priesthood, that once were put upon him that was my servant Oliver Cowdery;

From that passage we are informed that Oliver Cowdery was not just the co-presiding elder of the church back in Kirtland, he was also a prophet, seer and revelator.

In section 124, Hyrum Smith was being given the same blessing, glory, honor, priesthood and gifts of the priesthood that had been put upon Oliver Cowdery!

[Editorial Note: "President Joseph Fielding Smith once "said that if Oliver Cowdery had not apostatized from the church, it would have been him (Oliver) instead of Hyrum who would have died with Joseph Smith in Carthage jail to seal their testimony with their blood.” (ref)]

Hyrum was actually being acknowledged in section 124 in two separate and distinct callings.

The first calling the Lord gave to Hyrum was the “office of priesthood and patriarch“. It was given according to blessing and right. Apparently he had right to by lineage as the eldest living son of joseph Smith Sr but he was also being ordained.

That made him the patriarch over the entire church. Obviously, the priesthood being referenced was the patriarchal Abrahamic priesthood. This was the priesthood which applies to the restoration brought about by Peter James and John.

That was the priesthood that was governing the church now that the fulness of the Melchizedek priesthood had been lost from the earth.

Because of this, Hyrum held the keys of the patriarchal blessing upon the church-

“And again, verily I say unto you, let my servant William be appointed, ordained, and anointed, as counselor unto my servant Joseph, in the room of my servant Hyrum, that my servant Hyrum may take the office of Priesthood and Patriarch, which was appointed unto him by his father, by blessing and also by right;

That from henceforth he shall hold the keys of the patriarchal blessings upon the heads of all my people,

That whoever he blesses shall be blessed, and whoever he curses shall be cursed; that whatsoever he shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever he shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (see 124:92-93)

Most Mormons probably interpret the above passages to refer to patriarchal blessings which tell people about their tribal lineage, etc. however it really refers to holding all the keys of the kingdom, ie, keys of the saving ordinances of the church. (see Matthew 16:19 and Abraham 2:6-11)

The second calling that Hyrum was being called to function in was the calling of prophet seer and revelator in the church. He appears to be filling the vacancy left by Oliver Cowdery.

From section 124 we are informed that Oliver had previously been called to be a prophet seer and revelator just like Joseph.

Although the sanitized history of the Church greatly downplays the role and position of Oliver Cowdery in the early days of the LDS restoration, we know that Oliver saw the face of Christ.

We also know that Oliver was given the spiritual gift of being able to translate and use a seer stone and/or urim and thummim.

Although his faith failed him when he tried to translate part of the Book of Mormon, nevertheless, the Lord told him he had the gift and that he would translate at a future time in the 3^rd watch.

As a prophet and co-presiding elder of the church, Oliver brought forth some of the revelations in the D&C.

Although Oliver was a prophet seer and revelator just like Joseph Smith, there were restrictions on how he could use his spiritual gifts as a prophet, seer and revelator regarding the church.

He was not commissioned to receive new doctrine and commandments for the church, rather, it was his calling to expound on existing doctrine that had previously been revealed in the ancient scriptures and modern revelation.

“BEHOLD, I say unto thee, Oliver, that it shall be given unto thee that thou shalt be heard by the church in all things whatsoever thou shalt teach them by the Comforter, concerning the revelations and commandments which I have given.

But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee, no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

And thou shalt be obedient unto the things which I shall give unto him, even as Aaron, to declare faithfully the commandments and the revelations, with power and authority unto the church.

And if thou art led at any time by the Comforter to speak or teach, or at all times by the way of commandment unto the church, thou mayest do it.

But thou shalt not write by way of commandment, but by wisdom;“

The spiritual gift of wisdom listed in section 46 verse 17 was one of the gifts that Oliver had been given-

“And again, verily I say unto you, to some is given, by the Spirit of God, the word of wisdom.”

Using the spiritual gift of wisdom, Oliver was to teach and expound on previous revelations and commandments by the power of the Comforter.

There are two amazing sections in the D&C that were written by Oliver Cowdery under the spiritual gift of wisdom, by the power of the comforter.

The first was known as the “Articles and Covenants of the Church” (section 20 )

That section, received by the Prophet Oliver Cowdery, along with the “Law of the church” in section 42, received through the prophet Joseph Smith, were the two most important revelations in laying the foundation of the LDS restoration, the restoration of the church and the establishing of missionary work.

The word of wisdom received by Oliver Cowdery in section 20 does not reveal any new doctrine, rather it expounds on the covenants of the church using existing scriptures.

Interestingly, in section 20 we are informed that there are three ways that true revelation can be received-

1- By the Voice of God

2- The ministering of Angels

3- The Holy Ghost

(see 20:35)

THE FULNESS OF THE GOSPEL WAS ON THE EARTH IN 1831

EVERY SINGLE COVENANT AND ORDINANCE OF THE FULNESS OF THE GOSPEL REQUIRED FOR SALVATION WAS REVEALED BY FEBRUARY OF 1831

THESE COVENANTS AND ORDINANCES CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION 20 WHICH IS CALLED THE “ARTICLES AND COVENANTS OF THE CHURCH” AND SECTION 42 WHICH WAS CALLED “THE LAW”

Once a person gains an understanding and testimony that all of the saving ordinances and covenants of the fulness of the gospel are identified in sections 20 and 42, they can easily identify the false covenants, commandments and rituals that were being secretly introduced into the church during the apostate Nauvoo era and they can understand why the Lord commissioned the prophet Hyrum Smith to lead a reformation.

There is another “word of wisdom” revelation that Oliver had produced. One that was canonized 1835 and remained in the D&C until 1876, one year before Brigham young died.

This revelation was accepted by the church through the law of common consent and Joseph Smith never challenged it.

This revelation by Oliver Cowdery that was also canonized in the D&C was the “Article on Marriage“.

This amazing section simply expounded on the existing doctrine of marriage that had been revealed in the Bible, Book of Mormon and modern revelation

Although LDS fundamentalists are quick to point out that Joseph was not at the meeting when this section was voted on and they try to imply that Joseph did not endorse it, the fact remains that during the next nine years, Joseph never publicly challenged it or attempted to take it out of the D&C.

More importantly, the Lord endorsed all of the sections in the D&C, including the Article on Marriage, that had been publicly published and canonized by 1841-

“And again, verily I say unto you, let no man pay stock to the quorum of the Nauvoo House unless he shall be a believer in the Book of Mormon, and the revelations I have given unto you, saith the Lord your God” ( 124:119)

The above passage demonstrates that God was pleased with all of the canonized revelations in the D&C, including the Article on Marriage at the time when section 124 was given.

The Article on Marriage

Oliver was given the privilege of expounding on existing doctrine to the church.

That is what he was doing when he received both the Articles and Covenants of the Church (section 20) and also the Article on Marriage (section 101 before it was taken out of the D&C)

Compare the two following passages of scripture that had been given in sections 42 and 49 with the third passage from the Article on Marriage-

Section 42

“Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else.

And he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out.

Thou shalt not commit adultery; and he that committeth adultery, and repenteth not, shall be cast out.” (42:22)

Section 49

“And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.

Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation;

And that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made.” (49:15-17)

The Article on Marriage (101)

“Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband,
except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.” (Section 101:4 1835 edition)

Again, Oliver Cowdery wasn’t revealing new scripture or new doctrine, he was simply using his spiritual gift of wisdom in expounding on existing scripture and doctrine.

From the mouth of three witnesses, provided in canonized revelations that were accepted by the law of common consent, it was revealed during the early Kirtland years that the fulness of the gospel requires a man to have only one wife.

Amazingly, the article on marriage by Oliver Cowdery remained in all versions of the D&C from 1835 until about 1877 when Brigham Young finally had it expelled from the D&C and replaced by the heretical abomination now known as section 132.

Despite the fact that sections 42, 49 and 101 all testified of the requirement of the gospel law of monogamy during the Nauvoo years, the darkened minds of many of the saints in Nauvoo began participating in the secret practice of spiritual wifery.

In hindsight it is interesting to go back to section 38 when the Lord promised the saints that the law of the gospel that would be given in Kirtland to enable them to escape the power of the enemy-

“And that ye might escape the power of the enemy, and be gathered unto me a righteous people, without spot and blameless—

Wherefore, for this cause I gave unto you the commandment that ye should go to the Ohio; and there I will give unto you my law; and there you shall be endowed with power from on high“

Also contained in that revelation the Lord gave a veiled prophecy that the gentile church would become prideful and would take on the same sin of polygamy which was instrumental in bringing the prideful Nephite nation to ruin-

“And if ye seek the riches which it is the will of the Father to give unto you, ye shall be the richest of all people, for ye shall have the riches of eternity; and it must needs be that the riches of the earth are mine to give; but beware of pride, lest ye become as the Nephites of old.”

It was the sin of pride that led the Nephites into the practice of polygamy.

It was the practice of polygamy that led to the destruction of the Nephite nation after they rejected the fulness of the gospel.

The reformation that Hyrum attempted to conduct began with his attempt to get back to the pure and simple law of the gospel which included the celestial law of monogamy.

Amazing!

How is it possible that many of the largest factions of the latter day restoration, including the one led by the majority of the quorum of the twelve apostles who held the mandate to publish the Book of Mormon and the modern words of Christ to the world, would be seduced into believing a different gospel?

How could they embrace a different new and everlasting covenant which was out of harmony with the true new and everlasting covenant. (see isa 24:5-6)

How could they reject the celestial law of monogamy after it had been so well documented in ancient and modern revelation?

Unfortunately, the Prophet Hyrum Smith was unable to reform the church during the 2nd watch.

In the next installment we shall review Joseph Smith’s frantic attempt to repent just before his death and we shall dissect the amazing information revealed in the excommunication trial of the Prophet Sidney Rigdon.