The Four Gospels

[_Ray A]

Inconceivable, you have to recognise that, in Mormon doctrine, only "authorised" phenomena are recognised. If it's not in a First Presidency statement, or "authorised by the First Presidency", you can pretty well discard it.

[_Inconceivable]

Inconceivable, you have to recognise that, in Mormon doctrine, only "authorised" phenomena are recognised. If it's not in a First Presidency statement, or "authorised by the First Presidency", you can pretty well discard it.

Yeah. It is said that those who can't or don't do, teach. Or sometimes just authorize.. the definition of a blind guide.

It's unfortunate that whoever they channel have been racists, haven't recognized child molestors or rapists - particularly family/ward members, confirmed authenticity of bogus stories/events. I could go on, but the point is that the prophets don't change bad doctrine until public opinion leans against the poor judgement of their predecessors.

..and perhaps they are still close by influencing nutty things.

[_Gazelam]

Bushman states that there is a certain degree of controversy as to whether the date was 1829 or 1830. He is basing his evidence on letters from that time that puts the trials and travels of Joseph in Colesville in 1830.

It does stand to reason that the Melchizedek Priesthood would be needed for what took place, and for that reason July 5th of 1829 does seem more appropriate a time.

The point is though that if there are ordinances of Salvation (Mark 16:16, Rom. 6:1-6) they must come through a Legal Administrator (1 Tim. 4:14, Rom. 1:1), One called and ordained as were the meridian Twelve. The Lord's House is a house of order.

Joseph Smith proffesed no authority save that given him by those sent from the throne of God. he received the lesser priesthood at the hands of John the baptist, and the greater, the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God, at the hands of Peter, James, and John. "it shall not be given to any one to go forth and preach my gospel, or to build up my church," the Lord told his newly called prophet, "except he be ordained by some one who has authority, and it is known to the church that he has authority and has been regularly ordained by the heads of the church." (D&C 42:11)

The power and authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood, is to hold the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church—
To have the privilege of receiving the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, to have the heavens opened unto them, to commune with the general assembly and church of the Firstborn, and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father, and Jesus the mediator of the new covenant.
The power and authority of the lesser, or Aaronic Priesthood, is to hold the keys of the ministering of angels, and to administer in outward ordinances, the letter of the gospel, the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, agreeable to the covenants and commandments.
(D&C 107:18-20)

Joseph Smith spoke "as one having authority" (Matt. 7:29), and by that same authority he reinstated the ordinances of salvation. By that authority he reestablished the church and kingdom of God on the earth. By that authority he organized the quorums of the First Presidency and the Twelve Apostles, to whom the Lord said:

For unto you, the Twelve, and those, the First Presidency, who are appointed with you to be your counselors and your leaders, is the power of this priesthood given, for the last days and for the last time, in the which is the dispensation of the fulness of times.
Which power you hold, in connection with all those who have received a dispensation at any time from the beginning of the creation;
For verily I say unto you, the keys of the dispensation, which ye have received, have come down from the fathers, and last of all, being sent down from heaven unto you.
(D&C 112:30-32)

Thus the authority by which Jesus preached as well as the prophets before him, the authority by which they healed the sick and raised the dead, the authority by which they baptised the faithful and remitted sins, the authority by which all matters that appertain to the kingdom of God were performed, all of these things were restored in this the final dispensation of the gospel. The clear recognition of the necessity of that authority and the equally clear manifestation of that authority in our dispensation stand as perfect witnesses of the divine calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith and the divinity of the Church organized by him.

[_harmony]

Bushman states that there is a certain degree of controversy as to whether the date was 1829 or 1830. He is basing his evidence on letters from that time that puts the trials and travels of Joseph in Colesville in 1830.

It does stand to reason that the Melchizedek Priesthood would be needed for what took place, and for that reason July 5th of 1829 does seem more appropriate a time.

Then wouldn't you think that, given the detail of other less important revelations, there would something recorded somewhere?

The point is though that if there are ordinances of Salvation (Mark 16:16, Rom. 6:1-6) they must come through a Legal Administrator (1 Tim. 4:14, Rom. 1:1), One called and ordained as were the meridian Twelve. The Lord's House is a house of order.

No, Gaz. The point, Joseph may have lied. Joseph may have jumped the gun. Joseph may have been tripped up because of one small tiny detail: a date out of order.

And that whole thing bothers me.

[_Gazelam]

Ray,

Larry C Porter has placed the visit of Peter, James, and John in late May of 1829 in his book "Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods" p. 30-47. Porter elies on a letter of Addison Everett, written to Joseph F. Smith Jan 16, 1882. The letter staes that Joseph and Oliver went to Colesville while translating the Book of Mormon sand received the Melchizedek Priesthood while returning to Harmony, fixing the event in 1829.

B.H. Roberts states in History of the Church vol. 1, p. 41 : "... the time withen which the ordination took place may still be further reduced. In a revelation bearing the date of June 1829, making known the calling of the Twelve Apostles in these last days, and addressed to Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer, the Lord said: " I speak unto you even as unto Paul mine apostle, for you are called even with that same calling with which he was called." As this could scarcely be said of men who had not been ordained to the same holy apostleship as that held by Paul, and consequently to the Melchizedek Priesthood, the conclusion is reasonable that the ordination promised by John the Baptist, doubtless occured some time between May 15, 1829, and the expiration of the month of June that same year.

Joseph Smith was notorious for not sharing all of the details of a great many events, choosing instead to refrain from telling more than many people were ready to bear about a great many things. He was a master of the understement. We get from him quite often that things did occur, but the details are often cobbled together from various renderings. How long was it before we found out that there were angels present when the Father and Son appeared to him in the Firt Vision? We also get nothing regarding the deatils of the visits of the various dispensation heads, just statements regarding their appearance. He is quoted as once saying that the Lord trusts him with so many revelations because he knews how to keep a secret and no go blabbing about all he knows.

[_Ray A]

Yes Gaz, Roberts inludes David Whitmer in that record:

B.H. Roberts states in History of the Church vol. 1, p. 41 : "... the time withen which the ordination took place may still be further reduced. In a revelation bearing the date of June 1829, making known the calling of the Twelve Apostles in these last days, and addressed to Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer, the Lord said: " I speak unto you even as unto Paul mine apostle, for you are called even with that same calling with which he was called." As this could scarcely be said of men who had not been ordained to the same holy apostleship as that held by Paul, and consequently to the Melchizedek Priesthood, the conclusion is reasonable that the ordination promised by John the Baptist, doubtless occured some time between May 15, 1829, and the expiration of the month of June that same year.

But here is what Whitmer wrote (I would consider him a better source than Roberts or Larry Porter):

The next grievous error which crept into the church was in ordaining high priests in June, 1831. This error was introduced at the instigation of Sydney Rigdon. The office of high priests was never spoken of, and never thought of being established in the church until Rigdon came in. Remember that we had been preaching from August, 1829, until June, 1831 — almost two years — and had baptized about 2,000 members into the Church of Christ, and had not one high priest. During 1829, several times we were told by Brother Joseph that an elder was the highest office in the church. In December, 1830, Sydney Rigdon and Edward Partridge came from Kirtland, Ohio, to Fayette, N.Y., to see Brother Joseph, and in the latter part of the winter they returned to Kirtland. In February, 1831, Brother Joseph came to Kirtland where Rigdon was. Rigdon was a thorough Bible scholar, a man of fine education, and a powerful orator. He soon worked himself deep into Brother Joseph's affections, and had more influence over him than any other man living.....

Rigdon finally persuaded Brother Joseph to believe that the high priests which had such great power in ancient times, should be in the Church of Christ to-day. He had Brother Joseph inquire of the Lord about it, and they received an answer according to their erring desires. Remember that this revelation came like the one to ordain Brother Joseph "Prophet Seer and Revelator" to the church — through Brother Joseph as mouthpiece, and not through the stone. Remember also that "some revelations are of God; some revelations are of man; and some revelations are of the devil."

Whitmer didn't believe that any Melchizedek priesthood ordination by angels ever occurred, but that it all came through Rigdon, and Joseph then received the "appropriate revelations".

I also think this observation of his is significant, as an aside:

The Spaulding manuscript story is a myth...

(For full contexts see, An Address To All Believers in Christ).

But we all like to read selectively, I suppose.

[_Gazelam]

Interesting Ray, thanks.