General Tone, Theme, Layout, Style, Size of Manuscript, Feelings, Questions
Comments by KS
Here are some thoughts on your book:
I finished reading your book and have been digesting it a few days. I liked it. I learned. It makes me think. It deepened my testimony of the restoration and Joseph Smith.
It made me feel betrayed by the current L.D.S. church.I have to think that this is the way it happened, (the church being asleep), so God has known this and worked it into His plan. It helped me to realize I need to be my own detective and research things myself.
It makes me more aware of the importance of having the spirit to be my guide. I loved that you used a lot of scripture references and also included them in your book, which also made the book longer. Some of the people I know, would probably do well with a shorter version. There is good information though.
I’m not sure about the information on composite beings. I think some people will read that and tune out and discredit the other information because that seems like it’s not something that people are thinking about right now. I’m not sure myself if that needs to be covered at this time, but maybe it does.
I appreciate all your work and your research and detective work that you have done. Obviously you have been led and guided.
The information about polygamy has been personally very comforting to realize. I happened to read a book, I think it was The Seer by Pratt, and it about ruined my marriage because of the darkness that entered into me from reading it. The way he talked about women, wives and polygamy made me sick at heart and in spirit. It was wounding. Thank you for making sense of this. I see the church IS in a pickle because of it. I wonder what the church will do.
I also had been praying for my eyes to be opened. I also have felt pain about what I’ve learned. I’ve had to examine myself and realized that I suffered from “prophet worship” and followed along with all their words without examining things and checking them with scripture.
The information in your book has helped me as I go back and have started reading the scriptures over and can see them in a clearer way than in the past. Many things now pop out and make sense, where in the past I just read and didn’t really understand the truths that were there.
Your book has made me want to really examine my personal relationship with Heavenly Father and His Son. I pray for us all as we come nearer and nearer to whatever is ahead in these days.
I noticed some mistakes, but didn’t have a problem with figuring them out. They make me pause for a minute and think. I like things that aren’t perfect as they remind me this life isn’t perfect and none of us are perfect in this time.
I reread Lectures on Faith. It’s in a book called Discourses on the Holy Ghost. In the L.O.F. in the book I have, it references, in different parts, quotes from the King Follet Discourse,, which changes the meaning of L.O. F. So very interesting! I need to find a version that is just L.O.F. and nothing more.
The things you’ve written about make sense to me and and I think you did a good job with making them all and line up with the scriptures.
I enjoyed reading your book and thank you again for following the spirit in your life and bearing the persecution that has come up in your life because of it. I ordered the book tonight and will look forward to the hard copy in hand.
I’m still figuring out what this means for me and my life. I’m praying and hoping the events that will come will help me to know what to do with this knowledge. I am wondering if I could do more good for now encouraging others to read the scriptures and research things more carefully.
My husband has been good to listen and I think he sees that we shouldn’t just blindly follow the brethren, he sees there are problems in the church, and he’s never believed you had to be married to more than one wife to go to the celestial kingdom. It was me that thought I had to get used to the idea. I haven’t brought up about the priesthood though. I think this would be a tough pill to swallow. I see with him and others, a kind of pride in the priesthood, if that makes sense.
Comments by RR
That concludes my proofreading for today. The question I have is regarding the consecration of goods when the servant comes. There have been a lot of visions and speculations recently about gathering and tent cities, etc. Some are saying that the “price” of that gathering is to have a years supply of food and then when the invitation comes to gather, those people will turn their supplies to the church and go to places of safety to wait out the tribulations. At the same time, I have heard versions where the church collects the available food and turns it over to the “peace keepers” and then the members are left to gain their “mark” to feed their families with their own food. My question is whether you speculate the “consecration” would happen inside or outside a church context, where we are already living in darkness and condemnation. The church in Christ’s day rejected true messengers. Will members who put their trust in church leaders suffer the same fate as anciently, or is there still a role for the organization to play in extending the invitation to gather and consecrate? My thoughts are that the call only through church channels to members would not be sufficient to gather the watchers of other faiths into places of safety, unless they were called through different means.
What do you think?
Whew! this is a long one. I appreciate you are willing to accept feedback. I hope you don’t drown under my comments. Your narrative is compelling, and I believe the exact bridge necessary to move Saints from walking in darkness to light without being blinded and falling away from the Restoration completely.
As a continuation of our last exchange, I find the verses in the footnotes from pages 81 and 82 more compelling evidence about what sins Joseph may be guilty of than the historical affidavits present. I think that is part of the test we are all involved in. What do we choose to believe, and how does that belief affect out hearts? I don’t believe Joseph is a liar, and I choose not to judge his character. I also believe that he loved Emma, and whatever he was doing involved giving others enough rope to hang themselves. That belief has allowed me to continue with peace in my life and the hope that God will look mercifully on my sins as well. I have seen the bitterness at the Weeping For Zion site. It used to be one of my favorite places to read because it challenged me to dig into the scriptures and find hidden treasures of light. Now I can hardly go there because it is like drinking from a bitter fountain. I do appreciate the responses you made to the David Whitmer series that was done there. I wish more of the commenters had read what you wrote, but it might not matter, if their hearts were not open to the message of reconciliation to Joseph.
Just a question… if Joseph appointed Hyrum to be prophet because his mind was darkened through sin, what advantage would that be if Hyrum were also guilty of the same transgressions? Or did Hyrum become guilty once made prophet so he could join Joseph in being a sin offering (as a brother united in everything), or because the power of iniquity in the hearts of the people fell on him with the office of prophet? Or has Hyrum been falsely accused as well?
One other point I see you making in the text on page 91 about not receiving false prophets (section 43) is the warning that those who come before us are to teach the revelations and commandments that have been received through Joseph. That warning would protect us from current leader worship that we are currently under. I think the Muslims have done a much better job keeping these roles straight. (Muhammed was the last prophet, and the Koran is God’s word to be held sacred and unchanging.)
Comments by NPT
in my opinion, the section on Paid Shills detracts from your message. I don’t think you should remove it, but I think it belongs in a footnote, perhaps on page 43 at the end of the first paragraph. It would fit nicely there as additional info in support of the allegation that the church is trying to control the message using SEO and the such.
i also think the first sentence of the first paragraph and the entire second paragraph in the There are Biblical… section should be moved to the Paid Shills footnote (that i described above) b/c they fit nicely with that argument. again, i think the accusative tone detracts slightly from your thesis at this point in the narrative.
Comments by KS
So, I have a question. I tune into the Woodzone sometimes to check things out. Sometimes he has info about happenings in the world or our country that are interesting. Lately, he had a post about polygamy and how we might just be asked to live it again, soon.
I know you said that it’s best to let people wake up on their own. It’s hard though, when I read different blogs and they talk about polygamy, for or agaisnt, but they don’t have the whole truth of it. It makes me want to leave a comment, but then I think of what you said and I don’t know. To me, people are really struggling, and it would help them to know the whole picture, to have all the pieces of the puzzle as you say.
Also, about your book. I really liked what you wrote about Kirtland being Jerusalem. I thought that was an amazing insight, and I think that it would make a lot of sense that that would happen here, not Jerusalem in Israel.
Also, I don’t think you can say enough to people, that it’s all ok and that the church is doing their mission. You do say so, and I appreciate that, otherwise, it all seems like such a waste of time. However, the temple is a puzzle to me. Do you think they will ever be used or needed, the ones we have? Do you think they perform any thing along the mission of the church, or are they a busy work assignment to keep us busy and asleep. Now that I look at it, I think back about how it felt when I first went through and the concerns I’ve had about different things, but didn’t know why.
What about the sealing of husband and wife. Do you think that’s just going to happen with the holy spirt and no need to be “sealed”? That the temple just performs then a marriage like any other marriage on this earth?
One of your posts, someone had commented and asked about the temple and that he knew the difference between the spirit and not the spirit. You were commenting back that it really couldn’t be the spirit, ( I don’t remember your exact words, but that was the feeling I get.) I do know that people have received inspiration at the temple though. Do you think it’s the sitting and being quiet, the meditation and prayer and not the place or the setting?
We talked recently to a couple who were serving at the Payson Temple. The sister’s comment to me was it was very opulent. I think now, that all that money should be going to alleviate poverty. I remember going through the Rexburg temple and a sister proundly telling me that the vases were made of gold. I guess they get the idea that it should be made of the very best and expensive and perfect things from the Temple of Soloman? Have you written more about the temple’s now days anywhere?
I know you’re busy with your book, but I just wanted to ask and wondered also if you know of any forum out there where people who are waking up to things, and I mean with the knowledge you are sharing, to talk, ask questions, offer support or encouragement?
Comments by TD
I woke up this morning thinking that I would tell you that I disagreed with your characterization of John the Baptist as the Transmigration of the OT prophet Elijah. Instead I dug into the scriptural evidences you present and I was blown away. When I allow myself to truly believe the word of God I am indeed visited by the “manifestations of his spirit” to confirm what is plainly shown by multiple witnesses.
Darkness prevails because people believe the interpretations of men, instead of clinging to the iron rod.
Thank you my brother. Once again my eyes have been opened.
Comment by NPT
I also think you should remove completely the few paragraphs that speculate on BY’s racism, beginning with “The Blacks and the Priesthood issue…up until the end of the section. I think you are absolutely right that the issue is doctrinal…period. The question at hand is did Joseph err in ordaining Elijah Abel and was BY justified in correcting the error OR was Joseph in the right and did BY introduce false doctrine. Whether BY was racist or not is irrelevant. Racism is objective and quite broad. There are many that would argue JS was racist simply for his proclamations about slaves conditions due to their being sons of Ham, despite his abolitionist stance. The same can be said of the “emancipator” himself Lincoln. My point is, I don’t even care if JS was racist, what matters is the true doctrine that he promulgated. Likewise, I don’t care if BY was racist, I only care to know that his doctrine was false. A prophet can do what is true even if he does not agree (see Jonah, after a little encouragement from the Lord). Therefore, being a racist does not preclude BY from being a true prophet, but making up doctrine raises a red flag.
Comment by SF
The three orders of Priesthood is revealed in section 76
Comments by NPT
page 59, point 3 and page 60, bullet 3 (as an aside, the bullets on page 60 would correspond better to the list on page 59 if they were numbered, not bulleted): now is when i have less edits and more questions. In a previous chapter you point out that the temple in Kirtland had the name of the church as Church of Latter Day Saints (sans Christ); yet here you are saying that JS as the Davidic Servant builds “an house for my name” as read in 2 Sam 7:13. Do you see my dilemma? The only way I see out of it is if you explain a little more that the Kirtland temple was a “House of the Lord” (as proclaimed on the plaque) built by a church that was not Christ’s. Or maybe I’m over-analyzing this. I suppose the part I get hung up on is the wording in 2 Sam 7:13 where the Lord says that it would be “an house for my name”. I guess He doesn’t say “an house in my name”, right? Maybe that’s the answer. [editorial note: I have accepted this house… use of REQUIRE “for your sakes”]
page 65, paragraph that begins “…Just as 2 Sam prophesies…”: I’m not so sure that the statement “I will require it of him” refers to the Servant. I am not contesting the intercessory atonement, I am only questioning the use of that phrase to support the idea. It seems to me that the Lord is saying that He will require the sin of him who commits it, referring to “whosoever”. The Lord commands the Servant to speak, and expects all to follow when the Servant speaks His words in His name, and the Lord will require the sin of whosoever does not follow. This follows the pattern we see when the Lord tells Moses that “Whosoever hath sinned against me, him (the sinner) will I blot out of my book.” And it appears from your statement that “Although the Lord did not accept the specific terms of that offer…” you also think that what the Lord says to Moses refers to the sinner, not Moses. Unless you can convince me that the “him” in each of these statements refer to the Servant and Moses, respectively, then I’m of the opinion that the phrase “I will require it of him” refers to the sinner, not to the Servant. Good luck with this one. :)
[editorial note by Watcher: Discuss statement “for your sakes” by Moses and also the use of the word REQUIRE by Ezekiel: Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.]
Comments by RR
I just wanted to clarify my comment about Joseph discontinuing the Relief Society. I don’t dispute that it was discontinued for 20-plus years, nor that the discontinuance was probably because of the polygamy issue. My point was that is was not JOSEPH who stopped it, or if it was, I have never seen proof of that. It would be a minor textual change to say that Relief Society was suspended, rather than Joseph suspended the Relief Society.
Comments by RR
page 83 First sentence might be easier to understand by removing the first comma and replacing it with “as”, or better yet, start the sentence with “The integration of Old Testament theology (not to be confused with the Law of Moses) is perhaps one of the most curious thing…”
Center paragraph, add a comma after theology (in the list of restored Old Testamant themes). It keep theology and ritual as separate items in the list, not a compound item. Immediately following, you refer to “it”, but that “it” appears to be “Old Testament temple building, worship, theology, and ritual” which was plural in the first sentence. “They” would work better there and in the next sentence. I would also recommend “And why were …” to connect this question to the one you opened the paragraph with.
I don’t have the original to check with, but the last quote on the page would read easier with Aron spelled with two “a”s.
page 88: Last paragraph under first subheading. “Modern revelation actually speaks about the great intercessory atonement offering that was to be made by Joseph Smith and it [modern revelation?] sheds light on Malachi chapter 3 [footnote]”. [I don’t know what modern revelation specifically you are referring to here, or if it is just a general statement, and neither the sentence, nor the footnote tells me what you want me to know about Malachi chapter 3.]
“It is apparent that the literal fulfillment of the prophecy [which prophecy? the one from Malachi that isn’t specified, something from modern revelation, or one of the many Old Testament prophecies mentioned in the previous paragraph?] must take place in the end times as well. It [what does this “it” signify?] provides a summary of what God’s Latter-day servant would do.”
Footnote 245 doesn’t quite match the text. I had to look up the verses to see what you referred to and didn’t find what I was looking for. Maybe instead of “re-established” in the text, write “broken” and footnote verses 15-16 to illustrate your point.
page 94 footnote 260. Could you add where this is identified, or refer to a future chapter where you will explain this more?
page 96 can you cite your definition of purge source? Strong’s meaning includes to strain (figuratively), extract, clarify which sounds more like what you would do to gold and silver than to abruptly remove something unwanted
page 97, first paragraph “…departing from the ordinances has been ongoing from the time of their forefathers back in ancient Israel…” I thought you have said these early Kirtland saints were the Gentiles, and the rebellious Jews/Israelites were the converts made in Europe later.
Grammar, Typos, missing words, footnotes
Comments by NPT
page 43, penultimate paragraph: needs period at end of “…unsuspecting Mormons.”
page 45, second full paragraph: “…is published under the topic of “gospel topic” at LDS.org” perhaps would read better as “…is published under “Gospel Topics” at LDS.org.
page 45, fourth full paragraph: move comma from “…with which I really agree,” to after parenthetical statement “…he was saying),
page 45, fifth full paragraph: move comma from “…are so powerful,” slightly back to after “…Smith received,”
page 45, seventh full paragraph, last sentence: “Including” should be lower case
page 46, first full paragraph: the word “integrated” confused me for a second since we were talking about race, and BY certainly didn’t integrate anything when it came to blacks; i realize it is not incorrect, but perhaps you could change it to “implemented” or something of the sort.
page 46, second full paragraph: remove comma from “…point of view,”
page 46, second full paragraph: move comma from “…under God’s direction,” slightly back to “…unaffected by it,”
page 46, fourth full paragraph: remove comma from “…watch and tutelage,”
page 46, fifth full paragraph: remove quotation marks and dots right after Morning Star, since you have quotation marks already with “no special rule…”
page 46, sixth full paragraph: need period at end of paragraph after “blush”
page 46, seventh full paragraph: last sentence should be changed to “He knew full well that the Lord had not prohibited Blacks from holding the priesthood during the ministry of Joseph Smith.” the way it is written now (restricted the priesthood to the blacks) suggests that it was restricted from all else and allowed only to the blacks. i suppose you could also say “restricted the priesthood from the blacks.”
page 46, footnote 122: check spelling of “blessing because of the covenants of thy father’s” since blessing should be blessings and father’s should be fathers, unless that is verbatim from the record that is footnoted.
page 48, second full paragraph: need comma after “…section 42 was received,”
page 48, penultimate paragraph: need comma after “…in modern revelation,”
page 48, footnote 134: seems to be a word missing with “Your concerns about Jacob 2:27, D&C 42:22, 49:16, and the 1835 section 101 and [missing word?] have been leveled…”
page 49, section “Other Controversial Issues”: critic’s should be critics (no apostrophe)
page 50, last paragraph of Paid Shills section: “…may be among the very small group of followers of my blog. I think members of the church should be aware that this may be an activity…”
page 50, first paragraph of Controversial Things section: The first sentence would be more clear if it said something like, “An unfortunate thing is that most …” I got kind of confused about what the “this” was referring to in the sentences current writing. Also, you’re not quoting Hinckley, you are quoting Quinn, so the second sentence should read something like “Michael Quinn claimed that President Hinckley “acknowledged that there was…”
page 51, first paragraph: “listing” is better off as just “list”
page 51, third bullet: remove comma from “…three orders of priesthood,”
page 51, seventh bullet: put comma after “Eventually,”; and perhaps you could put a parenthetical statement referring to chapter 1, pages 37-40 where you mention that the Saints were a bit confused when they adopted the name Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For example (see Chapter 1, pages 37-40, in which it is shown how the Saints were mistaken in taken upon themselves the name of Christ once more)
page 51, eighth bullet: needs period at end of sentence
page 51, first paragraph of Biblical section: I think the paragraph would read better if the sentence starting with “By preventing…” was written as such, “It appears to me that if people who are experiencing a faith crisis are prevented from learning about the truth about the restoration and the corporate church, they ultimately lose their faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
page 51, third paragraph of Biblical section: “…to take them literally,” should just be “literally,” so that the sentence flows better (i.e., “…to take the scriptures seriously, literally, and to BELIEVE THEM.”)
page 52, second full paragraph: “…which the modern” should be “…that the modern”
page 52, third full paragraph: remove comma from “…establishment of the church,” and from “…attempt to usher in,”
page 52, sixth full paragraph: remove comma from “…history of the church,” and change “…entire world are in all actuality in a state” to “…entire world are all actually in a state”
page 52, last paragraph: remove “essential” from last sentence; it is redundant with “need”
page 53, 3rd paragraph: I noticed that the urgency to establish Zion demonstrated by the Saints…
page 53, last paragraph: …the dispensation of the fulness of times that was being anticipated.
page 54, last paragraph: …the Lord foretold that he would lose his awareness and fall. It corresponds to the chronology of the prophecy better; that is, JS would transgress, which would make him unaware (covering the seer’s eyes), and the result would be a fall from grace.
page 57, footnotes 161,162: I assume “MS” is Morning Star, but you should probably write it out.
page 58, last paragraph: This person would be a descendant of King David from the second kingdom of Israel, after the kingdom of Judah became divided from the kingdom of Israel. I don’t understand what the bold signifies. Was not king David the King of Israel prior to the division?
page 60, bullet 5: needs period at end of paragraph
page63, footnote 186: instead of “cumulatively”, the word you want is “collectively”
page 67, 3rd paragraph of Atonement section: “…cross the over” should be just “enter”
Comments by RR
page 98 First paragraph, break up the second sentence.”…out of their midst[period] God, in his wrath, left the Latter-day Saints with the preparatory gospel of Abraham, which contains the law of carnal commandments[period] This law can only curse[comma] and not bless[comma] when the fulness of the gospel is not on the earth.”
2nd paragraph, Something doesn’t work with “…returned to the priesthood they had lost when the final time…” I’m not sure how you want to rephrase the sentence.
The Malachi 3:16 quote has a typo “them [that] feared the Lord”. The next quote is from verse 17 (not noted).
That’s all for today! I’m going to go play with my kids now
page 90 “I shall appoint…another in his stead” needs a footnote.
middle section Joseph Smith received three revelations (Where are they found?)
footnote 279 This will be (WAS) covered in ch 4
page 102: [This is a personal question, not something to clarify in the text – We agree on the basis of scripture that Joseph transgressed in some way. Does that mean that he is necessarily guilty of the things he is being accused of by historical accounts? You mentioned in the last chapter that the sins were artificially put upon him (page 88), Here is the definition of artificial
: not natural or real : made, produced, or done to seem like something natural. Can you show from scripture that Joseph is actually guilty of the sins he is accused of, and not some other transgression (for the Lord seeth not as man seeth). The reason this seems relevant is that you are emphasizing the foolishness of trusting in science, and human knowledge, yet I don’t know of any other source for believing that we know what Joseph was or was not guilty of doing or not doing, unless scripture is that explicit. (In my ignorance I can’t say for sure it isn’t there.)
Something about the writing style on this page feels a little like you are trying to sell me on something. It might be the cumulation of adjectives like “The miraculous foretelling, in these three sections of the D&C, rivals the amazing passages in ancient scripture…”, “secret, prophetic storyline”, “seldom, if ever,”, “uninspired interpretation”, and “The prophetic storyline and true history of Mormonism detailed in this book has largely been a secret to Latter-day Saints living during the last four generations and, yet, it has been prophesied and documented in ancient scripture and modern revelation.” There is nothing really wrong with any of the writing, but taken together, it sounds a little like the tone from the shopping network or the ads that show up in my inbox. I totally understand your excitement and desire to share, but many readers (I think of people like my dad) are already sceptics of anything unorthodox, and are unlikely to trust something that seems to manipulate emotions as a reason to discount what you are really saying.
page 103 Half way down page, immediately following numbered list, a capitalized “T” is missing from the beginning of the paragraph.
page 104 “Computers and word crunching software with searching algorithms almost appear to represent a form of Transhumanism that results in a technological singularity in understanding the prophetic storyline of what really took place during Joseph Smith’s ministry.” This is over my head. Even though I know what you mean, I don’t really know what you said. However, I will probably read a few articles about Mormon Transhumanism, after I am done with the chapter, now that I know it exists.
page 105 Three lines from the bottom, biblical needs capitalization.
page 107 footnote 293 refers to “will be addressed in chapters 4 and 6”, but 4 was previous, and 6 is the chapter we are in). Also remove the apostrophe from chapter’s
page 109 First paragraph. Divide into two sentences.
Second paragraph: This is SO important! Your readers may not believe this statement, so references to each claim about prophets would be a valuable resource.
page 115 Five lines from the bottom of page, Capitalize “almighty”.
Second to last line, change “apparent” to “apparently” (adverbs modify adjectives)
page 116 (add citation to quoted scripture).
page 117: first sentence, remove apostrophe-s from Joseph’s
page 118: first paragraph of Gileadi quote, next to last line, capitalize “book of Mormon”
page 120. You state “…he who is watching for the purpose of being gathered and consecrated before the Lord returns..,”. I read this verse more literally, that he who is watching will be found imparting his portion, or rather serving those he has an opportunity to bless, caring for the poor, teaching the pure doctrine of Christ, etc. In contrast to the evil servant (verse 54) who says the Lord delays his coming and begins to beat the men-servants and maidens, and to eat, and drink, and be drunken. A clearer illustration of the faithful servant’s behavior is found in JST Matthew 24:52-53. “Who then is a faithful and wise servant,whom his Lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so doing.”
page 121 footnote 332 says C&C 101:47
page 123, halfway down page, add apostrophe to “Gentiles kingdom”, capitalize “gentile nations”, capitalize “inspired version” (because it is the name of the book)
page 126 13th bullet point. I don’t know what “four covenants” you refer to
15th bullet point. “…made with their Father’s…” (remove apostrophe)
last paragraph: capitalize “book of Mormon” and remove comma after Gentiles
page 127 halfway down page: “…did not represent that great last work, rather, it was laying the foundation…” Put a period after work to divide into two sentences.
page 129 footnote 350 typed as “350350”, chapter 5 is previous, so, “The prophecy [was] addressed…” However, a quick scan of chapter 5 didn’t show me this prophecy from Revelation 12, so either I wasn’t looking carefully enough and need a more specific reference point, or it is in a different place in the book.
page 135 footnote 362 “completion of the House of the Lord in House in Nauvoo…”
page137, second line of quote from 2 Nephi 3: “both in word and indeed” (in deed should be two words)
page 140, first quote “Lords house” (add apostrophe)
just under footnote 370 in text – did you mean “later days”, or “latter days”?
page 141, last paragraph, first sentence, remove commas after 1836 and after apex
page 142; 2nd paragraph under “The Heavens Were Closing” “Section 112 declared the whole had been overcome by gross darkness…” Something is missing here. Verse 23 doesn’t include the word “whole”. It says darkness covers the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people…”
page145, first line of second paragraph, capitalize “inspired version”
same paragraph, capitalize “gentiles” twice, and again in the 6th paragraph of the quoted scripture
page 153 halfway through first quote, “and hate me, smith the Lord God” I think that means “saith”
page154: point 5 continues from two sections prior (and should be numbered as 6). There needs to be some introduction or transition after the dates to reorient the reader to the sequence that was interrupted and will now continue to the end of the chapter.
page 193: Third sentence – remove all the commas, except after Kirtland.
end of second paragraph- add comma after “ultimately”
third paragraph, change braking to breaking. When was the letter written, before or after 1836? No reference cited for the letter.
5th paragraph – either a comma before “resulting”, or make a separate sentence.
7th paragraph – “…period that lasted…and continued” instead of “continuing.
page 194: 1st paragraph – “Clearly, the restored church…” Remove the rest of the commas from this sentence.
after April 3, 1836. There seems to be a random 183n in the middle of LDS Restoration Movement
missing comma in May 1 1836
page 195: section under July 23,1837. This brings me back to my earlier question about the use of “house”. When the verse says “vengeance cometh upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord. And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth…” I understand this use of “house” to refer to a group of people, not a physical structure. To understand this verse the way you describe, literally, the Kirtland temple would appear to be both burned and destroyed by a whirlwind. That sounds more like the unfinished Nauvoo temple than the Kirtland one. Since we have no record of the Lord ever claiming the Nauvoo temple as His house, I lean toward “house” as a collection of gathering Israelites.
2nd paragraph – “…but it is an obscure event [no comma] that is difficult to …”
page 196: line just above subheading, “directed by and ancient patriarchal priesthood”
second line from the bottom of page, remove comma after Ohio
page 197: footnote 530. I’m not sure what the connection is you are referring to. What you quoted says “for the salvation of my people”, but the footnote says to compare “for the salvation of the church”. This is verse 36 (which should be noted). Is there a different verse you refer to, or are you using “people” and “church” interchangeably?
page 200: footnote 542 the first web-link appears to be cut off
second indented quote. The word “choisests” appears rather strange. I don’t know if it is a typo, or copied from the original.
page 201: next to last sentence on page, remove either one of the two “secretly”s from the sentence.
page 202: first paragraph, take out hyphen from latter-day
last sentence of next-to-last paragraph “[Q]uorum of the Twelve” and “represent the fulfillment [of] Book of Mormon prophecies”
Consider making the numbered points bold and spacing them a bit so that the numbered headings starting on page 204 seem to be a continuation of this list, rather than starting from nowhere.
page 203: I’m not sure what “…to overthrow the kingdom of the Jews, and to make straight the way of the Lord” is doing there. Is it supposed to be a new section heading? This info needs a heading to focus attention on what you are saying — it is crucial to understand this idea of re-establishing the Kingdom of Judah for much of your later material to make sense.
Comments by MH
On Page 37, footnote 81: You list D&C 35:1 and Moroni 10:12 which appear to not be related at all to D&C 82 and the point you were making.
Footnote 86: concerning D&C 101:75, you seem to indicate that the Lord no longer considered them his people by indicating that he said “call themselves after my name”. You make this out to be negative, but immediately after that phrase he says that they are “willing to hearken to my voice”. If you refer to D&C 84:52, the Lord says the only ones not under condemnation were those who “hear his voice” and come unto Him.
If they are willing to hearken to his voice, then weren’t they still in his good graces at that point? I understand all of the other contextual evidences, but this may be a stretch to indicate that the Saints at that time were no longer worthy just because they “call themselves after [His] name”. Thanks for posting all of the other peer review responses, there are some good points being brought up. Overall, your work is astounding and should be considered by all LDS.
Comments by JC
Pg 87- Paragraph beginning “Shortly after..”, in the last sentence, it says “and the priesthood been had…” need to be changed to “had been”
Pg 98- Malachi 3:16 reference towards bottom of page. It says “written before him for them the feared..” “the” needs to be changed to “that”
Pg 136- Paragraph beginning “This amazing allegory..” there needs to be a space between the second sentence ending “Verse 70.” and “Unlike”
Also a little further down the page in the verse “…if ye labor with your might…” the word “layup” to “lay up”
Pg 137- Citation beginning “And there shall rise up” the word “indeed” edit as “in deed”
Pg 141- Paragraph beginning “We see from Section 64” end of first sentence, beginning of second sentence needs a space between “1836.” and ” Section”
Pg 142- Paragraph beginning “Section 112 declared the whole had been” needs “world” added for “the whole world had been”
Pg 172- Paragraph beginning “Joseph Smith observed”, the last sentence has a number 2 at the beginning of it. I’m not sure if this is just a typo, or if there is supposed to be a citation there.
Pg 179- Paragraph beginning “As I looked at the area”, the second sentence beginning “I had heard rumored that some out of print” change to “I had heard rumors” or omit the word all together with “I had heard that some”
Pg 182- Second to last paragraph on page. Space needed between first and second sentence of “Section 94!” and “I”
Also, last paragraph, another space needed between “(to my knowledge anyway).” and “Section 109”
Pg 192- Paragraph beginning “The Book of Mormon”, first sentence says “not the .ld world” edit to “old” (I’m assuming)
Pg 193- Paragraph beginning “In a letter that”, in the first sentence, the word “braking” change to “breaking”
Pg 194- April 3, 1836 bullet point, second sentence says “The Book of Daniel refers to is as”; change to “refers to it as”
Also, in same bullet point, the line that read “of the LDS Restoration 183n Movement”, I’m not clear on what “183n” was meant to be? 1830 perhaps?
Pg 223- Paragraph beginning “The literal fulfillment”, the last sentence reads “Modern revelation is pregnant with”. I might choose a different wording for “pregnant with”. Options include, “filled with”, “rich with” etc. The word pregnant just kind of threw me off for some reason.
Comments by RR
Not a big deal, but the first table is Table #1 and the second is Table 2. As these tables are separated by a chapter, and there doesn’t appear to be anything else in the book labeled as a table, you may just want to give them descriptive names.
page 159: The dates of the church in the wilderness are speculation. There are many dates that could be referred to, such as events involved in the Protestant Reformation, which led to the “woman being given two wings of a great eagle” (possibly referring to the founding events of America). Unless you have an something to indicate that 570 AD is a date relevant to history, or the thesis of the chapter, it is better to leave it out of the main text. Removing the parenthetical expression would fix this. — I found the explanation on page 173. You might want to point to a similar reference on this page for interested readers.
“Two Critical Definitions” section. Some separation is needed between “Church of God Man Child”
Second paragraph first sentence would be easier to follow if revised. Something like: Shortly after the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood at the special conference at the Morley Farm in June 1831, the Lord referred to those who were ordained High Priests and were attempting to live the law of the gospel (containing the law of consecration) as the “Church of God.”
Do “The Church of God”, “Church of the Living God”, and “Church of the Firstborn” refer to exactly the same thing?
Next sentence: Shortly thereafter, the fulness of the priesthood was lost [comma] and according to the prophecy in Revelation 12, the Kingdom of God was caught up to God.
page 160 “The Church of God” section.
“the elders who have not received the Melchizedek Priesthood [from the voice of God] are the presiding authorities…” I know this point has been made, but it needs to be reiterated for those who are conditioned to the idea that all elders have received the Melchizedek Priesthood.
Are there no women in the “Church of God”?
“The Kingdom of God” section indicates that those who are in the “Church of God” who are “chosen” to be High Priests (the previous section describes those who are “called” to the highest office of High Priest are the Church of God) are the Kingdom of God.
In what church or kingdom are “those who are baptized by water, fire, and the Holy Ghost” who have not been called by the voice of God out of heaven to the highest office of High Priest, nor chosen for that calling? Again, if being chosen a “High Priest” is a prerequisite, there wouldn’t appear to be any women in that kingdom.
page 161 “They explain that the [k]ingdom [seen by] Daniel saw, was hindered and delayed in going forth to subdue all other kingdoms[,] and the conflict with the powers of darkness would not be resolved during that generation.”
Next to last paragraph: “The kingdom[no comma] that was caught up to heaven[no comma] will return to Earth at the appointed time[no comma] to strike the foot of the image and roll forth in power, subduing the kingdoms of the earth.”
Next to last line, remove the comma after “remained on the earth”
You keep referring to a 3 1/2 year period, but I don’t remember you describing in the book where the significance of this number is explained. I know the blog did a great job talking about “a time and times and half a time” but I haven’t seen that explanation here yet.
page 162, first paragraph. Remove comma after iniquity.
“The house of and throne of David”
Why is the house/throne of David re-established forever, while the kingdom of God is established forever?
page 167. two headings with very little content should be removed and the content incorporated into other sections.
page 168: interesting poem. Is there a reference?
page 173 footnote helps answer my question about dates earlier from page159
page 174 footnote 461 ” place in heaven for Job”, or “place in heaven for Satan”?
page 184: last quote on page, “they” should by “thy”
page 188: last paragraph “Gods people” needs apostrophe (two times)
page 192: 6 lines down, “non” should be “none”
second line of first paragraph. “.ld” should be “old”
last paragraph. Capitalize “inspired version”
This was a great chapter! I was very interested to learn about the collection of artifacts. Thanks for letting everyone participate in this project. I feel like I am getting a real education. You have done an amazing job putting so much information together.