In August, 1829, we began to preach the gospel of Christ. The following six elders had then been ordained: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowder, Peter Whitmer, Samuel H. Smith, Hyrum Smith and myself . . . We preached, baptized and confirmed members into the Church of Christ, from August, 1829, until April 6th, 1830, being eight months in which time we had proceeded rightly; the offices in the church being Elders, Priests and Teachers . . . We were as fully organized—spiritually--before April 6th as were on that day . . . . In no place in the word of God does it say that an Elder is after the order of Melchisedec, or after the order of the Melchisedec Priesthood. An Elder is after the order of Christ. This matter of “priesthood,” since the days of Sydney Rigdon, has been the great hobby and stumbling-block of the Latter Day Saints. Priesthood means authority; and authority is the word we should use. I do not think the word priesthood is mentioned in the New Covenant of the Book of Mormon. Authority is the word we used for the first two years in the church—until Sydney Rigdon's days in Ohio.
This matter of the two orders of priesthood in the Church of Christ, and lineal priesthood of the old law being in the church, all originated in the mind of Sydney Rigdon. He explained these things to Brother Joseph in his way, out of the old Scriptures, and got Brother Joseph to inquire, etc. He would inquire, and as mouthpiece speak out the revelations just as they had it fixed up in their hearts. As I have said before, acording to the desires of the heart, the inspiration comes, but it may be the spirit of man that gives it . . . This is the way the High Priests and the “priesthood” as you have it, was introduced into the Church of Christ almost two years after its beginning—and after we had baptized and confirmed about two thousand souls into the church. (David Whitmer, An Address To All Believers in Christ: By a Witness To The Divine Authenticity Of The Book of Mormon, pp. 32, 33, 64)
But, hey, what does David Whitmer know? He's not a reliable witness to things that went on in the early church, is he, my true-believing Mormon friends? Let's see, Oliver Cowdery's account differs from the church's late-invented account, David Whitmer's account differs from the church's late-invented account, and the Book of Commandments which the church published in 1831, and which purported to contain ALL of the revelations given to Joseph Smith up until that time in chronological order, contained neither the alleged May 15, 1829 visit of John the Baptist nor the never-dated alleged visit of Peter, James, and John. There are no records of ANYONE in the church mentioning the alleged Melchizidek Priesthood restoration in the years immediately following the alleged event. NONE. It's not just Joseph Smith being forgetful and sloppy. You've got dozens of early church missionary journals from people who WERE meticulous record-keepers, NONE of which mentions a pre-1830 angelic/resurrected-being priesthood restoration.
Dr. Peterson is correct that burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Here, the LDS Church makes the claim that the priesthood was restored in miraculous fashion "sometime" in 1829. The available contemporaneous evidence ALL suggests otherwise. The ONLY evidence to support it are conflicting, self-serving testimonials given years after the fact.
As an aside, why doesn't the church know the date? Couldn't Tommy Monson just ask Jesus today when the 15 have their weekly board meeting with him?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain
"The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo