Why have ye transfigured the Holy Word of God?

Why have ye transfigured the Holy Word of God?
By OneWhoIsWatching www.threewatches.blogspot.com

In the 8^th chapter of Mormon the Prophet Moroni speaks of the sacred records that he has been entrusted with that were to come forth at a future time.

He notes that a Prophet will bring them forth by the power of God with an eye single to the glory of God:

“For none can have power to bring it to light save it be given him of God; for God wills that it shall be done with an eye single to his glory, or the welfare of the ancient and long dispersed covenant people of the Lord. And blessed be he that shall bring this thing to light; for it shall be brought out of darkness unto light, according to the word of God; yea, it shall be brought out of the earth, and it shall shine forth out of darkness, and come unto the knowledge of the people; and it shall be done by the power of God.”  (Mormon 8:15)

He then promises that those who accept it when it first comes forth shall know of greater things:

“And whoso receiveth this record, and shall not condemn it because of the imperfections which are in it, the same shall know of greater things than these. Behold, I am Moroni; and were it possible, I would make all things known unto you.”

When I think of the greater things that are promised to the righteous… I cannot help but think not only of the sealed portion of the plates that will come forth to those of the gentiles that repent, but also I am reminded that the more righteous portion of the Saints that were blessed with visions and spiritual manifestations after accepting the Book of Mormon when it came forth among the gentiles.

There was a small portion of the Saints that embraced the truth whole heartedly and accepted the gospel by entering into the waters of baptism and receiving the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost. A notable example would be Zebedee Coltrin who was one of several early converts that experienced the greater things in Kirtland. For a detailed listing of those who were blessed to have visions and to see God or Christ, “Joseph Smith’s Kirtland” by Anderson is a must read.

In the 8th chapter of Mormon, Moroni reveals that the Lord allowed him to see into the future and view the LDS restoration movement that took place at the time that the Book of Mormon came forth.

It appears that he was allowed to see the restoration of the Church of Christ in 1830.

As with virtually all prophesies, the ones contained in Mormon 8 will have a dual fulfillment. Many items contained therein are applicable to both the 1^st commission in the 2^nd Watch and the 2^nd commission in the 3^rd Watch. However the primary, literal fulfillment appears to take place in the 1^st commission when the Book of Mormon first came forth among the Gentiles and the Church was restored to the earth. That is the context that we shall use for the purposes of this article:

“Behold, the Lord hath shown unto me great and marvelous things concerning that which must shortly come, at that day when these things shall come forth among you.  Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing.”

Moroni was shown the future events pertaining to those Saints who accepted the Book of Mormon when it was translated by the Prophet Joseph Smith and it came forth among the Gentiles.

After Christ shows Moroni what the Saints of the restoration did, he was appalled at what he saw and he characterized the Saints as people who walk after the pride of their hearts…. Unto the wearing of very fine apparel, unto envying, strifes, malice and all manner of iniquities.

“For behold ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.”

So excruciating was the content of the vision given to the Prophet Moroni that he was led to exclaim:

“O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? (Mormon 8:38)

What a sobering rebuke to the first generation of Saints that accepted the Book of Mormon and joined the restored Church at the time the Book of Mormon came forth

We are left to wonder what Moroni saw and what he was referring to…

I wonder if Moroni observed that the Saints failed to redeem Zion in Jackson County.

I wonder it he observed the declaration of the Lord in section 84 that the Saints fell under condemnation in Kirtland for taking lightly the Book of Mormon and the other revelations which included the law of consecration, which were brought forth by the Prophet Joseph Smith.

I wonder if Moroni witnessed that the Saints of the restoration failed to live the law of consecration as contained in section 42 in Kirtland after being commanded to live it.

I wonder if he saw all of the events in the early days of the restoration including the fact that the Saints failed to fund the publishing of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible which needed to be done for the salvation of the Church.

I shudder to think that he saw the fight that broke out in the Lords Holy Temple in Kirtland between some of the leading Elders of the Church and the apostasy that resulted in up to 50% of the Saints leaving the Church when the Kirtland Safety Society Failed. Some have estimated that about 30% of the leadership of the Church apostatized at that time.

In the words of Joseph Smith; “No quorum in the Church was entirely exempt from the influence of those false spirits who are striving against me for the mastery; even some of the Twelve were so far lost to their high and responsible calling as to begin to take sides secretly with the enemy”.

Perhaps Moroni saw the Lords declaration in section 112 of the doctrine and Covenants shortly after the Kirtland apostasy that all flesh had become corrupted and the entire world was in gross darkness.

After the Temple was defiled Moroni might possibly have seen the Saints flee to Far West and other places as they plundered and took the spoils of the non-believing gentiles along the way feeling justified because of the unjust acts that had taken place against them in Kirtland and Jackson Co. (The autobiography of John D Lee and other diaries provide documentation that the Saints were desperate at this time and doing things they would not normally do)

I wonder if Moroni witnessed the long arm of God’s mercy extended unto the Saints giving them yet another chance to have that which had been lost,as a result of the Kirtland apostasy, restored if they would repent and be obedient in completing the construction of the Nauvoo Temple by the appointed time.

The Lord promised the Saints that if they were obedient in Nauvoo, they would not be moved out of their place. But the Prophet Joseph Smith warned the Saints:

“If the Temple and Nauvoo House are not finished you must run away..” (Words of Joseph Smith pg 179)

The Lords warning was a little more ominous. He warned in section 124 that if they failed to finish the temple by the appointed time they would be rejected as a Church with their dead…

I wonder if Moroni saw the First Presidency and the 12 Apostles plead with the Saints in Nauvoo to consecrate their time and substance to the building of the temple and petition the Saints for funds to publish the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible.

I wonder if he observed that many of the Saints were more concerned about other things such as building their own homes and building Masonic temples. I wonder if Moroni saw many of the early Saints swapping secret hand shakes, swearing by their throats and entering into secret oaths for the purpose of getting gain even though the Bible and Book of Mormon forbid us to do that. (Mat 5:36 , 3^rd Nephi 12:36 )

I wonder if Moroni saw that the Saints were moved out of their place after they failed to complete the temple by the appointed time. I wonder it he saw that a secret combination composed of members and non-members conspired to murder Joseph and Hyrum. (see The Nauvoo Conspiracy printed in the Contributor Vol V pp 251-260)

I wonder if he witnessed the Saints flee from Nauvoo and return back into a scattered condition among the gentiles.

.

Of course we don’t know if the window of time that Moroni was looking at was limited to that first generation of Saints or if it included all four generations that were to follow the restoration of the Church prior to the ushering in of the Marvelous Work and a Wonder.

It leaves those of us living four generations after the restoration of the Church why, after 160 years we are no longer attempting to live the law of consecration as we were commanded to live it. Why is the establishment of Zion no longer a current objective of the Church?

Perhaps we should ask ourselves if we are justified in paying some tithing and some fast offerings each month while we set our hearts upon accumulating wealth, cabins, boats, vacations and toys without feeling guilty about the poor, needy, sick and afflicted that are among us. I wonder if Jesus Christ is showing Moroni our doing?

But that is a topic for another post.

The topic and focus of this post has to do with how the restored church has transfigured the holy word of God that was revealed through the Prophet Joseph Smith.

This brings us to the curious observation Moroni makes:

“O ye wicked and perverse and stiffnecked people, why have ye built up churches unto yourselves to get gain? Why have ye transfigured the holy word of God…” (Mormon 8:33)

Moroni observes that the Saints would receive the word of God and then would transfigure it.

The 1828 Websters Dictionary defines the word “transfigured” to mean Changed in Form.

I suppose Moroni could have been talking about changing ordinances but I suspect that he could have also been referring to some changes that have taken place in the Book of Mormon and the Modern Revelations contained in the Book of Commandments and the Doctrine and Covenants.

It is very difficult to believe that anyone would have the audacity to change or alter the punctuation or words of a revelation, or cut and paste verses in a different order in such a way as to change the meaning of the holy and infallible word of God.

“Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life…” John 5:39

We have lots of techniques and tools that we use to help us study the scriptures. One is the strong’s concordance that allows us to look up the meanings of words in the New Testament in the Greek and in the Old Testament in the Hebrew.

I have also found the 1828 version of the Webster’s Dictionary to be extremely helpful when studying the revelations given to Joseph Smith since the English language has evolved during the last 180 years.

Another invaluable reference that I have blogged about before is the importance of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible. I suspect many who read this article use these same tools.

I also have copies of the original Book of Commandments and the Original Book of Mormon which have been invaluable in searching the scriptures and some of the changes therein. (You can purchase these at Deseret Book)

Perhaps one of the most incredible resources that I have come across for searching the modern revelations contained in the D&C is a dissertation on the changes that have taken place in the D&C by a BYU student back in 1974.

I first became aware of the many changes in the D&C about 18 years ago when I was walking around a used book store looking for hidden treasures and I came across a booklet entitled “The Doctored Covenants” by Greg Anderson.

As I perused that publication, I was unable to believe that people in high places would change or allow others to change Gods word. Besides, it did not look very credible to me. But it did get me thinking and wondering if in fact some of the modern revelations that came through the Prophet Joseph Smith had been tampered with and transfigured by mortal man.

I began doing research on the topic and found that indeed there had been some changes made. I wanted to find the best and most unbiased and credible resource for learning about the alterations to the Doctrine and Covenants. (Perhaps it would be more honest to say that I was looking for the most credible resource that had a bias in favor of the LDS Church) Eventually I learned about a magnificent six volume work done by a fellow named Robert J. Woodford.

Brother Woodford did a Dissertation in 1974 which he presented to the Department of Ancient Scripture at Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Melvin J. Peterson had previously done a Masters Thesis on a comparison between the text of the Book of Commandments and the sections in the D&C, however Woodford wanted to go further. He wanted to trace the history of the D&C from hand-written revelations to its current format and analyze the text of each revelation from the earliest sources available to the present composition.

He wanted to make a detailed study of the historical background of the D&C and a textual evaluation of each of the revelations.

One of the really helpful and extremely fascinating aspects of this work is that he uses the History of the Church, Times and Seasons, Millennial Star and other historical works and manuscript materials from the Historical Department of the Church as part of this work to provide context to the revelations given.

The name of this work is The Historical Development of the Doctrine and Covenants (Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International, 1980 I have heard you can order it in electronic format at the BYU Book Store)

In my humble opinion it is an absolute must for any serious student of the Doctrine and Covenants.

I think one of Brother Woodford’s desires in choosing this undertaking was to provide documentation for LDS apologists to combat the accusations made by anti Mormons regarding the changes in our modern revelations. Apparently he got the endorsement of the LDS Church and they allowed him to view virtually all of the available originals and copies of hand written revelations that the Church has in its possession.

His work is an amazing effort to document all of the places where the revelations contained in the Doctrine and Covenants have been changed or transfigured since they were originally given through the Prophet Joseph Smith.

I was so appreciative of the work this man did I just had to go meet him and shake his hand. At the time I met him he was serving in a Bishopric in a singles ward at the University of Utah.

I have been greatly edified in reading and studying this incredible work by Woodford.

There have been numerous times when I and my wife would be reading the D&C and the Spirit would indicate that something is not right. We would then reference this work by Woodford to view the original verse. After seeing how a verse was transfigured, everything would make sense.

It has been eloquently said by one of the contributors on this blog site that one of the callings of the Holy Ghost is to confirm to us that the scriptures are true. I would submit to you that the Holy Ghost also confirms when a scripture is NOT true.

I want to end this post by sharing two examples of where credible historical documentation makes it appear that the word of God in modern revelation has been transfigured and another similar example pertaining to the Book of Mormon. I will provide a fourth example pertaining to modern revelation where it may have been transfigured based on doctrinal evidence.. But first, let’s review how important the revelations are that Joseph Smith received. Here is an excerpt from a conference that was held concerning the publishing of the revelations

“After deliberate consideration in the consequences of the Book of Revelations  now to be printed being the foundation of the Church and the salvation of the world and the keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom and the riches of Eternity to the Church. Voted that they be prized by this conference to be worth to the church the riches of the whole earth, speaking temporally….” (Far West Record p 22, 23)

The importance of the Book of Mormon is possibly better known and better accepted than that of the modern revelations.

EXAMPLE ONE

It is common knowledge that there have been many changes in the Book of Mormon but that most of them have been punctuation related changes.

I frankly feel that most of the changes I have seen in the Book of Mormon, both punctuation and textual, appear to have been minor and insignificant, however the changes I want to spotlight have to do with the nature and character of God as well as the nature of Jesus Christ’s Godhood during his earthly ministry on this earth.

I have blogged about the true Godhood of Jesus Christ in his earthly ministry on this earth. I have also blogged about how leaders of the Church have taught unsound doctrines pertaining to who God is.

The first example of how scriptures have been transfigured that I want to point out has to do with some alterations in the Book of Mormon that took place in 1981, approximately 152 years after the Book of Mormon was published to the world.

I suspect some will feel that the following changes are not significant; I personally feel they are, nevertheless, I think it is a very serious thing to change Gods holy word in the scriptures if it is done without his authorization. I will not provide any other commentary on these changes other than to simply show the changes that took place in 1 Nephi 11 and also 1 Nephi 13:

1 Nephi 11:18- 1830 Edition of the Book of Mormon “And he said unto me, Behold, the virgin which thou seest, is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh” 1 Nephi 11:18 1981 Edition of the Book of Mormon “And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.”

1 Nephi 11:21 1830 Edition of the Book of Mormon “And the angel said unto me, behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father!…” 1 Nephi 11:21 1981 Edition of the Book of Mormon “And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!…”

1 Nephi 11:32- 1930 Edition of the Book of Mormon “…And I looked and beheld the Lamb of God, that he was taken by the people; yea, the Everlasting God, was judged of the world…” 1 Nephi 11:32- 1981 Edition of the Book of Mormon “…And I looked and beheld the Lamb of God, that he was taken by the people; yea, the Son of the everlasting God was judged of the world…”

1 Nephi 13:40- 1830 Edition of the Book of Mormon “…and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior of the world…” 1 Nephi 13:40- 1981 Edition of the Book of Mormon “…and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the World…”

EXAMPLE TWO

Many years ago there was an interesting fellow that went around giving seminars on the importance of a vegetarian diet. He claimed he had died and returned to life after being taught the truth about the word of wisdom. While dead, it was revealed to him that it is a sin to eat meats… ever!

In fact he said that you must get the animals you have killed to forgive you before you can enter into heaven. We listened to one of his lectures and invited him to speak to some of our friends. This caused us to focus on the Word of Wisdom at great length.

One day my wife was conversing with a friend who was agreeing with what the above mentioned brother had been teaching and my wife invited the person to read section 89 with her. While reading it my wife had a distinct impression that the comma in verses13 should not be there!

“Yea, flesh also of beast and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly; And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.”

You will notice that the use of the comma (in red) reverses the meaning of those verses.

With the comma the verse is saying that flesh of beasts and fowls should only be used in times of winter, cold or famine. Yet without the comma it is saying that it is not ordained for such limited use, although it should be used sparingly.

Having recently read several statements from the prophets, noticing that many of the people in the scriptures seemed to use meat during all seasons and also having recently read the following warning from the Apostle Paul my wife and I felt something was wrong:

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;  Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim 4:3)

Feeling that there was an apparent discrepancy in this verse she checked the Historical Development of the D&C by Woodford and this is what she found:

“…the only other variation in this section of any consequence is the comma following verse 13. It was never found in any text prior to the 1921 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. According to T. Edgar Lyons, Joseph Fielding Smith, when shown this addition to the text, said: Who put that in there?”

This is a significant statement since Elder Smith served on the committee to publish that edition of the D&C. Thus the comma may have been inserted by the printer and has been retained ever since.” (Volume 2 part 2 pg 1175)

Those verses have created lively discussions between many members of the church and have caused some members to feel guilty about eating meat in all seasons.

It is disconcerting to me that someone inserted a comma that would reverse the meaning of God’s word, it is perhaps even more disconcerting in this case that the Church has never corrected this error.

(For the record, I personally feel better when I eat less meat. I have no personal agenda as far as encouraging people to eat meat. I do believe we are to eat meat sparingly. I am simply showing the facts as I see them with regard to what the original intent of the scriptures in question was verses what they appear to say after being transfigured)

EXAMPLE THREE

The 3^rd example I want to share with you of a scripture that has been altered is one where part of the text has simply been deleted from the original revelation.

If you are not aware of this particular example, I hope you are sitting down because this is a whopper!

First, let me lay a little ground work.

In previous posts we have discussed how JST Luke 12 refers to three watches or three separate and distinct gospel dispensations. The1st Watch was the Meridian of Time. The 2^nd Watch was the LDS Restoration Movement when the Church of Christ was restored to the earth through the Prophet Joseph Smith and the 3^rd Watch will be the Marvelous Work.

We have also discussed how JST Matt 21 reveals that the First Watch represents the gospel going to the Gentiles after being rejected by the Jews and 2^nd Watch represents the gospel going to the Jews after being rejected by the Gentiles.

JST Mat 21 seems to reveal that the gospel would be taken from the Gentiles and given to the Jews shortly after the Church was restored in the 1830’s so I began to look for another witness that the Lord had warned the restored Church about this in modern revelation. One wherein the Lord gives a stern warning to the Gentiles that they will be led into darkness just like the Jews in Jerusalem were if they don’t repent and accept the gospel..

I always like to get the testimony of at least two scriptural witnesses.

I felt that if I was interpreting JST Mat 21 correctly that the Lord would have given a warning to the Gentiles in modern revelation. There are actually lots of these types of warnings in the D&C but I was looking for something with stronger language.

Sure enough, using the Historical Development of the Doctrine and Covenants by Woodford I discovered that when it was time to publish the revelations that Joseph Smith had received again, the name of the cannon of scripture was changed from the Book of Commandments to the Doctrine and Covenants. At the time of that printing, the text in some of the revelations was also changed.

One of the changes that I found does in fact warn the Gentile Church with very strong language that they would be delivered over to Satan if they harden their hearts. He told the Saints that he was warning them of the sword of justice just as he had warned the people about the destruction of Jerusalem.

The following verses were taken out of what is now section 5 in our current Doctrine and Covenants. The part I red was deleted from the current editions of the D&C:

“And thus, if the people of this generation harden not their hearts, I will work a reformation among them, and I will put down all lyings, and deceivings, and priestcrafts, and envyings, and strifes, and idolatries, and sorceries, and all manner of iniquities, and I will establish my church, like unto the church which was taught by my disciples in the days of old.

And now if this generation do harden their hearts against my word, behold I will deliver them up unto Satan, for he reigneth and hath power at this time, for he hath got great hold upon the hearts of the people of this generation: and not far from the iniquities of Sodom and Gomorrah, do they come at this time: and behold the sword of justice hangeth over their heads, and if they persist in the hardness of their hearts, the time cometh that it must fall upon them. Behold I tell you these things even as I also told the people of the destruction of Jerusalem, and my word shall be verified at this time as it hath hitherto been verified..”

Wow. That is quite an ominous warning.

I chose this example to spotlight a very sobering principle, that if the Saints harden their hearts against Gods word, he will turn them over to Satan.. a similar warning is given to the Saints in the New Testament:

…And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Thes 2:11

Again, it is a hard doctrine that if we reject the truth from God’s servants, God will send us a strong delusion.

I do want to mention that the above change in section 5 appears to have been done under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith and I personally believe that he did it under the direction of God.

Therefore, I don’t necessarily believe this is one of the changes that Moroni was upset about when he asked the Saints of the restoration “Why have you transfigured the word of God?”

Documenting the reasons why I don’t see this alteration in the scriptures to be a problem would take too long for the purposes of this article. Suffice it to say, I think the Book of Commandments may have been primarily addressing the remnants of the Kingdom of Israel mingled among the Gentiles while the Doctrine and Covenants may have been written primarily to the remnants of the Kingdom of Judah mingled among the Gentiles. For additional info on this click here

Nevertheless, it is important for us to understand that the above text was in the original Book of Commandments, yet removed when the Doctrine and Covenants was published and we need to know about it in order to better understand what took place in the restoration movement. It obviously wasn’t removed from the chapter because God made a mistake when the revelation was first given… God is all knowing and infallible and simply does not make mistakes.

I personally believe that it was removed because something had taken place in the Church that made that warning no longer applicable as something that might happen in the future. I wish I had time to explain why I feel the Lord wanted the above text in the Book of Commandments but not in the Doctrine and Covenants but I have already made this post too long.

EXAMPLE FOUR

The last example is purely speculation and based on what I deem to be a doctrinal inconsistency pertaining to church government. It is not based on clear cut historical proof that the scripture in question was changed or fabricated. I simply offer this as something worth searching out for those who are curious about the issue of succession.

The doctrine pertaining to succession is a very sensitive subject. I made a few random observations, particularly in a recent article but have never covered this topic in depth and I don’t know that I ever will attempt to.

Before spotlighting my fourth example, let me first reiterate what I have stated before in various posts…. I believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints represents Gods people and Gods Church today on the earth. I accept the literal interpretation of the following declaration of the Lord in section 115:

“And also unto my faithful servants who are of the high council of my church in Zion, for thus it shall be called, and unto all the elders and people of my Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, scattered abroad in all the world; For thus shall my Church be called in the last days, even the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” (D&C 115)

I interpret the above verses to say that when Gods people are gathered under his direction into stakes of Zion, his church is called the Church of Zion.

I also believe that when his people are living in a scattered condition in the last days, they are called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I believe section 115 promises that Gods Church will be in existence in the last days and I believe we are living in the last days.

I believe the Church that has the legal claim on the above name, which I believe happens to be in a scattered condition at the present time, is in fact Gods Church.

I believe the current Apostles in the First Presidency and the quorum of the Twelve of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are striving to continue the mission and calling that was given to the original quorum of the Twelve that was called in 1835.

The primary commission given to them, as contained in section 112 of the Doctrine and Covenants is to “Bear testimony of my name and to send it abroad among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people” and to “send forth my word unto the ends of the earth.”

I believe the above commission that was given to those who were not the First Laborers of the Last Kingdom is not the same Apostolic Commission given to the Apostles in the New Testament or to the Disciples in the Book of Mormon, or to the First set of Apostles appointed after the Church was restored, who were referred to as “Apostles” and “Friends” of God (see section 84).

Nevertheless, the current brethren are clearly striving, in there own way, to fulfill the mission and calling given to Brigham Young and his brethren. They are contuing to labor in the vineyard until the return of the First Elders into the vineyard.. And that commission is to bear testimony of the name of Christ and to send forth the Word of God.

To me it is not a question of whether the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the True Church; the real question is; what is the current state of the true Church?

Section 84 could be interpreted as identifying us as the True Church which is under condemnation.

Section 112 could be interpreted as identifying us as the True Church membership whose flesh has all become corrupt.

Section 124 could be interpreted as the True Church that has been rejected with our dead for four generations.

In the words of the Prophet Moroni who was watching the early events of the restored church: Why have ye polluted the Holy Church of God?

The scriptures often refer to God people as an unfaithful wife that is put away. Nevertheless, she is still the wife!

With those characterizations of the latter day church in mind, I now offer the following possible example of a scripture that needs to be scrutinized because of its doctrinal content. Historical documents don’t categorically prove it is authentic one way or the other:

One day while studying the succession issue I noticed an apparent discrepancy in the doctrinal content of the following revelation:

“Dear and well-beloved brother, Brigham Young, verily thus saith the Lord unto you: My servant Brigham, it is no more required at your hand to leave your family as in times past, for your offering is acceptable to me. I have seen your labor and toil in journeyings for my name. I therefore command you to send my word abroad, and take especial care of your family from this time, henceforth and forever. Amen.” (section 126)

It seemed odd to me that the Lord would release Brigham Young from traveling forth into the world as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve after only being a member of the Quorum of the Twelve or six years and traveling abroad on missions for only about two or three years! Being a traveling missionary is the very definition of what the Twelve Apostles are supposed to do:

“The Twelve are a Traveling Presiding High Council, to officiate in the name of the Lord, under the direction of the Presidency of the Church, agreeable to the institution of heaven; to build up the church, and regulate all the affairs of the same in all nations, first unto the Gentiles and secondly unto the Jews.” (D&C 107)

Joseph Smith gave the following clarification of the above scripture:

“The apostles have no right to go into Zion or any of its stakes where there is a regular high council established, to regulate any matter pertaining thereto: But it is their duty to go abroad and regulate and set in order all matters relative to the different branches of the church of the Latter Days Saints. No standing high council has the authority to go into the churches abroad and regulate the matters thereof, for the this belongs to the Twelve” (Minutes of the Grand High Council, 2 May 1835. See also Patriarchal Blessing Book, p. 2, Church Archives)

It is true that Joseph Smith did give members of the Twelve assignments to do in Nauvoo between their missionary assignments, but I don’t think those assignments overlapped into the administrative callings of the First Presidency or the Presidency of the Stake or of the High Council of the Stake. These responsibilities were temporary assignments to do until they were sent into the mission field again.

Clearly, the Quorum of the Twelve is a traveling missionary quorum that has not right to officiate in an organized stake of Zion.

I have more documentation that I do not want to take the time to present here that would indicate that the content in section 126 is not congruent with the Word of God and the words of Joseph Smith regarding Brigham Young’s role as an Apostle and as the President of that Quorum.

Perhaps the 64 dollar questions is; was the traveling quorum of the twelve equal in authority with the First Presidency of the Church or were they functioning under the direction of the First Presidency of the Church

The apparent doctrinal discrepancy I saw in in section 126 caused me to research the available documentation on that revelation. What I found was very curious to me.

1- There were no witnesses to this revelation other than Brigham Young.

2- The revelation was never published or included in the Doctrine and Covenants by Joseph Smith.

3- The oldest known manuscript of the revelation was written by Thomas Bullock in about April of 1845. There are no known manuscripts of it in existence that were written within four years of July 9^th 1841, when the revelation was purportedly given. The earliest manuscript in existence of this revelation that was purportedly given by Joseph Smith was written AFTER the death of Joseph Smith.

4- The oldest known manuscript of this revelation was created shortly after the succession crisis and just a few years prior to the re-establishment of the First Presidency… When according to Wilford Woodruff, Brigham Young posed the following question:  “I had a question put to me by President Young: What my opinion was concerning one of the Twelve Apostles being appointed as the President fo the Church with his two counselors. I answered that a quorum like the Twelve who had been appointed by revelation, confirmed by revelation from time to time – I thought it would require a revelation to change the order of that quorum..” HC Vol 7:621)

5- Another historical item that does not seem congruent with the revelation that Brigham claims to have received is the fact that after the Lord tells Brigham that his offering is acceptable and he no longer needs to leave his family, the Lord called Brigham on a political mission in 1844, after the revelation date in 1841. This is where he was when the martyrdom took place:

. “In May 1844, Brigham and other apostles left on summer missions. While they were gone, events in Nauvoo deteriorated. Joseph Smith was arrested and, on June 27, was killed with his brother Hyrum when a mob stormed the jail at Carthage, Illinois, where they were being held. Brigham began to hear rumors of the murders while in the Boston area, but did not hear definite word of the assassination until July 16 in Peterboro, New Hampshire. He and his companions immediately rushed back to Nauvoo, arriving August 6.”

6- The revelation was never included in the D&C until 1876!

I present this possible discrepancy in doctrine and the events of LDS history to illustrate the importance of using doctrine, as well as documentation in the searching process when one is testing the authenticity of the various scriptures.

Again, I do not have conclusive evidence to show that section 126 is or is not authentic; the key becomes one of discernment after searching out the events in LDS history, the words of God in the scriptures, the word of God from Joseph Smith, the Lords anointed, and most important, the guidance of the Holy Ghost in revealing what all of the evidence points to.

Again, I accept Brigham Young as the Presiding officer and President of the Church based on the principle of Common Consent because he was elected President of the Church by the voice of the people. The question is whether the keys of the kingdom as held by the First Presidency had been passed on to him as required in the law of succession as stated in section 43 and whether he was a prophet seer and revelator.

These issues are critical in determining if the current church membership is in spiritual and temporal bondage and needs to be delivered. They are critical in determining if Zion has been redeemed or if there still needs to be a future redemption and re-establishment of Zion. Does there need to be another restoration and refreshing or have we already arrived?

This concludes the examples.

Did you know that you can get copies of the original Book of Commandments and the Original Book of Mormon, with the original punctuation and without the current verse format?

I have friends who prefer to study the scriptures using the original texts and original verses and original punctuation because they feel it is easier to understand and has a much better spirit.

There you have it. I have provided three examples of where the infinite, eternal and infallible word of God in modern revelation has been transfigured and one example of an apparent discrepancy to chew on.

Although example one did not take place at very close to the time of the restoration, I used it because it provided one of the most vivid and pertinent illustrations of how the meaning of Gods word can be changed by the improper use of punctuation.

These changes represent just a few of the changes that took place. I will leave it up to those of you with inquiring minds to search, dig out and find the changes that have taken place….

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine
The higher Priesthood contains the Key of the Knowledge of God
© Onewhoiswatching www.threewatches.blogspot.com

“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” 2nd Tim 4:14

One of the great evidences that the Marvelous Work was to be a separate work from the foundation work of the 1830’s is the prophecy given by Paul in the above verses, that the time would come when the Saints would not be able to endure sound doctrine, but rather, they would turn away their ears from the truth and would be turned unto fables.

Obviously many of the Saints in the Meridian of Time drifted into apostasy and the dark ages followed, during that time men were unable to endure sound doctrine. However, as we have previously discussed, most if not all prophesies have a dual fulfillment. If it can be shown that Latter day Israel has not been able to endure sound doctrine following the restoration of the church in these latter days, then it provides another evidence that another great work is needed to restore true doctrine to Gods people.

We all have our opinions based on our own interpretation of the scriptures which doctrines are true and whitch are false. However  I want to begin this post by showing that modern LDS leaders have stated publicly and privately that false doctrines have entered into the Church.

President Ezra Taft Benson once said:

“Not only are there apostates in our midst, but there are apostate doctrines which are sometimes taught in our classes and from our pulpits and which appear in our publications. The these apostate precepts of men cause our people to stumble. AS the Book of Mormon, speaking of our day, states: “..they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men” (Book of Mormon ref 2 Nephi 28:14 E.T. Benson ref CR April 1969 )

Not too many years prior to President Bensons statement President Joseph Fielding Smith had entered the following notation in his person diary:

“I attended sessions of meetings for the institute teachers, held in the assembly room on the fourth floor of he Church Office Building. I cannot say that I was very greatly edified. Too much philosophy of the worldly nature does not seem to mix well with the fundamentals of the gospel. In my opinion many of our teachers employed in the church school system have absorbed too much of the paganism of the world, and have accepted too readily the views of the uninspired educators without regard for the revealed word of the Lord. What to do about it I do not know. It is a problem for the Presidency to consider. It is a very apparent fact that we have traveled far and wide in the past 20 years. What the future will bring I don’t know . But if we drift as far afield from the fundamental things in the next 20 years, what will be left of the foundation laid by the Prophet Joseph Smith? It is easy for one who observes to see how the apostasy came about in the primitive church of Jesus Christ. Are we not traveling the same road?” (The Life of Joseph Fielding Smith 212. Deseret Book Co., 1972 )

Prior to that observation by President Smith, George Q. Cannon had made the following remark:

“I tell you we are beginning to follow along the course of the early Christian Church. So long as that church was persecuted from without, it prospered, but when it began to be polluted from within, the church began to wither. There is, creeping into our midst, and I warn you brethren about it, and urge you to meet, a great host of sectarian doctrines that have no place amongst us. The gospel in its simplicity, is to be found in the revelations… we must accept them as God gave them to us and there must be amongst us a unity of the faith.” ( CR October 1944 )

Erastus Snow made this observation:

“Over fifty years have passed away since the light of the glorious gospel in its fulness began to dawn upon us, and still we are measurably walking in darkness.” (Annual Conf Report April 6 1883 )

Finally, let me share this sobering proclamation from John Taylor:

“We are getting into such a condition that if we were to meet the Lord, we could not look him in the face and the way we are going, it will soon be impossible to tell what we do believe.”

As you can see from the testimony from numerous leaders of the Church, the restored church is plagued with false teachers teaching false doctrines.

Obviously we do not have time in this post to discuss and document the countless false doctrines that have snuck into the fold since the time of Joseph Smith’s 1st commission in the 2nd Watch.

But I do want to speak about one of the most important foundational doctrines upon which I believe all other doctrines rest.

The Prophet Joseph Smith said:

“It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God” (Teachings, 345).

In other words, one of the foundation stones of the restored gospel is a knowledge of what kind of being God actually is. But not only do we need to understand what kind of being God is, we must come to know God. In the same sermon from which we just quoted, the Prophet Joseph further stated,

“If any man does not know God, . . . he will realize that he has not eternal life; for there can be eternal life on no other principle” (Teachings, 344).

In His great high-priestly or Intercessory Prayer, the Savior confirmed that life eternal was to “know . . . the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom [the Father] hast sent” (John 17:3).

Joseph Smith also endorsed the following teaching taught in the School of the Prophets:

“One of the three things necessary in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation, is to have a correct idea of his character, perfections, and attributes.” (Lectures on Faith, 3rd Lecture)

In modern revelation the Savior has stated that:

“I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and ^aknow what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness.” (D&C 93:19)

It seems to me that the first principle constitutes the foundation doctrine of the Gospel. It is the doctrine upon which all other doctrines are built. It sets the stage for learning additional truth. If one has a correct understanding of this fundamental doctrine one stands a reasonable chance of getting the next principle or doctrine right, and the next and so on. Conversely, if one begins with a false perception of who and what God is, it is likely that the belief system that follows will also have erroneous assumptions.

Realizing how important it is to have a knowledge of the true character of God, modern revelation tells us that the “greater priesthood” administers the gospel and holds the key of the knowledge of God:

“And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God.

Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not  manifest unto men in the flesh; for without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father and live.” (D&C 84:19-21)

Clearly, those who truly hold the higher priesthood are those who know God and can lead the Saints to him, teaching the truth about who he is and revealing his nature and character.

Having established the incredible importance of the true nature of God and having leaders who truly hold the key of the knowledge of God so that they can lead the Saints to him and protect the Saints from false teachings about God, let’s review an incredible event in LDS Church History:

According to a significant amount of historical documentation, some of which may have been suppressed for a time, it appears that on April 9^th 1852 … my great great great grandfather Brigham Young shocked the church by teaching the following doctrine concerning the nature and character of God. In this sermon he declared:

“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken—He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later … (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp.50-51).

Related quotes and doctrines from Brigham Young are varied and to numerous to include in this article, among other things, Brigham taught that Adam is the father of Jesus Christ:

“When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family … I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and over-righteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone…. Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp.50-51).

As a descendent of Brigham Young I have had a particular interest in knowing his place in the restoration movement, who he really was and what he really taught. There is a very large 4 volume document in the Church Historical Library containing every known discourse that Brigham Young ever gave. They don’t let you make copies of it but you can go into a secure room and read it. One day I sat down and read the entire thing. It took many, many hours to read.

I was surprised at how many times Brigham taught the exact opposite doctrines that Joseph Smith taught. I am compiling a list of these contradictions and perhaps will do a post on them someday.

One of the things Joseph and Brigham disagreed on that jumped out at me as I read this volume of discourses is how they both viewed the creation story in Genesis.

Joseph Smith was a biblical literalist. He was once asked how Mormonism differs from other Christian Churches and he answered We believe the Bible. His apparent use of sarcasm was somewhat uncharacteristic but provided a poignant way to point out how most protestant religions pick and choose which Biblical verse they want to take literally.

Although this must have seemed offensive, and condescending to protestants, I think he was simply making a very important distinction… simply that Latter day Saint theology believes the Bible literally as long as it is translated correctly. We have the JST of the Bible to show us any mistranslations in the Bible an it confirms that the creation story is literally true.

The Book of Mormon and the revelations contained in the Doctrine and Covenants reinforce a literal interpretation and belief in the Old and New Testaments.

Joseph Smith interpreted and believed the creation story in Genesis in the literal sense. So important was the literal interpretation of the creation story in Genesis to Joseph Smith that he provided two other versions of it. One was from the JST of Genesis and the other was obtained from translating the papyrus that became known as the Book of Abraham. Both of these accounts of the creation story are published in the Pearl of Great Price.  This provides two witnesses that the literal interpretation of the creation story in Genesis is true and that Adam was literally created out the dust of this earth and Eve was literally taken from his rib.

I was shocked while reading Brigham Young’s discourses to find that he discounted the creation story as a “fairy tale”.

Many members of the Church silently accepted the new Adam-God doctrine that Brigham Young taught, however, some prominent members of the church took issue with the doctrine. Most significantly, Apostle Orson Pratt, one of the greatest doctrinal scholars in the Church at the time, disagreed with the doctrine, and expressed that disagreement publicly and in private meetings with other apostles.

Pratt also published his disagreement in his east-coast publication The Seer. Pratt continued to debate the issue in public forums for months, despite being rebuked privately and publicly by Brigham Young on more than one occasion until 1860, when faced with possible disfellowshipment, he agreed to the language of a public confession as negotiated during a series of meetings among the church hierarchy.” Wikipedia

The following entry is found in the journal of Joseph Lee Robinson:

“Oct. 6th attend Conference, a very interesting Conference, for at this meeting President Brigham Young said thus… that Adam was, God our Eternal Father, this as Brother Heber remarked was letting the cat out of the Bag, and it came to pass, I believed every word … our Beloved Brother Orson Prat[t] told me he did not believe it. He said he could prove by the Scriptures it was not correct. I feared lest he should apostetize [sic] …” (Journal of Joseph Lee Robinson, Microfilm copy in LDS Genealogical Library)

Pratt felt so strongly that the Adam-God doctrine was wrong that he expressed a desire to resign his position from the quorum of the Twelve. Brigham’s response to Pratt was “No you won’t Orson, I’ll rub your ears until I get you right..”(Pg 174 Unpublished Revelations by Collier)

Although I am related to Brigham Young through my fathers side of the family, ironically, I am also related to Father Edward Bunker and his son Bishop Edward Bunker Jr. through my Mothers side of the Family. Father Bunker was a contemporary of Brigham Young. In fact Brigham Young had called Father Edward Bunker to settle parts of Southern Utah.

I believe that there is a special place in heaven for people like Orson Pratt and the Bunkers because they had the guts to QUESTION AUTHORITY. Bishop Edward Bunker was possibly the single biggest reason that the Church discontinued teaching the Adam-God doctrine.

For a number of years questions on church teachings had been agitated in the Bunkerville Ward. “Bishop Bunker had stated he did not believe Adam was our God and he had expressed his opinion that some teachings in the temples were wrong, notably part of the Lecture at the veil- That Father Bunker had the same views.” Father Bunker felt that the wrong teaching of God would negate the purpose of the sealing ordinances done in the temple… had stated that-

“the principle of adoption would be of no avail as administered in the Temple. All such work would have to be done over again.”

Bishop Bunker created quite a stir in his ward when he began challenging the Adam-God doctrine. In 1891 he made the following declaration to the Stake Presidency when they called him to task for not believing in the doctrine taught by Brigham Young:

“I do not believe that Adam is the father of Jesus Christ and the God we worship and the God of this earth…” “Pg 170 Unpublished Revelations)

After the Stake Presidency got an ear full from Bishop Bunker, they turned him over to the First Presidency of the Church. The President of the Church at the time was Wilford Woodruff.

Bishop Bunker got reprimanded by the First Presidency for challenging the official doctrine of the Church concerning God but curiously, shortly after that meeting with Bishop Bunker President Wilford Woodruff was quoted as saying:

“it was not wisdom for the Elders to contend about such matters and things they did not understand. And not to teach such things to the children in the Sunday Schools; they could not comprehend them.” (Pg 174 Unpublished Revelations)

President Cannon later said: “…it is not necessary that we should [teach] or endorse the doctrine that some men taught that Adam was the Father of Jesus Christ” (Pg 174-5 Unpublished Revelations)

Shortly after this, the Adam-God doctrine was no longer taught at all in the Church by the leaders.

A few generations later the Adam-God doctrine was virtually unknown to most members of the Church. When anti-Mormon documents would reference the doctrine some LDS apologists denied that the doctrine had ever been taught. Some have claimed that those who recorded the sermons of Brigham Young made mistakes.

In recent years, a private letter from Bruce R. McConkie to a BYU professor has been copied and made available to the general public. In it Elder McConkie made the following statement:

“Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel.…that is something he will have to account for…. I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church… If we believe false doctrine, we will be condemned. If that belief is on basic and fundamental things, it will lead us astray and we will lose our souls …. This clearly means that people who teach false doctrine in the fundamental and basic things will lose their souls. The nature and kind of being that God is, is one of these fundamentals. I repeat: Brigham Young erred in some of his statements on the nature and kind of belng that God is and as to the position of Adam in the plan of salvation …. If we choose to believe and teach the false portions of his doctrines we are making an election that will damn us: (page 7)“ (page 6 of McConkie’s letter)

Despite the fact that the Adam God doctrine was taught and believed for many years, it is really quite remarkable that the Church was able to “self correct” and put down the false doctrine that suggested that Adam is the Father of Jesus Christ and the only God with which we have to do. Even more remarkable is that the correction appears to have been initiated from individual Saints in both high and low positions who had the wisdom to compare a questionable doctrine to the word of God and then have the courage to question authority and challenge the doctrine by utilizing the laws of agency and common consent.

The Apostle Paul chastened the Saints of his day for allowing members from within the Church to pervert the true Gospel of Christ and gave a strict warning not to follow anyone… not even an angel from heaven if they preach any other gospel than the gospel of Jesus Christ:

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal 1) He later gave one of the most simple and concise definitions of the Gospel of Christ:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power  of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Rom 1:16)

Looking at our day the prophet Nephi observed that many of the humble followers of Christ would be led astray because they followed the precepts of men:

“They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and,  whoredoms they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men…Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. (2nd Nephi 28)

The Book of Mormon reinforces that most basic foundational belief that it is through faith in Jesus Christ that we are saved and there is no other name under heaven by which man can be saved:

“And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen.” (2nd Nephi 31)

“There is no other ^cname given whereby salvation cometh; therefore, I would that ye should take upon you the name of Christ..” (Mosiah 5)

If the historical documentation about Brigham Young teaching the Adam God Doctrine is true and if Elder McConkie’s statement is accurate that Brigham Young did in fact teach a false doctrine about who the true God of Israel is, it is deeply disturbing to think that a presiding officer of the Lords Church could lead us incorrectly regarding such an important doctrine. It was Brigham Young himself that expressed his concern that a President of the Church might some day lead the people astray:

“What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.” (Brigham Young, January 12, 1862, Journal of Discourses, 9:151)

He also said:

“I have often said to the Latter-day Saints– Live so that you will know whether I teach you the
truth or not. Suppose you are careless and unconcerned, and give way to the spirit of the world,
and I am led, likewise,to preach the things of this world and to accept things that are NOT of God, how easy it would be for me to lead you astray! But I say to you, live so that you will know for yourselves whether I tell the truth or not. That is the way we want all Saints to live.” (Brigham Young, JD 18:248)

In previous posts I have noted that there was a difference between the “first elders” of the Church who were designated as the first laborers of the last kingdom vs Brigham Young and others who were called about five years later to serve in the quorum of the 12 apostles. They were identified as those who were not the first elders. According to latter day revelation, Brigham Young and the other members of the quorum of the twelve did not enjoy the same relationship with God that Joseph Smith and the First Elders enjoyed. In section 84 Joseph Smith and six others received an incredible confirmation of the higher priesthood by the voice of God out of the heavens… few people have ever received this endowment:

“this priesthood which ye have received which I now confirm upon you by my own voice out of the heavens…” (D&C 84:40)

In section 88 Joseph Smith and the other First Elders were promised that God would send them again into the vineyard at a later time to testify and warn the Gentiles for the last time and to bind up the law and seal the testimony and prepare the Saints for the hour of judgment with is to come, however Brigham Young and the other members of the 12 who were not among the first elders and who were not clean from the blood of that generation, were to “continue in the vineyard until the mouth of the Lord should call them…” (D&C 84:74-85)

In the general charge given to the 12 Apostles in the month of April 1835 the Prophet Joseph Smith provided this counsel, admonition and charge:

“You have been indebted to other men , in the first instance for evidence; on that you have acted but it is necessary that you receive a testimony from heaven for yourselves; so that you can bear testimony to the truth of the Book of Mormon, and that you have seen the face of God. That is more than the testimony of an angel…. never cease striving until you have seen God face to face, strengthen your faith, cast off you doubts, your sins, and all you unbelief… Your ordination [ as Apostles] is not full and complete till God has laid his hand upon you…  you have our most fervent prayers that you may be able to bear this testimony, that you have seen the face of God.” (DHC2:195-198 see also HC AD 1835 pg 195-6)

It is very important to understand that Brigham Young and his brethren of the 12 were ordained to be Apostles but their calling would not be full and complete until they had seen the face of God and been ordained personally by him..

Mary Rollins Lightner was a convert to the church who had seen an angel, she noted that Brigham Young had said to her in Nauvoo “he would give anything to have seen what I had.” (Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, Autobiography, in B. Carmon Hardy, ed., Doing the Works of Abraham: Mormon Polygamy: It’s Origin, Practice, and Demise (Norman, OK: Arthur H. Clark Co., 2007),

Susa Young Gates recorded that when asked if he had ever seen the Savior, Brigham responded that he hadn’t, and that he didn’t expect to until he died. ( Note, 1885, Susa Young Gates Collection, Box 11, Folder 1, Subfolder 1, Utah State Archives, Salt Lake City  )

Brigham Young was very open and honest about his own status as the President of the Church. He understood that the President of the Church did not necessarily need to be a prophet: “I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet…” (Fred C. Collier, ed., The Office Journal of Brigham Young, 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, UT: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006),

When responding to a skeptic that was expressing doubt that Brigham was a prophet seer and revelator he responded that he had never made such a claim:

“A person was mentioned to-day who did not believe that Brigham Young was a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator. I wish to ask every member of this whole community, if they ever heard him profess to be a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, as Joseph Smith was?”  (Brigham Young, Sermon, April 7, 1852, JD 6:319-320 See also a related post in By Common Consent)

One of the things that confuses people concerning the succession issue is that it appears that one can be the legal presiding officer of the Church, elected by the voice of the people without holding the key of the knowledge of God and without being a prophet, seer and revelator.

This doctrine was true in Book of Mormon times as well as pertaining to church government in modern times:

“Thou shalt not leave this place until after the conference; and my servant Joseph shall be appointed to preside over the conference by the voice of it, and what he saith to thee thou shalt tell…. For, behold, these things have not been appointed unto him, neither shall anything be appointed unto any of this church contrary to the church covenants. For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.” (D&C 28 see also D&C 20:63 102:9 )

Brigham Young states that on December 27 1847 he was “unanimously elected president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” (HC 7:621 see also HC pg 82 )

As we consider the doctrines taught by Brigham Young, we must not hold him to a higher standard than what would be appropriate. It is not fair to accuse someone of being something they have never claimed to be.

Brigham Young never claimed to be the legal successor of Joseph Smith in reference to holding the keys of the kingdom or of being a prophet seer and revelator, those claims became a tradition within the Church over time. By his own admission, it appears he felt he was simply trying to steady the ark until he who had the higher authority rose up:

“The brethren testify that brother Brigham is brother Joseph’s legal successor. You never heard me say so. I say that I am a good hand to keep the dogs and wolves out of the flock. I do not care a groat who rises up. I do not think anything about being Joseph’s successor. That is nothing that concerns me” (Journal of Discourses 8:69).

Years ago I walked into Sam Wellers Book Store and saw a large poster on the wall having to do with the genealogy of the 12 tribes of Israel and I felt compelled to find out who had created it and speak with him. The book store gave me his number… we became fast friends. He is a fascinating personality that has provided me with a differing perspective of the gospel as we have studied the gospel together and debated various aspects of it during the last two decades.When I first met him he was a Jewish Mormon Fundamentalist who had worked for the Boarder Patrol and then served as a security officer at he White House. After joining the LDS church he worked as a security guard at the Washington Temple. He was also a veil worker. Eventually he joined the Allred polygamous group and took on two more wives.

Eventually it occurred to him that he had been deceived about the so-called doctrine of Celestial Plural Marriage and he left the Allred Group.

A friend of his in the Allred Group believed that I had been a bad influence on him but felt that if I would be willing to meet with Owen Allred, the leader of the group, that perhaps I would see the light and join their group. She brokered a meeting between Brother Owen and myself.

After being introduced to Owen, he quickly began speaking about the Adam-God doctrine and began quoting profusely from the words of Brigham Young out of the Journal of Discourses. I sat quietly and listened. After a while he divined that I was extremely unimpressed and he asked why the words of Brigham Young did not have more impact on me.

I replied that I use the Word of God in the Four Standard Works to measure the words of every man regardless of his position.

I quoted the statement by Joseph Fielding Smith to him:

“It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine. You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works.” ( Doctrines of Salvation 3:203)

I then said lets take the doctrine that Brigham Young thought that Adam is the Father if Jesus Christ and lets measure that doctrine against the holy and infallible word of God to see if it squares with the scriptures. I then opened the D&C to section 29 verse 34 and handed it to Brother Owen asking him to read it.

“Wherefore, verily I (Jesus Christ) say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.” (D&C 29:34)

The look on Owen’s face was priceless. Talk about a deer caught in the lights of an oncoming car! He kept reading the scripture over and over again to himself as if to see if there was another way to interpret it. I could see the wheels turning in his mind trying to come up with an answer to the doctrinal dilemma he was facing.

As he sat there confused I asked: “How can Adam be the father of Jesus Christ if Jesus Christ is the one who created Adam?

I got the distinct impression that was the first time Owen had ever read that scripture… although I was excited to review additional scriptures with him, lost interest in the discussion and had me ushered to the door.

I don’t mean to single out Brother Allred, I mention this experience with him simply to demonstrate what has been the rule rather than the exception as I have conversed with LDS Fundamentalists on doctrinal issues. They tend to be very knowledgeable when it comes to the doctrines taught by Brigham Young, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff in the Journal of Discourses, but less knowledgeable about the holy and infallible word of God as contained in the Bible and Book of Mormon and virtually illiterate in the D&C.

I had a similar experience in an LDS fundamentalist chat board a few years ago. A fellow who considered himself to be an authority on the fundamentalist view of the everlasting covenant of Marriage (Plural Marriage) was jousting back and forth with me and I pointed out the distinction between the “Biblical Doctrine of Plural Marriage” vs the “Spiritual Wife Doctrine” that originated in Nauvoo in the 1840’s… which teaches that you must be sealed to multiple wives in order to attain the highest degree of exaltation. The former was purely for the purposes of procreation while the other was a prerequisite of the Gospel to enter into the highest exaltation.

I then challenged him to prove the spiritual wife doctrine from the Old and New Testament without using any of the teachings from the Journal of Discourses. He enthusiastically accepted my challenge and assured me his response was forthcoming soon. A few hours went by.. then a few days. Eventually he returned to the chat board with a humble acknowledgement that he could not prove such a doctrine in the word of God contained in the Bible. I could tell he was surprised at this realization.

Obviously this did not change his beliefs. My father had a favorite saying that really annoyed me when I was growing up but I have come to realize there is a lot of truth to it.

“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still”

Even many members of the restored church believe that Celestial Polygamy is a true doctrine that will be lived someday by the Saints. False doctrines have infiltrated the Saints in the latter days as was prophesied by the Apostle Paul. I have provided the testimony of several latter day Presidents of the Church and general authorities to this end. I have even provided an example of one of the most blasphemous false doctrines that was apparently introduced pertaining to the true nature of God. Thankfully the Church self-corrected and later rejected it.

This is another sign that the Marvelous Work and a Wonder did not take place in the 2nd Watch at the time the church was restored to the earth in 1830, rather it is to be a future work that takes place in the 3rd watch when the fulness of the Gospel and the fulness of the scriptures will be restored to the earth.

In closing I want to provide a most remarkable testimony from one of the early members of the restored church who really did know who God the Father and his son Jesus Christ were because he held the key of the knowledge of God and he saw them:

Brother Zebedee Coltrin is one of about 9 people  that has been documented from credible historical sources as having seen God the Father and/or Jesus Christ during the Kirtland Era of the Church. Many years later, after coming to Utah, he was asked to give the following account of what happened in the School of the Prophets in Kirtland:

“At one of these meetings after the organization of the school, (the school being organized_ on the 23rd of January, 1833, when we were all together, Joseph having given instructions, and while engaged in silent prayer, kneeling, with our hands uplifted each one praying in silence, no one whispered above his breath, a personage walked through the room from east to west, and Joseph asked if we saw him. I saw him and suppose the others did and Joseph answered that is Jesus, the Son of God…. Afterward Joseph told us to resume our former position in prayer, which we did. Another person came through; he was surrounded as with a flame of fire. He (Brother Coltrin) experienced a sensation that it might destroy the tabernacle as it was of consuming fire of great brightness. The Prophet Joseph said this was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. I saw Him. When asked about the kind of clothing the Father had on, Brother Coltrin said: I did not discover his clothing for he was surrounded as with a flame of fire, which was so brilliant that I could not discover anything else but his person. I saw his hands, his legs, his feet, his eyes, nose, mouth, head and body in the shape and form of a perfect man. He sat in a chair as a man would sit in a chair, but this appearance was so grand and overwhelming that it seemed I should melt down in his presence, and the sensation was so powerful that it thrilled through my whole system and I felt it in the marrow of my bones. The Prophet Joseph said: Brethren, now you are prepared to be the apostles of Jesus Christ, for you have seen both the Father and the Son and know that they exist and that they are two separate personages.

This appearance occurred about two or three weeks after the opening of the school. After the Father had passed through, Joseph told us to again take our positions in prayer. We did so, and in a very short time he drew our attention and said to us that Brother Reynolds Cahoon was about to leave us, and told us to look at him. He (Brother Cahoon) was on his knees and his arms were extended, his hands and wrists, head, face and neck down to his shoulders were as a piece of amber, clear and transparent, his blood having apparently left his veins. Upon the attention of the brethren being thus called to Brother Cahoon, the change seemed to pass away and Joseph said that in a few minutes more, Brother Cahoon would have left us, but he came to himself again.” (Minutes, Salt Lake City School of the Prophets, October 3, 1883)