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.
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