A Great Test
In previous posts I have quoted Heber C Kimball who warned that just before the return of Christ, a great test was coming upon the Saints. Of course he was simply paraphrasing what the prophecies in the scriptures warn us about.
The Savior characterized the coming test as one that would be so great, so deceptive, so seductive, that IF POSSIBLE (which it is not) it would deceive even the very elect.
Among the issues that will accompany the great controversy that is coming up, will be two of the doctrines that are at the very heart of modern day Mormonism, the so-called “Temple Endowment” and the so called “New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage” (Spiritual Wife Doctrine).
I have been attempting to address these two issues within some of my past posts but it is a daunting task to challenge something so deeply entrenched into the religious psyche of the LDS people. One of these doctrines actually springs from a “revelation” contained in the D&C. Section 132.
Contemporary False Prophets
Among the false prophets that are contemporary to our time, there are some that are actually publishing “thus saith the Lord” revelations.
I have previously mentioned the charismatic “Christopher Nemelka” who claims to be bringing forth the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. Another one recently mentioned by the Anarchist is Robert C Crossfield and a third, one of my favorites, is a guy by the name of Art Bulla.
All three of these characters have produced “thus sayeth the Lord” revelations that are potentially seductive to those not exercised in the scriptures in that they cover some very advanced doctrines and there is much truth mingled within them regarding the apostasy of latter day Israel.
All three of these false prophets and many others share one thing in common, they all emphasis the doctrine of plurality of wives contained in section 132 and it is this doctrine that gives them such credibility in the eyes of those that have had their eyes opened to the latter day apostasy of Israel yet still believe section 132 is a true revelation from God.
The prophet Joseph Smith once said that Satan would teach 9 truths in an effort to perpetuate one lie.
That will be the nature of much of the test that is coming, there will be so much enlightenment and truth in the message of Satan’s minions that it will be extremely difficult for many to identify that one lie that is being perpetuated.
Crossfield and Bulla’s revelations are, in my opinion so seductive because of the amount of truth intermingled in them that I don’t think they have been manufactured by mortal man, I really feel that old Scratch himself inspired them.
Back in the earlier part of our marriage, when Mrs Watcher and I had much more zeal than knowledge, we had a desire to live all of the laws of God and therefore were trying to prepare our hearts to live all of them. Among the laws that we assumed that we would need to live one day is the so called everlasting covenant of marriage as described in section 132.
To this end, in the spirit of the “law of Sarah” Mrs Watcher had told me about a dear friend of hers in our ward who was a single parent with two kids, that she would be willing to have her as a “sister wife” someday.
That is how seriously she took section 132.
That was long before the experience that Mrs Watcher wrote about having to do with receiving false revelations.
Do Women have Souls?
Mrs Watcher came into my office one day after pondering how the 144,000 High Priests could be virgins and it didn’t say anything about any wives of these High Priests despite the importance of the marriage covenant.
She was a little upset that nowhere in the scriptures did it talk about what was the ultimate state of women.
I laughed and jokingly stated that they must not be saved.
This wasn’t very funny to Mrs. Watcher because by this time she was familiar with the statement (I think in Josephus) that women did not have souls. She was also familiar with the statement by Brigham Young who had authoritatively opined that women did not have the spiritual capacity to become daughters of perdition like men could become sons of perdition.
These and other statements got her searching the scriptures and words of the prophets, looking for documentation that in fact, women could become exalted. Unfortunately, as she did this she was reminded how chauvinistic many of the scriptures appear to be with regard to women as well as how women were treated in Old Testament times, New Testament times and in the earlier periods of the church.
We had a long talk about this topic and she ” gave me the mandate” (LOL) to dig into the scriptures and to profile what exactly the truth of the matter was regarding the creation and eternal role of the sexes and what happens to women in eternity.
We both had a deep desire to better understand the eternal relationship of the genders and the eternal nature of our relationship with each other and with God.
As we began studying that particular doctrine, we became aware of a very controversial pamphlet that was circulated in Nauvoo about polygamy just at about the time that polygamy was secretly being introduced to some of the leading Elders of the Church. It was titled “The Peace Maker” and was supposedly authored by a Mr Udney Jacobs even though it was published by Joseph Smiths printing press.
Some historians speculate that Joseph Smith actually authored it and had it distributed under another persons name in an effort to build a doctrinal foundation for the introduction of the practice and also to “test the waters” to see if the Saints would be willing to support such a radical doctrine and life style. When so many of the Saints found it so abrasive and repugnant, Joseph smith distanced himself from it and from the person who wrote it.
Here is what John D. Lee said about it;
“During the winter Joseph, the Prophet, set a man by the name of Sidney Hay Jacobs to select from the Old Bible scriptures as pertained to polygamy, or celestial marriage, to write it in pamphlet form, and to advocate that doctrine. This he did as a feeler among the people, to pave the way for celestial marriage”
I am not suggesting that John D Lee’s statement is accurate, I simply don’t know. After reading John’s book that he wrote just prior to his execution (for his part as the scapegoat in the Mountain Meadows Massacre) I feel that John was a good man and would not have lied about the pamphlet, nevertheless, he could have gotten his information from a questionable source.
As I was one day researching I came upon another fascinating document that is being kept at the church historical library. It is called the “little Known Discourse” by Joseph Smith.
It is a discourse supposedly given by Joseph Smith on marriage that was recorded and documented in the biography of Warren and Amanda Smith, of Haun’s Mill Fame.
Some historians are claiming that the “Little Known Discourse” was taken from the “Peace Maker”.
Again, I don’t claim to know the truth about the origin of either of these two documents, but if you want to read some fascinating information about the doctrine of marriage, these documents are certainly interesting. You risk sleeping on the couch if you read them with your wife and indicate that you agree with them!
One day Mrs Watcher was pondering the contents of one of the above pamphlets which postulated that the woman is given to the man in marriage but the man is NOT given to the wife in marriage and that it is therefore unbiblical and impossible for the wife to divorce her husband, only the husband can divorce his wife… it opined that the man was to rule over and have dominion over his wife. It stated that the husband “owns” the wife in a similar manner that he owns his horse, etc.
Frankly, the Old and New Testament have a chauvinistic view that can be construed to support some of the doctrines contained in the two publications.
The contents within the pamphlet was so ruthlessly demeaning towards the female gender that it actually threw Mrs Watcher into a state of depression and deeply injured her spirit.
After Mrs Watcher had been in the bathroom for an inordinate amount of time I knocked on the door to see what was wrong… she was in tears and had bared her soul and body before the Lord laying face down on the floor of the bathroom asking the Lord to help her be more submissive toward Him and toward me. She wanted to see things the way the Lord did and with her current information and understanding it was all quite perplexing.
That experience happened shortly after I had acquired scripture crunching software and I took on the project of trying to understand what the eternal relationship of the male and female genders really was.
It was during this period of study that I gained a deep testimony of the literal nature of the creation story in genesis and the additional, more accurate details found in the JST version as well as the pearl of Great Price.
I am not going to address what I found regarding this topic in this post although I have addressed this topic to some extent in “the Unrestrained Pondering and Pontifications of a Heretic” and to a much greater extent in this article “CELIBACY, the Doctrine of Marriage & the Shaker Connection” article.
But please don’t cheat and go to those articles, stick with me here…
Let me just say that although the mystical union of the sexes and the doctrine of composite beings is a mystery to most people, it is taught plainly in the scriptures but it is so simple and obvious and sacred, yet mystical and abhorrent to the natural man, that it is difficult for many to accept and to comprehend.
It has really enhanced our relationship with each other and with God and enhanced our understanding of the role of women and our testimonies of the Gospel.
I simply mention this experience because it pertains to the insidious Spiritual Wife doctrine which breads chaos instead of unity and enslaves women and allows the lusts of men to run wild.
The plain and simple fact of the matter is that the whoring spirit that the church contracted in Nauvoo has remained in the Church to this very day.
The government has not been able to “legislate” this whoring spirit out of the church. It takes much more than legislation to cast out an evil spirit.
There are legions of LDS men who can’t wait for the practice of plural marriage to return… some openly, some secretly. And it isn’t just a sexual thing, it has to do with changing the dynamics of the marital relationship in such a way as to increase the dominion and power of the priesthood head.. as if they don’t already have enough power to get themselves and their spouses into serious trouble.
Anyway, getting back to the general topic, many of the “thus saith the Lord” revelations conjured up by people like Crossfield and Bulla really harp on the temple covenant and the so-called New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage.
Documenting the true facts about the Spiritual Wife Doctrine
Mrs Watcher has been asking me for quite some time to bring together my research on the spiritual wife doctrine that I did nearly two decades ago and put it into a listing of scriptural and historical observations about this topic. She really wanted it accomplished by our 31st anniversary which took place a few weeks ago but I failed to get it done.
Unfortunately it is still not finished because I have not kept good notes and a good filing system on the research I have done over the years but in honor of her Christ-like ability to put up with me for all of these years I have started the listing which is a work in progress and it can be viewed further down in this post. I encourage those of you that are still struggling with this doctrine to prayerfully read this article and use it as a primer for doing your own prayerful research into the matter.
I cannot emphasize enough how important it is that you come to terms with section 132 and the Spiritual Wife doctrine BEFORE the great test begins.
Conversely, the so-called endowment also needs to be dealt with BEFORE the test begins.
Is the Church Progressing or Declining Spiritually?
One day I was having a conversation with a faithful and passionate member of the LDS Church and I asked him what his thoughts were about the current leaders of the church. I asked him why they did not receive “thus saith the Lord” revelations and I asked him how they compared spiritually with the Prophet Joseph Smith.
His answer surprised me.
He first said that the Church has continually progressed spiritually from the time of the Prophet Joseph Smith and that the leaders of the church now days are so extremely revelatory that they don’t need visions and dreams nor do they need to hear the voice of God or to receive word for word “thus saith the Lord” revelations.
He said that the leaders are so incredibly in tune with the spirit that whatever they utter is the word of the Lord to the Latter day Saints. He made it sound as if the use of the urim and thummim and seer stones and the open visions and the “thus saith the Lord” revelations that Joseph Smith got, represented the “lesser light” and that we now have the “greater light”.
One of the things you need to do as you study the scriptures, the gospel and the events of the LDS foundation movement is to determine for yourself if the church has in fact continually been on an upward path doctrinally and spiritually from the time of the re-establishment of the Church in 1830. In particular, you need to evaluate what direction they were on from 1830 to 1844. Were they progressing or declining spiritually and doctrinally.
Did “thus saith the Lord” revelations dry up during the Nauvoo period because Joseph Smith became more spiritual and could simply reveal truths through sermons as he spoke, or were the heavens being closed because the Saints had lost the fulness of the priesthood and broken the everlasting covenant?
Were the Saints obedient to the first laws and commandments given to them in the first six years after the re-establishment of the church, including the successful establishment and living of the law of consecration, the building of the Jackson Temple and keeping the Kirtland Temple undefiled? If not, does it seem logical that God would then entrust them with even greater laws? And if so, would the higher laws contradict eternal laws previously given?
If the higher law of consecration given in section 42, in 1831 was ultimately rejected in Jackson, Kirtland and Far West, does it seem consistent with Gods nature and the history of his dealings with mankind that he would just brush it off and begin giving even higher laws and greater revelation to his people in Nauvoo? Or would he make good on his promise and send them strong delusion, and turn them over to Scratch for several generations like he did time and time again anciently?
Please remember, there was no other law given besides section 42 before the appointed time of September 11th 1836 when the Saints were to have redeemed Zion.
I leave you with these things to ponder as I invite you to review the information about the Spiritual Wife doctrine below as well as the following two articles that address the so-called “temple endowment” that originated during a very dark time in the history of the church.
Black and White Robes- Part One
Black and White Robes Part Two
Black and White Robes Final
The Spiritual Wife Doctrine
I have been meaning to do a post on biblical polygamy, the spiritual wife doctrine and the so-called New and Everlasting Covenant pertaining to multiple wives as contained in section 132. I just never seem to have the time to gather all my thoughts and research on it so I am posting this in it’s unfinished condition.
I will be adding more later.
None of these three doctrines are necessarily synonymous.
As I have mentioned in several other posts, there is a huge difference between the doctrine of “Biblical Polygamy” vs the “Spiritual Wife” doctrine that originated in Nauvoo.
There is also a difference between the Spiritual Wife doctrine and the doctrine contained in section 132.
It is truly sad that fundamentalists, gospel scholars and historians have allowed the spiritual wife doctrine to be confused with the biblical doctrine of polygamy.
This obscures and muddies the waters and results in people getting off track as to the real issues.
Biblical polygamy has to do with having multiple wives, usually for the purpose of expanding ones posterity, but the principle never was considered a higher law necessary for a higher exaltation, during Old Testament times.
The so-called New and Everlasting Covenant of having multiple wives sealed to a man as a requirement for the highest exaltation, as defined in section 132, is an aberration that grew out of the LDS apostasy. It differs from the more general definition of what became known as the Spiritual Wife doctrine in Nauvoo in that it limits the taking of plural wives to virgins and prohibits the taking of widows, divorcees and other men’s wives.
The Spiritual Wife Doctrine is a doctrinal anomaly that states that a man needs to be sealed to multiple wives in order to gain the highest exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom. It also grew out of the Nauvoo period of the LDS restoration movement. This doctrine simply cannot be justified in the four standard works, in fact it contradicts several revelations contained in the D&C and it is even in clear violation of the so-called “New and Everlasting Covenant” as outlined in section 132.
Clearly, God tolerated polygamy among some of the prophets and patriarchs to create a larger posterity through some of his chosen vessels through which he had a covenant relationship. Additionally, we know that the children of Israel under Moses, while being cursed with a lesser law were allowed to live it in their darkened and deprived state after they rejected the holy order of the Priesthood.
Polygamy was, like other parts of the lesser law, a cursing to the children of Israel and there is nothing in scripture to support that they were sealed to multiple wives as part of celestial law, indeed, they had rejected the higher law that Moses tried to prepare them for. Also, in the New Testament, we are reminded that a brother of a deceased person could raise up seed unto his dead brother via the principle of polygamy.
For all we know, this may be the sole circumstance under which the children of Israel practiced it as well. Although the Old Testament doesn’t provide much information about polygamy other than a few rules Moses gave them, the Book of Mormon does clearly specify why God allowed the doctrine of polygamy during a few periods in ancient times;
“Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredomes are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command you people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things. For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abomination of their husbands” Jacob 2: 30
The Spiritual Wife doctrine, on the other hand, which teaches that a man must be sealed to multiple wives in order to gain a celestial inheritance in the highest kingdom simply cannot be documented or substantiated in the Old Testament, New Testament or Book of Mormon.
Although latter day revelation received through Joseph Smith clearly also forbids polygamy in section 42, section 49 and in the original section on marriage written by Oliver Cowdery, there is one very questionable section of the Doctrine and Covenants which teaches the original version of the Spiritual Wife doctrine that originated in Nauvoo. ( I say it is a “version” of the Spiritual wife doctrine because it limits a man to marrying “virgins” even though many of those who practiced the spiritual wife doctrine in Nauvoo and Utah violated that portion of the so-called revelation and married widows, divorcees and other men’s wives.)
Since section 132 contradicts the original Section on Marriage written by Oliver Cowder, which it replaced in 1876, as well as contradicting the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon and all other sections in the Doctrine and Covenants pertaining to this doctrine, we have an obligation to take a critical look at the contents of this revelation to see if it is true.
Indeed, as the apostle Paul counseled, we must prove all things and hold fast to that which is true.
I want to dissect portions of section 132 that are problematic to see if in fact they are incongruent with the rest of the revealed word of God .
For this reason, I will address various passages contained in section 132 and I will list additional scriptural and historical problems pertaining to the so called Spiritual Wife doctrine as well. Before we begin itemizing the many problematic inconsistencies pertaining to section 132, let me remind you that there is no existing copy of the original manuscript and the revelation was not ever published in the Book of Commandments or D&C during the life of Joseph Smith. Indeed, section 132 was not published in the D&C until about 1876, within about one year before the death of Brigham young. Now let’s review 132 and the Spiritual Wife doctrine to see how consistent they are with the rest of the revealed word of God;
-
CHAPTER HEADING OF SECTION 132: In the chapter heading of Section 132 which was overseen by Bruce R. McConkie, He says, ” Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.” That statement is very misleading. I am not aware of any credible evidence to indicate that Joseph Smith ever taught that one must have multiple wives sealed to them in order to gain a higher exaltation in 1831 or any time prior to the defilement of the Kirtland Temple.
McConkie probably references 1831 in the chapter heading because the Prophet Joseph Smith appears to have received a revelation in that year pertaining to “biblical polygamy” which indicates that the Lamanites would become a white and delightsome people via the principle of polygamy with some of the elders of the Church. That is according the a letter written by WW Phelps many many years after the event supposedly took place. There is no other credible documentation I am aware of to provide a second witness for the supposed utterance of Joseph Smith nor is there any credible documentation to indicate that Joseph and the brethren actually attempted to change the color of the Lamanites by breeding with them… LOL. We will cover that revelation later on in this post but for now, please understand that the revelation known as section 132 and the associated principles pertaining to the Spiritual Wife doctrine WERE NOT RECEIVED AS EARLY AS 1831! Indeed, they appear to have surfaced after the Saints defiled the Temple in Kirtland, probably in about 1841-2
-
JOSEPH SMITH NEVER OPENLY PREACHED THE SPIRITUAL WIFE DOCTRINE, HAD IT VOTED ON BY THE CHURCH OR PUBLISHED IT IN THE D&C- IT NEVER BECAME BINDING UPON THE CHURCH ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF COMMON CONSENT; If the Spiritual Wife doctrine as contained in section 132 was a binding law required for exaltation, the Lord would have required Joseph Smith to openly and publicly preach it and have it sustained according to the law of common consent; “And all things shall be done by acommon consent in the bchurch, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.” D&C 28: 13) Additionally, he would have required it to be published either in the “Articles and Covenants of the Church” now known as section 20 or the “Revelation on Priesthood” now known as section 107 or the “Article on Marriage” that was in the D&C for over 30 years. (HC 5:501-7) There are historical accounts that state that Hyrum tried to get the High Council to accept the doctrine in Nauvoo but several noble and courageous members of the Council firmly rejected it, having declared it to be a false doctrine. For this reason alone, it cannot be an accepted and binding doctrine for the Church. It seems very strange that Joseph Smith would not have shown up and born testimony of the revelation and the doctrine personally, if God really did require this principle for exaltation.
-
WHEN SECTION 132 WAS FINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE D&C BY BRIGHAM YOUNG IN 1876, IT REPLACED THE SECTION ON MARRIAGE WHICH FORBADE THE PRACTICE OF POLYGAMY AND HAD BEEN BINDING UPON THE SAINTS (ARTICLE ON MARRIAGE) The original Article on Marriage which was eventually replaced by section 132 declared; “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“. It was written by Oliver Cowdery and was approved by the Church according to the law of common consent in a general assembly on August 17 1835. At the close of the meeting, after all those present had examined the revelations and voted to approve them, Oliver Cowdery stood and “read an instrument containing certain principles or items upon law in general & church governments.” After he had read the document, the entire congregation unanimously voted that it be accepted and included with the revelations. Although Joseph Smith and Frederick G. Williams were on a mission to Michigan when the above meeting was held, the Prophet approved of section 134 (Article on Marriage) and declared the statement to be “the belief of the Church” on principles of law and government. The authorship of section 134 traditionally has been attributed to Oliver Cowdery.
-
SECTION 132 CONTRADICTS THE BOOK OF MORMON REGARDING DAVID AND SOLOMON BEING JUSTIFIED; 132:1 states that the Lord justified David and Solomon in having many wives; “..I the Lord justified my servants Abraham Issac and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines… David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this pwer; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife..” D&C 132:1, 39. The book of Mormon states; “But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing awhoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and aSolomon truly had many bwives and concubines, which thing was cabominable before me, saith the Lord.” One must weigh the credibility of the Book of Mormon against the very questionable origin and incongruent doctrines found in section 132 to see which one is found wanting.
-
NO ONE CAN REJECT THIS COVENANT AND BE PERMITTED TO ENTER INTO MY GLORY; 132:3 Informs us that no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into the glory of the Lord. If that is true, why were the majority of the Lords righteous servants in the Old Testament, who obviously knew about polygamy, monogamous, including Joseph of Egypt through which the chosen seed of Ephraim would come. (Matt 8:11) Additionally, it is interesting that the few documented cases of elders of the foundation movement who had passed away, that had entered into the presence of the Lord, like David Patten, Edward Partridge and Joseph Smith Sr., were monogamous when they passed; “That when he shall finish his work I may areceive him unto myself, even as I did my servant David Patten, who is with me at this time, and also my servant bEdward Partridge, and also my aged servant Joseph Smith, Sen., who sitteth cwith Abraham at his right hand, and blessed and holy is he, for he is mine” D&C 124:19 (all three of these elders were monogamous when they passed yet they entered into the Lords presence and were sitting next to Abraham)
-
SECTION 132 HAS INCONSISTENT AND INACCURATE USE OF THE PHRASE “NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT” Section 132 uses the term “New and Everlasting Covenant” to be synonymous with being sealed to multiple wives. This is totally inconsistent with the use of the phrase in all of the other scriptures previously. Perhaps the most important and clear definitions have been provided in modern revelation. The D&C is pretty explicit that the phrase “New and Everlasting Covenant” refers to the “fullness of the Gospel”; And for this cause, that men might be made partakers of the glories which were to be revealed, the Lord sent forth the fulness of his gospel, his everlasting covenant, reasoning in plainness and simplicity— (133:57 see also 66:2) More specifically, it refers to the covenant of baptism which covenant is the essence of the fullness of the Gospel; “BEHOLD, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning. Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.” (D&C 22:1-2) Sometimes the phrase also refers to the anointed servants of the Lord because they are dispensing the fullness of the Gospel or the “New and Everlasting Covenant of baptism”. (D&C 45:9)
- IF YOU ABIDE NOT THE COVENANT YE ARE DAMNED In section 132:4 we are told that we are damned if we don’t live the doctrine of having multiple wives sealed to us. It is hugely problematic for the revelation to be given sometime between 1838 and 1843 that you are damned for not living the spiritual wife doctrine since the Lord assures us in 1831 that the “Everlasting Covenant, even the fullness of [the] Gospel” had already been given, long before the Spiritual Wife heresy ever surfaced in the post Kirtland days of the restoration movement (D&C 66:2);
- THE SPIRITUAL WIFE DOCTRINE CONTAINED IN SECTION 132 FULFILLS THE PROPHECY IN ISAIAH 24 THAT THE EVERLASTING COVENANT WILL BE CHANGED. By changing the definition of the phrase to mean the Spiritual Wife Doctrine instead of baptism and the fullness of the Gospel, and turning the focus on salvation towards multiple wives instead of coming to the mercy of Christ and the power of his blood through the atonement through the baptismal covenant, the prophesy in Isaiah is fulfilled; “..they had transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant” (Isa 24:5)
- “AND THERE IS NEVER BUT ONE ON THE EARTH AT A TIME ON WHO THIS POWER IS GIVEN”; Major problem here. This declaration in section 132 is clearly not true if section 124 is true. It contradicts Section 124 which states that God did in fact have at least two people on the earth that held the sealing keys, namely, Hyrum and Joseph. Furthermore, Hyrum was the primary holder of the sealing keys of the priesthood at the time the revelation was supposedly being passed around, not Joseph. Additionally, Zech 4 informs us that during the 2nd watch there will be two anointed ones on the earth; “Then said he, These are the two aanointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.”
- “I THE LORD COMMANDED IT: this verse (35) contradicts the Old Testament and even the Inspired Version. It was Sarah’s idea for Abraham to take another handmaiden not a commandment from the Lord. Indeed the idea backfired in that God had another plan for bringing forth the chosen seed, it was to be through Sarah. It was her lack of faith that motivated her to beseech Abraham to take on another wife.
- “THEY HAVE ENTERED INTO THEIR EXALTATION” Another major doctrinal boo boo. I am not aware of anywhere in the scriptures that tells us that anyone has entered into their exaltation… in fact the fulfilling of the covenant between God and his people on this earth does not even take place until the 3rd watch according to the book of Mormon! Abraham and other righteous patriarchs and prophets are suspended in a terrestrial, paradisiacal glory with the city of Enoch. The Lord has explained that the salvation of the fathers is predicated on the salvation of the children. (See Heb 11:40 which JS made the following commentary on in section 128; “For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect. Neither can they nor we be made perfect without those who have died in the gospel also..” Hence, no one during the last 6,000 years has been made perfect and received their final exaltation yet. Section 88:107 confirms that the Saints do not recieve their final inheritance or are made perfect until the Zion from above unites with the Zion from below at the time of the redemption of the dead.
- THE LAMANITE REVELATION; Now lets address the revelation given in 1831 which McConkie used to imply that the content in section 132 had been given as early as 132; “Verily I say unto you, that the wisdom of man in his fallen state, knoweth not the puposes and the privileges of my holy priesthood, but ye shall know when you receive a fullness by reason of the anointing; For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome and just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles.” (Unpublished Revelations Pg 58) Nothing about the necessity of being sealed to multiple wives for the purpose of containing godhood was contained in that revelation. According to this revelation, if it is a true one, is the sole purpose of making the posterity of the Lamanites and Nephites white. I am not judging at this time whether that Lamanite revelation was true or not, however, it seems odd that in Book of Mormon times, people with dark skin became white through righteousness rather than through breeding. Additionally we have no record of the leading elders ever going to the indian tribes to diseminate their seed in an effort to make them white,
- LAMANITE REVELATION KEPT OUT OF D&C; It should be noted that the revelation on the Lamanites and polygamy was given just six months after section 42 which forbids more than one wife. Clearly, if section 42 is true, coupled with the fact that there is no evidence to support that the elders of the church ever took Lamanite women as multiple wives, there is strong reason to question the truthfulness and/or accuracy of the revelation.. particularly since the council of elders commissioned to decide which revelations should be included in the D&C chose to ban the lamanite revelation from the canonized revelations. On the other hand, if both section 42 and the Lamanite revelation are true, then it should be remembered that the Lamanite revelation deals with the biblical doctrine of Polygamy, it does not support the “Spiritual Wife” doctrine that claims the sealing of multiple wives is essential for exaltation.
- RIGDON WAS COMMANDED TO PROVE THE REVELATIONS; Sidney Rigdon was appointed by God to prove the revelations received by Joseph Smith using the scriptures. He refused to defend the spiritual wife doctrine and he refused to live it. In fact, he condemned it. D&C 35:23
- MORE OR LESS THAN THIS COMMETH OF EVIL; 3rd Nephi 11:40 Tells us that anyone who declares “more or less” than baptism and the gift of the holy ghost As God’s doctrine cometh of evil: “And whoso shall adeclare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a bsandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.”
- IF I OR AN ANGEL FROM HEAVEN PREACH ANOTHER GOSPEL…;The story of the angel threatening Joseph Smith if he does not practice the spiritual wife doctrine is contrary to gospel law. It reminds us of the new testament verse the “If I or an angel from heaven preach another gospel let him be accursed.
- NEW REVELATION DOES NOT CONTRADICT PREVIOUS REVELATION; At the time Joseph Smith introduced the Spiritual Wife doctrine it had never been taught in the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants.In fact, these scriptures condemned the practice. Joseph Smith had taught that new revelation never contradicts previous revelation.
- POLYGAMY WAS PART OF THE CURSING IN THE OLD TESTAMENT; Polygamy was clearly part of the lessor law which was given as a cursing
- CELESTIAL LAW REQUIRES MONOGAMOUS MARRIAGE; The higher law also known as Celestial Law and Gospel Law has a marriage law within it which is monogamy… section 42
- MONOGAMY REQUIRED FOR THE EARTH TO FULFILL MEASURE OF ITS CREATION; SECTION 49 second witness to 42
- BISHOPS TO ONLY HAVE ONE WIFE ACCORDING TO THE NEW TESTAMENT; Bishop to have only one wife New Testament
- MULTIPLE WIVES FORBIDDEN ACCORDING TO THE BOOK OF MORMON; “Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife and concubines he shall have none..” THE LAMANITES WERE MORE RIGHTEOUS THAN THE NEPHITES BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE MULTIPLE WIVES;”Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them..”
- JOSEPH SMITH AND THE SCAPEGOAT DOCTRINE What about the overwhelming evidence that Joseph Smith practiced the Spiritual Wife doctrine? Aren’t prophets perfect? Would God allow his anointed to do something wrong and lead people astray? First of all, prophets are not perfect. Secondly, God can and does use prophets to test people, thirdly, in the case of Joseph Smith, a very important key in understanding his involvement in the spiritual wife doctrine has to do with understanding the scapegoat doctrine… see the tribute to Sidney Rigdon
Because I am Watching 
How did I miss this gem?
I hope you don’t mind if I add my favorite points.
*Jesus said “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
This is neither easy nor light. Any reasonable person can see that it is a burden and curse as you have pointing out.
*Marriage is often used as an allegory for our relationship with God.
-Is it possible that the church falling into polygamy is an allegory for their fall into the worship of false gods?
There are some common misconceptions of a “need” for polygamy.
*There were more men than women in Utah. This debunks the “need” for polygamy based on male to female ratio.
*Fewer children are born to polygamist relationships than monogamist. Just look at BY.
Great points TruthSeekerToo
BTW
I must confess, I only posted this just recently but instead of creating a new post I replaced a pre-existing post with this article.
I did that because I didn’t want this to attract a lot of attention, and I didn’t want it showing up at the top of this blog… but I forgot that it would show an erroneous posting date that would make it appear as if this was posted a long time ago.
Watcher
Oh, I wondered if that is what happened! Because it sounded like a new post except the date stamp. LOL Plus I knew an article on polygamy would have MANY more comments.
I have to add more of my thoughts. I agree this is important because so many people fully expect to live this again….I know I used to.
Another thing that is incongruent is the way Emma is spoken about in 132. I find it more than a little strange that God freely forgives adulterers in other sections of the D&C or warns members about lust, etc in a very forgiving way. Then get to 132 and Emma and women will be DESTROYED for adultery and for not accepting polygamy. Ironically, it never mentions men being destroyed for adultery!
——————————————–
The whole concept of “exaltation” is one I am having trouble figuring out. Did this concept get born out of polygamy? And it seemed like this was being used to exalt ones self. Make your kingdom as big as you can, get all the women you can.
*He who is exalted shall be abased; he who is abased shall be exalted.”
——————————————
I believe that Jacob 2:30 does not say that God will ever command polygamy. This chapter is also talking about how God leads the righteous out of the lands of the wicked. I believe THAT is how he preserves his people.
Don’t even get me started on the “Law of Sarah.” The supposed exemption if your first wife disagrees is just wrong. It completely removes agency, dignity and rights from women. Seriously! You can disagree, but you’ll be damned and your husband can go one marrying anyway.
——————————————
D&C 58:21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land. (given in August 1831)
AF12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
Polygamy (bigomy) was against the law in Illinois as early as 1833. It has never been legal in the US. God knew that and knows all. God was telling the truth in D&C 58.
———————————————
A God of Love would not command his daughters to be concubines. Concubines are wives (sometimes slaves) who have no rights. They are not legal wives.
We can see in the history of Utah that polygamous wives who asked for divorce often had to leave with nothing. Brigham Young did this to one of his wives. Often when a husband died the less liked wives got nothing from the estate. This happened to one of Parley Pratt’s wives.
*sigh* I just am glad I was able to finally really take a look at this doctrine and test it and have my eyes opened.
Wow TruthSeekerToo
You have put some serious thought into this.
You have provided several observations that need to be added to the list.
Thanks
Watcher
Uh, yeah. It was one of my first heretical research projects after finding your blog. LOL I finally put all my reasons together in Word so that they were easy to reference.
Being a woman, this has become a very important topic to me. I’m glad I could contribute.
[…] first paper on the Spiritual Wife Doctrine approached the subject from some personal experiences my wife and I had trying to sort things out […]
i came across teh idea of “legal wife”and “spiritual wife” in a heresy that ripped through some German churches last year connected to the Water-spirit movement.
is there a connection?
Where in your site do you give the justification for the September 11 1836 date for the redemption of Zion?
I think it is this post- http://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/2008/11/08/the-bridegroom-tarried/ ( which is not my blog but I did several guess posts on the site)
On August 16th 1834, Joseph Smith wrote a letter to Lyman Wight and the brethren on the High Council in Missouri telling them that the spirit had informed him that the leaders of the Church in Zion must use-
“every effort to prevail on the churches to gather to those regions and situate themselves to be in readiness to move into Jackson Co. in two years from the Eleventh of September next (1834) which is the appointed time for the redemption of Zion“.
the scriptural basis for for Joseph’s statement appears to be in section 64 which was given on September 11 1831. In verse 21 the Lord said ” I the Lord will to retain a strong hold in the land of Kirtland for the space of five years.”
Along with the Mountain Meadows Mass. and the 9/11 attack of 2001, there are a host of tragic historic events that have taken place on September 11 throughout history.
this coming September 11th could possibly be one to remember as well.
OWIW,
I attended a book signing at Benchmark Books in Salt Lake last Wednesday. It was for the release of Brian C. Hales three part work “Joseph Smith’s Polygamy”. Absolutely worth the buy. Brian is a believer in Polygamy and an unabashed apologist. However, that being said, his work is honest. The documentation is incredible and he clearly states when he is expressing his opinion. Again, I can’t stress enough the level of documentation.
Some interesting things come to light as I am reading it.
He places Joseph’s marriage to Fanny Alger and their intimate relationship sometime between 1835 and 1836. It would appear that Emma discovered the relationship in mid 1836; after the dedication of the Kirtland temple. It was at that point that it blew up in his face and caused all kinds of problems.
This is interesting when considering the Gentiles rejection of the fulness of the Priesthood. The expulsion from Zion. The failure of the United Firm and the Law of Consecration….and then comes Polygamy?
What is even more interesting, and I am sure you are aware, Hales discusses the revelation claimed years later to have been received by Joseph Smith in July of 1831 in Missouri. The accounting of this revelation states: “For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites…” The revelation is full of anachronisms; however, there is some corroborating evidence that such discussions took place at this time. The Ohio Star published an article in December of 1831: “It has been made known by revelation, that it will be pleasing to the Lord, should they form a matrimonial alliance with the natives…It has been made known to one, who has left his wife in the state of New York, that he is entirely free from his wife, and he is at pleasure to take him a wife from among the Lamanites.” A non-Mormon source from the time period.
The 1831 revelation itself does not indicate Polygamy directly. It wasn’t till three years later, 1834, that the same individual who recorded the revelation asked the Prophet Joseph for clarification about how married men could take wives of the Lamanites and Nephites: “In the same manner that Abraham took Hagar and Keturah; and Jacob took Rachel and Bilhah and Zilpah: by revelation — the Saints of the Lord are always directed by revelation”…How fast did the Gentiles reject the fulness?
As I read this book, I am beginning to believe that God did indeed allow this doctrine to enter the church for one reason — to bring it to its knees. (D&C 124:28, 48-50).
We neglect the baptism of water and the baptism of the Spirit. Today, baptism by water is basically considered an ordinance for children and new initiates — rather than the New and Everlasting Covenant. Baptism by fire is no longer even discussed — how many people do you know, or how many people reading this blog, can name the day they were baptized by fire as described in “the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and the word of God—Which is my word to the Gentile”? (D&C 19:27). The Holy Ghost has been downgraded from the ‘tongue of angels’ to a ‘whispering uncle who gives good advice’. But then, what are you going to do if all you have is the form and not the power???
Yet after all the failure to consecrate, sanctify, and live according to the word of God….a higher blessing; polygamy?
Polygamy, responsible for the death of the Prophet Joseph, the casting of the church into the wilderness, the breaking of countless tender hearts, the near destruction of the church at the turn of the century, a stumbling block to honest people everywhere who are searching for the truth….
Sounds more like a punishment and a downgrade to me.
I believe that Joseph was sincere in what he did. Maybe he saw it as a great blessing that the Lord was even willing to continue to work with the saints…who knows. I believe the scriptures testify that there are ways to please the Lord and gain his favor that do not require you to destroy the confidence, faith, love and admiration of the one that facilitates your becoming One with Him. (1 Corinthians 11:11) Adam did it; Enoch did it; Melckizedek did it; Isaac did it; Nephi did it; Alma did it; the Twelve in Jerusalem did it; the Twelve in America did it; and an exceedingly many others have done it — and not only is Polygamy not mentioned, in some cases it is strictly prohibited.
Anyway, get the series — you will find a lot of great information there that I think you will find edifying.
Wow
Great comments and observations.
Very timely with regard to where my thoughts have been going lately.
I almost went to the Benchmark book signing for Hales. It is odd to think we may have been sitting next to each other and never known that our paths had previously crossed.
I had an interesting email exchange with Hales a few years ago. He was very much aware of my blog and of the atonement statute. As I recall, he declared something to the effect that he did not have the faith or desire, to believe the scenario I have provided of the atonement statute. He refused to believe that Joseph had made a mistake, etc.
“He places Joseph’s marriage to Fanny Alger and their intimate relationship sometime between 1835 and 1836. It would appear that Emma discovered the relationship in mid 1836; after the dedication of the Kirtland temple. It was at that point that it blew up in his face and caused all kinds of problems.”
It was just about 3 or 4 days ago that I was reviewing the differing views relevant to the Fanny Alger “affair” as Oliver referred to it. Some people try to force the relationship much earlier although things came to a head in 1836.
I have personally come to the conclusion that it had to have taken place AFTER the event described in section 110. I just don’t think Joseph and Oliver could have had the endowment during an affair that Joseph was having.
It actually makes perfect sense that it took place shortly after 110.
Therefore, I concur with Hales on that timeline.
One of the things that led me to the atonement statute years ago is the unlikely scenario that Oliver could be critical of Joseph and then leave the church within such a short time frame after having such an amazing experience with him with God’s apparent endorsement. Oliver and Joseph received priesthood keys JOINTLY pertaining to the future. Oliver seemed to have an awareness that things were going to get funky after the veil experience.
That is what has led me to conclude that much more took place behind the veil than what we often assume.
Although the comments of Christ in the opening verses of 110 have a positive inflection of the event, I have long suspected that both a blessing and a cursing took place during that occasion and that is why Oliver was quick to be critical of Joseph and quick to cut ties with the church that he, as the second elder of the church, was so intimately involved in helping to establish.
Oliver firmly believed the original section 101 about polygamy, that he penned and he was not going to be deceived on the issue.
One would expect that Oliver and Joseph would be bound together in an unbreakable loyalty to each other after experiencing the endowment that they jointly received and yet, something was revealed during that event that apparently heightened Oliver’s awareness that Joseph was going to temporarily fall.
It has occurred to me that the closing statements by Elijah in section 110 was a veiled innuendo of the “cursing” that was about to take place, and then delayed, because of the intercessory offering.
The time spoken of by Malachi had “fully come”.
What had Malachi spoken of?
The last few verses of section 110 were letting us know that if we wanted to know what else was related to what happened behind the veil, we need to study the ominous pronouncements of Malachi because the time for those ominous pronouncements had fully come…
Malachi had prophesied that he would curse the blessings of the apostate saints.
“I will even send a curse upon you. and I will curse your blessings…. I will corrupt your seed…”
Malachi spoke of how Joseph was perfect in grace up to the time of the endowment:
“my life was with him of life and peace… the law of truth was in his mouth and iniquity was not found in his lips.. he walked with me… and did turn many away from iniquity.. for a priests lips should keep knowledge and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts”
Malachi then reveals and foretells that Joseph temporarily falls after turning many away from iniquity:
“But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law [of the gospel that included the law of monogamy]…
.. ye have corrupted the Covenant of Levi….
.. therefore I have also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as you have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law…”
Malachi foretells that Joseph will be “cut off” for being “partial in the law”
“The Lord will cut off the man that doeth this, the master and the scholar, out of the tabernacles of Jacob..”
Clearly, Joseph is the master that was cut off..
I personally think that the “scholar” is Sidney, although Oliver could also fit.
So, why has the Lord’s wrath been directed at Joseph according to the ominous pronouncements of Malachi?
“Because the Lord hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom though has dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, an the wife of thy covenant”
Malachi reveals here that the monogamous marital relationship is part of the new and everlasting covenant made by water, fire and the Holy Ghost!
“… therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.”
Why is it treacherous to be untrue to one wife?
How does infidelity in the celestial law of monogamy as contained in section 42 cause the great curse upon the earth that Malachi speaks of?
How is it that the breaking of the everlasting covenant causes the earth to waste away as documented by Malachi and Isaiah 24?
The Lord reveals that the monogamous marital covenant is tied to the ability of the earth to fulfill the end of its creation-
“..I have sent to you mine everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning… 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..”
No wonder the breaking of the everlasting covenant unleashes a cursing upon the earth that needs to be stayed until just before the servants return!!!
This is why the Lord must send his servant and his associates back to the earth to explain what the desolation of abomination is that is going forth in the earth!!!
are we seeing the signs that the earth is wasting away and going through serious earth changes?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Pz4M6-4Js&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WBUmL7ow6w
But I digress… continuing on in Malachi
“.. but one covereth violence with his garment..
A veiled reference to the absurd holy “garment” that was devised to make people feel that committing treachery upon the wife of the covenant is somehow okay by a higher law????
Malachi, after detailing the fall of the messenger of the covenant in chapter two then pronounces the unlikely and nearly unbelievable fact that the Lord is going to send his fallen, intercessory messenger back to prepare the way before the Lord coming
“Behold, I will send my messenger and he shall prepare the way before me .. but who may abide the day of his coming?
“he will purify the sons of Levi and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.”
“I will be a swift witness against the adulterers and false swearers..”
“even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances and have not kept them”
“RETURN UNTO ME AND I WILL RETURN UNTO YOU!”
“YE HAVE ROBBED ME… IN TITHES AND OFFERINGS..”
“YE ARE CURSED WITH A CURSE BECAUSE YE HAVE ROBBED ME”
How ineffably significant that the two primary observations of Malachi are that latter day Israel has committed treachery against the covenant monogamous wife and has not kept the law of consecration… talk about summing up the relentless observations contained in modern revelation and the history of the church!!!
“Behold the day shall come that shall burn as an oven and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall be stubble and the day cometh that [THEY THAT COME SHALL BURN THEM]” (see JST version)
“Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord and he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest [for fear that] I come and smite the earth with a curse”
“This is interesting when considering the Gentiles rejection of the fulness of the Priesthood. The expulsion from Zion. The failure of the United Firm and the Law of Consecration….and then comes Polygamy?”
Exactly… cognitive dissonance at its finest..
“It has been made known by revelation, that it will be pleasing to the Lord, should they form a matrimonial alliance with the natives…”
Clearly, Joseph Smith did think that matrimonial alliances needed to be made.
Was he correct?
These alliances did not need to necessitate polygamy if indeed they did need to be made.
Another fascinating “matrimonial alliance” that Joseph felt needed to be made was with the daughter of Bishop Whitney, having to do with the Davidic dynasty.
“How fast did the Gentiles reject the fulness? As I read this book, I am beginning to believe that God did indeed allow this doctrine to enter the church for one reason — to bring it to its knees. (D&C 124:28, 48-50).”
Amen to that!!
“We neglect the baptism of water and the baptism of the Spirit. Today, baptism by water is basically considered an ordinance for children and new initiates — rather than the New and Everlasting Covenant. Baptism by fire is no longer even discussed — how many people do you know, or how many people reading this blog, can name the day they were baptized by fire as described in “the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and the word of God—Which is my word to the Gentile”? (D&C 19:27). The Holy Ghost has been downgraded from the ‘tongue of angels’ to a ‘whispering uncle who gives good advice’. But then, what are you going to do if all you have is the form and not the power??? Yet after all the failure to consecrate, sanctify, and live according to the word of God….a higher blessing; polygamy?”
Amen!
“Polygamy, responsible for the death of the Prophet Joseph, the casting of the church into the wilderness, the breaking of countless tender hearts, the near destruction of the church at the turn of the century, a stumbling block to honest people everywhere who are searching for the truth…. Sounds more like a punishment and a downgrade to me. I believe that Joseph was sincere in what he did. Maybe he saw it as a great blessing that the Lord was even willing to continue to work with the saints…who knows. I believe the scriptures testify that there are ways to please the Lord and gain his favor that do not require you to destroy the confidence, faith, love and admiration of the one that facilitates your becoming One with Him. (1 Corinthians 11:11) Adam did it; Enoch did it; Melckizedek did it; Isaac did it; Nephi did it; Alma did it; the Twelve in Jerusalem did it; the Twelve in America did it; and an exceedingly many others have done it — and not only is Polygamy not mentioned, in some cases it is strictly prohibited. Anyway, get the series — you will find a lot of great information there that I think you will find edifying.”
Amen amen and amen!
Watcher,
Where is the second part of this series? The link from the .pdf blog list is not working. Is it still available?
Thanks,
Seeking
i am not sure what you are referring to.
This post was not part of a series, it was a single post.
I have written about five or six posts on the topic and they should all be on the pdf blog list.
If you know what the name of the post is that you are looking for I would be happy to research it.
BTW, I am currently posting a new article that addresses the topic of polygamy that you may find interesting.
It is called “Oliver’s Secret”
It briefly addresses the Fanny Alger issue which you brought up in the comments section some time ago.
BTW, I used to believe that the affair must have taken place post section 110 but I have changed my mind.
I appreciate you making the comments you did to get me thinking about it….
Thanks
Watcher
Glad to hear it, I believe your assumption regarding the affair is correct. Thanks Watcher. My bad, the link is Searching for the Holy Order and 23 High Priests- Part 8 — The link is listed with the other Holy Order posts as #8 (that one works) The one listed further down:
Article #2 on Polygamy-Spiritual Wife Doctrine
Searching for the Holy Order and 23 High Priests- Part 8
The Gospel of Abraham and The Place of Patriarchal Polygamy in the LDS Foundation Movement The Possible Restoration of Biblical Polygamy in 1836
This one doesn’t work — but your reference to Part 8 got me looking back at the top of the pdf where the Holy Order links are and as I said, it works there.
Thank you so much for all you have been willing to share on this blog — it is truly a gem. Rare are the blogs that give as much credence to the word of God as yours does. There is so much to digest that I find myself annotating your blogs over and over — searching through the references and pulling out keys that have given me great consolation.
Your blogs have got me looking at the D&C in an entirely different light. I am fascinated by all of the references to the work of the Father, the last time the vineyard will be pruned, the marvelous work and a wonder which will divide the people into Zion and Babylon. As someone who believes the D&C to be the word of God — the third watch doctrine is the only way to take seriously what is being said. The modern LDS church leaves so many of Joseph’s prophecies dead on the floor — apologists find themselves straining at gnats to declare them fulfilled.
I am now searching for clear prophecies, both ancient and modern, regarding the power of that great work that is to be.
No one can deny that we are not doing it now…it isn’t happening. The fullness of the gospel, sanctification by the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, is not occurring in the Church today. I have been to dozens of baptisms, I have performed them, I have thousands of family members/friends/coworkers/patients/companions in the church — and I have yet to find one that I know personally who can testify that they have ever seen or heard of such a thing.
Yet it will happen and I want to be ready.
Watcher, do you mind me asking…what is your relationship to the LDS church today? If the church is fulfilling the call to take the preparatory gospel to the house of Israel and thus “preserving the roots of the tree” by “the change of the branches” from Gentile to Israel/Israel to Gentile — do you feel a desire to be a part of that mission?
My paradigm has completely shifted regarding the temple and many other aspects of the church — I would love to share with you some thoughts I have had — but this reply is becoming far too long.
Thank you for sharing what you have learned. It is immensely appreciated and has brought me closer to God and helped to set me on a path that will change my eternity and the eternity of my family — God willing.
SeekingtobeAstonished
“..apologists find themselves straining at gnats to declare them fulfilled.” LOL
“Yet it will happen and I want to be ready.” Amen… that is really the bottom line isn’t it?
You know, I don’t like to speak about my relationship with the church because I am not a worthy example for anyone for follow and I am afraid there may be someone foolish enough to think that my life and decisions should be emulated.
I do understand how confusing the whole things is… on the one hand, it appears that the church possibly has a remnant of priesthood and is spreading the Book of Mormon and keeping the roots alive..
On the other hand, the Lord did promise to reject the church with their dead if they failed to repent and complete the temple… and the more a person becomes spiritually enlightened the more horrified they become at the false and destructive fruits coming from the corporate church…
One could go interpret the proper relationship either way I suppose.
I think each person needs to evaluate how much they get from it , how much they are able to give to others through it, and most of all, one needs to take the spirit as their guide as to what their relationship should be.
I really appreciate your observations and remarks and the fact that you are passionately engaged in God’s word and waiting and watching for the Marvelous Work to break forth.
It is very faith promoting for me to hear from people like you and Fusion and others who find the scriptures as exciting as I do…
Thanks
Watcher
I have spent a lot of time studying and pondering this issue. Jacob 2:30 was troubling for me and I read it over and over trying to make it fit the context in which it was given. Finally I prayed about it and then read and pondered it some more and this is what I came up with:
There are three clear condemnations of polygamy in the Book of Mormon. One in Jacob 2, one in Mosiah 11 and one in Ether 10. By the mouth of three witnesses the practice stands condemned as false doctrine(D&C 5:15, 2 Nephi 11:3), in the “most correct book on earth”.
However, there is a ‘weasel clause’ in Jacob polygamous church leaders have used to justify polygamy, by falsely interpreting it.
It is found in Jacob 2:30. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
Church leaders have interpreted this to mean when God wills, he will command his people to practice polygamy.
This is a bad interpretation. It is not a valid “loophole”. If read in context and with a clear understanding of the definition of the word ‘otherwise’ this is obviously incorrect.
If you look at the 1828 Websters Dictionary definition of the word ‘otherwise’ you find this definition: Otherwise, adv. in a different manner. The 1812 Johnsons Dictionary has the same definition.
So look at the verse with that definition replacing the word ‘otherwise’ –
30: For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; in a different manner they shall hearken unto these things.
And just what manner is being discussed in this passage? The abominable manner practiced by David and Solomon which some of the Nephites are using as an excuse to justify their own “whoredoms”.
The manner which in verse 31 we learn; For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands. And in 32 the Lord goes on to say, “And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.”
So it is clear when God wants to raise up seed unto Him, He will command His people to act in a DIFFERENT manner than did David and Solomon.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. (again, won’t condone them practicing polygamy)
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments (hearken unto these things), saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. (One can easily make the case the saints were cursed, as you have done so well Watcher.)
I think section 132 is a ridiculous, pathetic, illogical, threatening attempt to promote evil as being good. 2 Nephi 15:20 Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! The fact it is still in the D&C and considered as scripture by church leaders speaks volumes about them.
It introduces new words, phrases, doctrines and definitions not seen in any other scripture or supported by them. It is the first and only introduction in all the scriptures of the concept of “exaltation” which it throws out 9 times. If “exaltation” represents the pinnacle of God’s plan why didn’t he mention it here: Moses 1: 39 “For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” Or here: D&C 75:5 And thus, if ye are faithful ye shall be laden with many sheaves, and crowned with honor, and glory, and immortality, and eternal life.
Its treatment of Emma(and all women) is appalling and the antithesis of Christ-like behavior. In this travesty we find the only instance in scripture where Jesus threatens a woman by name, Emma Smith, who he called earlier, “an elect lady” with destruction, for NOT breaking her marriage vows. What?
It also lies about Isaac whom it says had more than one wife. No scripture makes that claim and research on the net fails to turn up any biblical scholars who do either. It is also doubtful if Moses had more than one wife although in this ‘revelation’ it states he did. How can you have a true revelation based on a lie(s)?
We also learn of the “law of Sarah” here for the first time and what a stupid law that is. It is a Hobson’s choice. And shouldn’t it be called the law of Sarai since Sarai gave Hagar to Abraham long before she became Sarah?
Very interesting points. Thank you for sharing.
“I think section 132 is a ridiculous, pathetic, illogical, threatening attempt to promote evil as being good..”
Anyone disagreeing with the above declaration may find the following article of interest.
https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/analysis-of-section-132/
One,
Am I given to understand that you toss out the entire concept of the continuation of the seeds both in the world and out of the world? Your commentary skipped this point entirely. If you reject the spirit body birth of seeds out of the world, they you deny that Adam and Eve were our heavenly parents of our spirit bodies which is in fact duly recorded in creation scripture if you closely follow the precise chronology. Adam and Eve are the archetype of exaltation. LDS get confused because Brigham Young really did not care to understand it clearly before he spouted adolescent recreational theology.
James
Why would you think that I toss out the entire concept of the continuation of seeds?
I am simply pointing out that the spiritual wife doctrine which teaches that a man needs to have multiple wives sealed to him in order to achieve the highest salvation has never had any foundation in reality, as far as the four standard works are concerned.
The true nature of celestial marriage is based on monogamy.
Secondly, I am pointing out that section 132 is full of contradictions and false statements. It was obviously something that had either been composed of different concepts by conspiring men, (some true, some not) and combined them together in an attempt to justify the secret abominations that were taking place, or it was revealed by Satan himself. Either way, there are undoubtedly some true concepts mingled in with it as there usually is in anything truly deceptive.
Beyond that, you should not read anything into what I am saying.
I believe in the continuation of seeds, although we have precious little information about the topic, since section 132 is not a credible revelation in its entirety.
It is interesting to me that the Bible says both man and woman have seed.
I don’t think they had seed until they partook of the tree of knowledge (intelligence)
I believe the primary priesthood function and responsibility of the female portion of mortal man is to “bring forth children” and be a helpmeet to her husband up until they become one flesh again.
I have wondered why the Lord told Eve “in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children..”.
Sorrow is not the same as physical pain.
It has to do with emotional anxiety distress and disappointment.
That is exactly what Eve felt when she next conceived and excitedly exclaimed that, the man child Cain that she bore would hopefully, be in the likeness of she and Adam, desiring to worship the only true God, and then, in great sorrow, she found out that would not be the case.
Sorrow is truly what she experienced in her bringing forth Cain and other children that would not repent.
It makes me wonder if the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was actually code for the SEED bearing tree of good and evil intelligences.
In other words, unlike the plants and animals that all reproduced offspring in their own likeness, Eve, the Mother of ALL living had the priesthood responsibility to bring all manner of spirit beings into the world for the opportunity for the plan to work, even some that were not in the spiritual likeness of Adam and Eve.
It appears that Adam and Eve both needed to partake of the fruit in order to get seed in their bodies… differing kind of seeds in their bodies.
This is possibly why she and Adam did not get the promise of categorically producing offspring in their own likeness.
This is possibly why Adam and Eve were sterile and without seed in their bodies before partaking of the fruit
The mystical attraction of human sexuality may well have been predicated upon the seed of the man and the seed of the woman being present in both bodies and desiring to physically unite.
Prior to that, no covering was necessary for the naked body because no seed was present and therefore, no sexual attraction was present..
Just some random speculation from a heretic
You are hard pressed to get the continuation of the seeds, where man is bringing them forth, from anywhere but D&C 132. And only the woman had her conceptions multiplied and replenished unto her.
And Adam and Eve already had many sons and daughters whom Satan already had turned away BEFORE she had Cain……where do you suppose his wife came from? Generations had passed before Cain can up….he was the first smart enough to come to know God and enter into his presence. Then Abel whom Cain envied because he rivaled Cain in intelligence which was Cain’s glory and downfall.
Moses 5: 2
2 And Adam knew his wife, and she bare unto him sons and daughters, and they began to multiply and to replenish the earth.
13 And Satan came among them, saying: I am also a son of God; and he commanded them, saying: Believe it not; and they believed it not, and they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.
Then Cain come around in verse 16.
It was death that awakened the sexual drive to preserve the species. Adam became as a little child after the coarse material of this planet…..clay….was added to his glorified and exalted body to tether him upon this planet. Then after he had assimilated that coarse material some was added from his side to Eve so that she would not have to endure as much agony as Adam had conditioned the coarse element to temper there natural trauma upon an soul resurrected unto exaltation glory as was both Adam and Eve when made….resurrected unto the same glory….in the image and likeness of God.
Tethered upon this earth so they could not translate to Kolob as they needed to remain until the plan was advanced. These ideas I call doctrine based upon scripture and not speculations.
“You are hard pressed to get the continuation of the seeds, where man is bringing them forth, from anywhere but D&C 132”
If that is true, that is just one more reason to reject section 132. By the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
Section 132 glorified man while section 76 glorifies God. Show me from section 76 where man is to be glorified instead of God.
“And Adam and Eve already had many sons and daughters whom Satan already had turned away BEFORE she had Cain……”
I don’t recall ever saying Cain or Abel were the first ones born.. I only gave an example of Cain in reference to sorrow in child birth. There were many sons and daughters of Adam and Eve that rejected the Gospel when it was preached to them.
“Adam became as a little child after the coarse material of this planet….. clay…. was added to his glorified and exalted body to tether him upon this planet.”
You are now spouting Brigham Young heresies. Adam was made of the dust of the earth. He probably began in the garden in a paradisiacal state before the fall but he had not been celestialized. There is absolutely nothing to support that doctrine. Joseph believed and taught the literal interpretation of the creation story even though Brigham believed it to be a fairy tale.
You need to cleanse yourself from the gospel of Brigham Young.
I am not a Brighamite. Read creation scripture allowing everything to line up chronologically. It does not repeat. You know from other sources that the man Adam helped form the earth before he was made of clay, as it were. So…..oh, I forgot, you reject temple rituals. hmm… Back to the chronology. I know you could see it. Take up as if your own idea and see where it ends.
James-
Joseph Smith once taught that every single religion on earth has its own very distinct and powerful spirit that accompanies it. Your obsession with the LDS temple ritual and the glorification of man instead of God, and the doctrines of Brigham Young feel to me like you are one more flavor of the Brighamites that is headed down the same rabbit hole.
Virtually all of the fundamentalist groups that have broken away from the church have been obsessed with the corrupt temple theology that permeates modern day Mormonism, which has been inherited from Brigham Young.
The leaders of Mormon fundamentalist cults become convinced that they commune directly with God via the keys and knowledge gained from the temple “endowment” that has replaced the true spiritual endowment that the saints rejected four generations ago.
All of the false prophets from Jim D. Harmston to Owen Allred, to Rulon Jeffs and especially those that slit people throats, such as outlined in the temple ceremony, such as Ervil Labaron and his brothers, and the Lafferty brothers, and a long list of other self appointed and devil appointed prophets have all received their revelations and been motivated to start their own churches based on the revelations they get from their Temple experiences and their belief in the doctrines contained in section 132.
This is one of the main reasons I have been motivated to do this current series on PTHG, there is a very common trend that appears to be taking place with the group of people that are followers of the PTHG that are potentially going down the same rabbit hole that other groups have gone down.
Once people get this spirit that has been passed down by Brigham Young, they suffer from delusions of grandeur and they often start their own “true church” and appoint themselves to lead the way to Zion.
Does this scenario sound familiar to you?
I just re-read Malachi again and I had read the servant in chapter 3 as JS during the 2nd watch. However, your comments above make it sound like it could ALSO be in the 3rd or just before the 3rd.
Fascinating.
Your quote:
“Malachi, after detailing the fall of the messenger of the covenant in chapter two then pronounces the unlikely and nearly unbelievable fact that the Lord is going to send his fallen, intercessory messenger back to prepare the way before the Lord coming”
“Behold, I will send my messenger and he shall prepare the way before me .. but who may abide the day of his coming?
“he will purify the sons of Levi and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.”
“I will be a swift witness against the adulterers and false swearers..”
“even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances and have not kept them”
The fathers being the JS and others who practiced polygamy and broke the covenant of marriage and consecration.
Wow.
Regarding this strange ‘seer stone’ business being real or just something from Joseph and his contemporaries’ inventing, check this out:
The entire video, though long (I’m watching the whole thing while re-setringing a bunch of guitars) is extremely fascinating.
Fusion
Looks like an interesting vid. I loved how it went right to 49:01 when copied the url and pasted it in a browswer. I didn’t realize that could be done.
The donut shaped “sacred stones” reminded me of the mystical shape of the first verse of Genesis according to the research of Bill Haber.
You might find the following vid of interest, beginning at 9:32 to see his visual.
my apologies…I forgot to give you the timeslot of where the seer-stones are in the above video:
0:49:01
Thanks…will watch tonight…
You can right click a video on youtube and an option should be there to ‘copy video at current time’…
Speaking of seer stones, I have in my possession a intriguing stone of questionable origin. Ironically it seems to be a natural made monocle, but instead of just the circle, it has a small place where a thumb fits perfectly, and a small slope where the other fingers rest to grasp the stone, to make it easily held for peering through the circular hole in the stone, that is about the size of a oblong dime, with an even smaller hole that almost a pen tip can fit through. The hole in the stone, is shaped like swimming goggles, in that when held up to the face, seems to block out the external light, that is not coming through the tiny hole in the stone.
Now the stone may not be of any significance, but its appearance causes wonder, and I may have miserably described it for an accurate picture, of a remarkable stone that may be more than just a pen holder. Now that I think about, it resembles a tiny volcano, that when seen, its erosion causes me to question that the erosion on the top was peculiarly carved, and the erosion on the bottom is what is to be expected of a stone from the shores of a river.
Fabled
I would be curious to know how you came into possession with your curious stone. Have you attempted to search out any hidden treasured below the ground, from the scriptures or out of the heavens?
I obtained the stone, about 10 to 12 years, fishing Bear River near my old hometown with my Father. My Father was the one to find it, and gave it to me saying, “Better hold on to it, it may be important someday.”
If the stone is mystical, I am unaware of its influence in my journey. I have tried to use it to gain some sort of insight, but to no avail. I am afraid my spiritual mind is blind as a bat, who knows maybe its a transmitter. It does seem to emit a lot of energy. And it may be missing something, it looks like it can house a distinct object
Btw what is the best format for uploading a picture in the comments, [img] or ? I uploaded a picture of the stone to digital code, on photobucket. And I am willing to share, to gain some observational insight if the stone is unique or not.
I am technically challenged and do not know how to upload a pic in the comment section..
Well I did a trial comment on my personal wordpress, html link from photobucket worked, while the img link did not, so hopefully it will show here. I was asking just so I don’t accidentally comment with programming code. If this comment doesn’t work, I’ll just end up having to email the picture.
I can see the link but it does not appear to be live and is not easy to copy. Please email it to onewhoiswatching@gmail.com
Do you have a wordpress blog? If so, give us the url brother.
Hey Fabledsog,
I’d love to check it out too, if you wouldn’t mind. Click on my name to email, or I’m sure Watcher won’t mind forwarding to me 🙂
Thanks
I just sent it to you Fusion.
Fabled, that is really pretty awesome looking. It reminds me of one of the seer stones that Joseph used that I saw in the Wood museum
Got it, thanks Watcher.
I must agree, that is a most curious looking stone.
Funny that these stones have become a taboo subject amongst LDS…we seem to be ashamed of them…perhaps due to being commanded not to ‘peep’ or be associated with ‘peeping wizards’ maybe??
David Whitmer, who though was such a passionate believer in the BofM, was such a critic of Joseph in so many things in his ‘Address to all believers’ pamphlett, but strangely never seemed to have any problem with the seer stone, if I recall correctly.
Outside of the ‘white stone’ mentioned in Book of Revelation, I wonder if the seer stons have any scriptural justification?
It would make an interesting study for someone. I know Ogden Kraut wrote a pamplet on seer stones, I’ll need to dig that one out if I can.
I was reading somewhere that Joseph never even used the U and T, only the seer stone. That got me curious to know what the initial purpose of the U and T was.
Some of the passages indicated that it was used for judging Israel. Very interesting. Perhaps each of us will be judged by the servants when they return, by means of the U and T.
A bit of insight. The Book of Mormon refers to what we call the U and T as Interpreters. Moroni indicates that he ‘sealed up the interpreters’ for the purpose of translating the ‘very things the brother of Jared saw’. (see Ether 4:4-5). They will become useful in the day that the Gentiles ‘repent of their iniquity, and become clean before the Lord…’ (Ether 4:6) In other words, they are to be used in the Third Watch. Moroni makes clear that in that day, the sealed writing of the Brother of Jared will be made manifest — he included the interpreters with the plates for that purpose.
The term U and T began to be used because early converts saw that item from the Bible in the Book of Mormon — but they are obviously two distinct items — One was held by the High Priest in Israel and another apparently found its way across the ocean with the descendants of Lehi. I don’t know, they could be the same — but I would imagine that if they were — then the Book of Mormon translation would have referred to them by the name given them in the Bible — it might have mentioned some connection to the U and T of ancient Israel — but it doesn’t — it assumes they are different.
For whatever it is worth…
that is incredibly informative and interesting. Thank you Seeking..