Jeff Roundy

This video discusses the hundreds of witnesses who experienced personal divine manifestations as part of Christ’s church being restored – it wasn’t just Joseph Smith!

---

So this video in the Evidences series was inspired by an article I read in the Deseret News about six years ago from Daniel Peterson. It was entitled, “Too many credible gospel witnesses to believe they all lied”. And Daniel was discussing how he came out of General Conference and saw a sign that read “Joseph lied”, and he started thinking about how many other people would have had to have lied.

It wouldn’t have been just Joseph and one of the paragraphs at the beginning of his article says, “It wasn’t just Joseph that would have had to lie … Lucy Mack Smith must have borne false witness in claiming to have held the breastplate that came with the Nephite record. Emma Smith and Katherine Smith Salisbury must have lied in their descriptions of the Book of Mormon plates. William Smith must have lied in estimating the weight of the plates at about 60 pounds. Mary Whitmer must have lied to her son and grandson in claiming to have seen them.”

If you recall, she was the first one to actually see the plates. And then of course we have the three witnesses that were shown the plates with the angel Moroni. All three of them left the church. Two came back, one didn’t. I’m going to do an entire separate video on that specifically, and then of the eight witnesses that saw just the plates, three of them left also. None of these individuals ever denied their testimony of what they experienced. I think that’s powerful witness. Also, if you think about the translation process, in the Book of Mormon Miracles video that I did, I talked a lot about that. How Emma talked about Joseph never needing to be told where he was when he took a break and started again, the translation, he wouldn’t ask for her to repeat where they were in the process. He couldn’t write a well-worded letter, she said, at that time. In the house Elizabeth Ann Whitmer who later married Oliver Cowdery, talked about the process that she witnessed.

She said, “I often sat by and saw and heard them translate and write for hours together. Joseph never had a curtain drawn between him and his scribe while he was translating. He would place the director in his hat, and then place his face in is hat, so as to exclude the light, and then read to his scribe the words he said as they appeared before him.” Oliver Cowdery described this process. He said, “These were days never to be forgotten, to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of Heaven.” Then Oliver ended up being a second witness, the law of witnesses when the Priesthood was restored at this time as well. John the Baptist, the Aaronic Priesthood, and then Peter, James and John a month later, in June of 1829, restoring the Melchizedeck Priesthood ,and again, Oliver fell away for a period of time, but came back towards the end of his life, but while he was out of the church he never denied any of these miraculous experiences.

There was a huge outpouring of the Saints in Kirtland. There are three great books I would recommend. Joseph himself had 76 documented visions and those are accounted for in this great book, “Opening the Heavens”. Another great book about Kirtland particularly, “The Savior in Kirtland” and then a newer book, “The Witness of Women”. Lots of great references and I’ll share some of the tidbits that I pulled together out of this. Hundreds of people had divine experiences and interactions with angelic beings in the Kirtland period. 23 had accounts directly with the Savior himself. I’ll share some of those experiences.

Philo Dibble actually talked about, where they were baptizing in Kirtland, he said, “A pillar of light was seen every evening for more than a month hovering over the place where we were doing the baptizing. One evening … the moon was not to be seen that night. Although it was cloudy, it was as light as noonday.”

Mary Elizabeth Lightner talked about an experience of seeing Joseph with a searchlight within him. He was transparent. She said, “I shall remember it and see it in my mind’s eye as long as I remain upon the earth.”

Martin Harris described how the Savior was in their midst but there was a veil over their eyes. That’s how they described how they saw Joseph.

Orson Pratt talked about seeing Joseph receive one of the sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. “His face was exceedingly white and seemed to shine.”

Here are some other great experiences: The Father and the Son manifested themselves to Joseph Smith, Lyman Wight and Harvey Whitlock. The vision came as the Priesthood gathered in the log schoolhouse on the Isaac Morley farm to ordain the first high priests of the church.

John Murdoch testified that one of the Savior’s appearances in the School of the Prophets, saying, quote, “I beheld the face of the Lord.” Zebedee Coltrin who was one of the first seven presidents of the Seventy recorded several visions, at least one of which included both the Father and the Son.

Then of course Sidney Rigdon had the greatest vision, there with Joseph, they had the vision of the three degrees of glory. It went on for over an hour in the John Johnson farm in the upper story. There were 12 witnesses of this. Philo Dibble described how powerful the room was as they witnessed Joseph and Sydney experiencing this. Again, Sydney later left the church after the martyrdom but never denied having these experiences.

Frederick G. Williams in the First Presidency had an experience of actually seeing the temple, the Kirtland Temple, before the construction was begun at all. He said, “We went upon our knees, called on the Lord, and the building appeared within viewing distance; I being the first to discover it. Then all of us viewed it together. After we had taken a good look at the exterior, the building seemed to come right over us.”

Then at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple, March 27th, 1836, there were almost a thousand people in the temple that witnessed this Pentecostal experience, they called it a great rushing wind. Many saw angels, even outside the temple. They thought the roof of the temple was on fire with this large pillar of light that was there. Truman Angel’s autobiography records that a heavenly messenger, who Joseph Smith said was Peter, had ‘come to accept the dedication’ and was seen entering the temple and sat between Frederick G. Williams and Joseph Smith Sr.

Nancy Tracy said, “The heavenly influence rested down upon that house … heavenly beings appeared to many … it was heaven on earth.”

Eliza R. Snow said, “The ceremonies of that dedication may be rehearsed, but no mortal language can describe the heavenly manifestations of that memorable day.”

And Benjamin Brown, this is a crazy story, he said, “One woman brought her child, about two months old. The woman and child entered and the child did not cry a word from eight until four in the afternoon. But when the Saints all shouted ‘Hosanna’, the child was nursing, but let go and shouted also. When the Saints paused, it paused. When they shouted, it shouted for three times. When they shouted ‘Amen’ it shouted also for three times. Then it resumed it’s nursing without any alarm.” Quite the story.

Charles Walker recorder Harrison Burgess’s account of the first endowments given in the Kirtland Temple. He said that all at once there was a heavenly and divine atmosphere surrounding them, and it seemed as if the rafters and beams were all gone and Joseph gazing up said, “I see the Son of God sitting at the right hand of the Father.” Hyrum Smith at the same instant said, “I behold the angels of Heaven,” and Roger Orton said, “I see the horses and the chariots of Heaven.”

At the solemn assembly, Heber C. Kimball said, “The beloved disciple John was seen in our midst,” by the prophet Joseph, Oliver Cowdery and others. Then of course the grand finale was on the following Sunday, after the dedication. It was Easter Sunday and Passover, April 3rd, 1836. This is canonized as Doctrine and Covenants section 110, the Savior appeared to both Joseph and Oliver, as a second witness, and said that He had received the temple. Also, Moses, Elias, and Elijah came and restored priesthood keys to both Joseph and Oliver, again as a second witness. Remember, Oliver left, never denied any of these things happening.

After the temple dedication, over the next year, there were lots of experiences that continued to happen. Prescendia Kimball talked about seeing angels on the top of the roof of the temple from end to end. She said a number of children in Kirtland saw the same. Another time they were praying in the temple and heard a choir of angels. She said, “…united and singing some song of Zion.” Invisible to them but in the corner of the temple she said, “Sweet harmony filled the temple of God.”

So I hope you enjoyed many of those different examples of a lot of the people that experienced the restoration. It wasn’t just Joseph Smith. Miraculous things happened and I want to share this quote at the end here from George Q. Cannon. He said in speaking of Joseph Smith and Oliver beholding the Savior in Kirtland, he said, “These witnesses are also supplemented by hundreds of others who have beheld in vision, glorious personages in these latter days. In the face of these testimonies which cannot be impeached successfully, is it any wonder that faith grows in the hearts of the people of God?”

I hope you enjoyed the video and subscribe for more. Thanks.

---

Resources:

Books:

The Savior in Kirtland by Karl Anderson

Opening the Heavens by John Welch

The Witness of Women by Janice Johnson and Jennifer Reeder

Articles:

Too many credible gospel witnesses to believe they all lied https://www.deseretnews.com/article/7…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

In this video, I delineate the main objections raised by critics of Joseph Smith’s First Vision and offer clarifying, faithful resolutions based on accurate records and references.

---

Today, we’re going to talk about the First Vision and some of the issues that critics bring up about this experience that Joseph Smith had. The first is the multiple accounts of the First Vision. There are four main accounts that Joseph told. The first one was a private recording in an autobiography in 1832. 1835 account was Joseph telling the story to a visitor in his home that was then recorded by Warren Parish’s scribe into Joseph’s journal. The 1838 account we find in the scriptures. That’s the one that’s been canonized, and we have it in the Pearl of Great Price and Joseph Smith history, and then the 1842 account was the Wentworth letter. We also have five different accounts of people that wrote really secondhand accounts of when Joseph told them the story. They recorded what they remember Joseph telling them.

There are lots of different details in these different accounts, and I think they’re beautiful. Combined altogether, you get this wonderful holistic view of this experience. If you were to tell a story multiple times, you would emphasize different things to different audiences. There, the 1832 account was very focused on Joseph coming to the Lord seeking forgiveness of sins. The 1838 account was much more of the institutional church and the focus there. This is actually a fantastic book that I love, Opening the Heavens, that goes and takes the nine accounts and actually puts them together into a way where you can see each of the different areas, so Joseph Smith’s quest and struggle, or what Joseph Smith saw, for example. You can see all nine accounts listed there, and it’s fascinating to see different things.

Four accounts, the first two and the last two actually talk about one person coming and then another. Now, it’s interpreted a little bit, possibly implied in the 1832 account. It’s a little confusing. We’re going to talk about that next, but that’s a fascinating aspect to that as well. If you were to look at a couple of examples from the New Testament, Paul on the road to Damascus or the vision on the mount of transfiguration, there were multiple tellings of that with different details in the various accounts. It doesn’t mean the story is not true because there’s different details. In fact as you read this, there isn’t anything you’ll find that contradicts anything else. In fact, the 1838 account where we have two people being there, it just doesn’t say how exactly they came. The other accounts help you understand it sounds like one came first and then immediately followed thereafter by the Son.

So the next issue that’s often brought up is the wording of the 1832 account. This is the one that causes the most challenge from the critics bringing this up with the wording here. So let me read exactly what Joseph said. He said, in describing this, “A pillar of light above the brightness of the sun at noon day came down from above and rested upon me, and I was filled with the spirit of God.” Then he says, “And the Lord opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord, and he spake unto me saying, ‘Joseph, my son, thy sins are forgiven thee.'” He uses the term “the Lord” twice, so some have criticized Joseph saying that there was really only one person here. Keep in mind the vernacular of that time and really today in some ways too, the Father and the Son being one, the Lord is a descriptive term for both there. But it does seem, especially when you hear the next time Joseph’s telling this, where he’s describing this, he’s saying one came and then one followed thereafter, so it really was only one first and then the second was introduced. I find it interesting, the last two accounts, 1843 and ’44 after the official accounts were published, he tells it the same way, again how there was one first and then another to follow. That’s the way I read that.

The next issue that’s sometimes brought up is (silence) why did Joseph wait 12 years to record this officially? A couple things. First of all, in 1832 there was a lot of criticism coming at the Church at that point in time. That was the year the office of the First Presidency was organized, and Joseph began recording different things and felt like there needed to be some history of his experiences recorded, also to rebut what was being spread and being publicized there from critics. If you look at his 1838 account, the way it starts, and it makes you wonder almost if there hadn’t have been critics, Joseph may have not told the story here at all. He said, “Owing to the many reports which had been put in circulation by evil disposed and designing persons,” he says, “I have been induced to write this history to disabuse the public mind about what has happened.”

So it is interesting. Joseph’s attitude about sacred things was to keep them sacred. He talked about if you receive a spiritual manifestation to keep it to yourself. If you remember when Moroni came to Joseph, he told him to tell his father about the experience, and the next day Moroni came to Joseph and asked if he had done it, and he said he hadn’t because he was afraid his father wouldn’t believe. Moroni then said, “Tell your father and he will believe,” which he did. Joseph had this reticence, this attitude about this. Also in 1832 account, he does actually say that he found none that would believe, so we don’t know how many he told, but he was very reticent to do it. We do know he told the Methodist preacher the experience and was rejected out of hand.

The last topic that’s sometimes brought up is about whether there was really revivals happening in 1820 in Palmyra. This really came from Reverend Wesley Walters. In the year of 1967, he did a study on just looking back at the papers that were around in Palmyra then to just try and identify, and he found nothing in the spring of 1820 there. So he said, “Well, then that gives us the proof that the Joseph didn’t have this vision because there wasn’t a religious excitement that he talked about.” Well, in his 1838 account, he says “Sometime in the second year after our removal to Manchester.” Now, they moved there in 1838, so this would be 1819. He says, “After our removal to Manchester, there was in the place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion. It commenced with the Methodist but soon became general among all the sects in that region of country. Indeed, the whole district of countries seemed affected by it.”

So first of, all he’s talking about Manchester, and one year earlier, 1819. There was an interesting side note I will tell you. There was a big snow storm on May 28th of 1820 in Palmyra, so there was actually a big revival in June 1820 in Palmyra, but that wasn’t considered spring. Well, if you had a big snow storm May 28th, you might consider June spring. Where Joseph’s really talking about it though is he said it was the whole district, and in fact even in Manchester in 1819 there was religious excitement, particularly the Methodists. There are journals from Methodist preachers now that had been found that record that. This was a great one that Milton Backman did on looking at where we have recordings of unusual religious excitement in 1819 and 1820 in upstate New York, particularly in the west in the Burned-over district, which was considered from the Finger Lakes over to Lake Erie. All those dots represent spots where there was recorded religious excitement, unusual religious excitement there. This is really close. Here’s Manchester right there, so you can see all around Joseph. That’s really what he alluded to there, so I think that’s kind of a silly argument for anyone to make, but it goes back to that research that was done in 1967.

So those are the things regarding the First Vision that I thought would be good. Again, this is Cliff Notes version. There’s lots of detail in all of these. I will put some details in the description of other links to go deeper on this if you’d like. Please subscribe, and we’ll look forward to the next video.

---

Resources:

Books:

Opening the Heavens, Accounts of Divine Manifestations, 1820-1844 by John Welch

Videos:

https://history.lds.org/article/josep…

https://history.lds.org/article/i-saw…

https://history.lds.org/article/owing…

https://history.lds.org/article/unusu…

Websites:

FairMormon: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Jo…

Gospel Topics Essay: https://www.lds.org/topics/first-visi…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

In this video, I introduce my video series, “Latter-Day Saints’ Q&A” where, as an independent voice, I will respond to criticisms of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints with abbreviated, easily understood clarifications while also providing source and reference links for those desiring further study of the topics. In addition, I will also be posting “Evidence” videos of faith promoting information witnessing to the truthfulness of the Restoration.

---

Latter-Day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and offer faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

Hello, this is my first YouTube video for the new YouTube series that I’m starting with this channel called Latter-Day Saints Q&A or Tough Questions Answered For Latter-Day Saints. I felt inspired to do this. I had been thinking about doing something on social media for the last year, answering different critical questions or giving thoughts about different critical questions about different topics dealing with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and at a recent conference, the FairMormon Conference held in August 2018, there was a visiting General Authority of the conference, Elder Pearson, that spoke to us. I’m going to share a quote from something he shared with us. He says, “It is essential that members create and promote online content that effectively communicates what the Church believes in clear and authentic, engaging ways, especially on some of the most prevalent search topics. Access to understandable answers to critical questions and concerns can help correct misunderstandings about the church and remove stumbling blocks to faith. It can also level the playing field for the sincere truth seeker to find and recognize truth in a world increasingly hostile to faith.”

And he did actually recommend YouTube as a great channel to produce material. It’s the number two search engine he mentioned for youth and young adults when they’re searching for different topics and as I was reviewing some of the topics I wanted to discuss, I did find that it was heavily skewed to the negative, probably a hundred a one, it felt like as I was looking through the different material out there at this point, so there is a great need to have more voices in this space. I do have a passion for this. It’s not like I’m a great scholar or something, but it has been a hobby for many decades since I went on a mission in the Bible Belt. I had to deal with many critics of the church back then and I’ve kept up the studies on many of these topics over the years and do love to address and talk about the different topics and share my views and opinions on them.

This isn’t anything that’s sponsored by the Church in any formal way, shape or form. These are my opinions, but I look forward to sharing them with you. It has been recommended that the videos be short. The optimal length for a YouTube video sounds like it’s in the four to eight minute range from what I’ve researched. So I’m going to try and keep these videos in that range. I also would like to share positive things as well. Instead of just defending the faith, I would like to share powerful evidences of the faith as well. So every time I address a question or do a video on something where I’m addressing a critic’s question, at the same time, I’m going to simultaneously release something positive, another video as well, on an evidence based for the restoration. So, and in that vein, I wanted to share a quote from Elder Holland at the BYU Chiasmus Conference in August of 2017.

He said, “My testimony to you tonight is that the gospel is infallibly true and that a variety of infallible proofs supporting that assertion will continue to come until Jesus descends as the ultimate infallible truth of all. Our testimonies aren’t dependent on evidence. We still need that spiritual confirmation in the heart, but not to seek for and not to acknowledge intellectual, documentable support for our belief when it is available is to needlessly limit an otherwise incomparably strong theological position. We ought to be more assertive than we sometimes are in defending our testimony of truth.” And he also shared a quote from the English cleric Austin Farrer who… I love this quote as he talked about C.S. Lewis and other defenders of the faith, the Christian faith. He said, “Though argument does not create conviction, lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.” And that’s one of the goals I have with these videos.

Again, I want to try and keep them short, in the four to eight minute range, and that will be the most challenging part of doing some of these videos. Some of these topics, I feel like I won’t be doing justice with that timeframe. So I’m going to do more of a cliff notes version and hope that that will provide enough resources for somebody that wants to get a quick synopsis of the topics and some of the questions and answers that are there. And in the description below, I will link different resources to go deeper on the topics, especially because of trying to keep the video so short. I want to provide some of my favorite resources for the various topics and I just encourage you to hit the subscribe button as we go forward with the video content in the future. Thanks.

---

Latter-Day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video goes over a significant number of verses in the Bible, which can be seen with hindsight now, as amazing evidences of foreknowledge by prophets and apostles of the latter day restoration.

VIDEO EDIT NOTE: Twice during the video I mentioned that Lehi and Mulek are from the tribe of Joseph – I meant to say Lehi and Ishmael.

---

In this video we’re going to talk about biblical verses or prophecies on the Restoration. There’s a lot of them, and I know that a number of these verses can have dualistic meanings, especially some of the Old Testament prophets. Isaiah was classic in this. So I know there’s multiple meanings for some of these verses. But in light of the Restoration, we can look back and see there’s some bulls-eyes in some of these verses. So I’m going to break it up into various categories. Let’s start with the Book of Mormon.

First here, I’ve got three examples here. I won’t read the full verses of these, but you can see the verses here. “Biblical prophets, they used a trumpet to symbolize the preaching of the gospel, the gathering of Israel, and the coming of the Messiah. On top of many Latter-day Saint temples stands the statue of the angel Moroni with a trumpet pressed to his lips. On September 22, 1827, Moroni again appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him gold plates to translate and to use as a tool to gather Israel from the four corners of the earth.”

Now let’s talk about the meaning of that very specific day that Moroni had designated and told Joseph this was to be the day this was to happen. So the significance, “This day happened to be one of the Jewish high holy days, Rosh Hashanah, also known as the Feast of Trumpets. On this Jewish holiday, the trumpet (ram’s horn or shofar) is sounded in celebration of the future gathering of Israel, the rebuilding of the temple, and the coming of Messiah Ben David, whom we believe is Jesus Christ.”

Another interesting, rich symbolism too is this is the day where light would come in, the autumn equinox, into the Holy of Holies in the temple in Jerusalem, ancient temple. So fascinating.

Okay. Revelations 14:6, this is our angel Moroni scripture, “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” Why would this be needed if it was already on the earth?

Psalms 85:11, “Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven.” Think about the Book of Mormon, came out of the earth. It had been buried for over 1,400 years.

Okay. Isaiah 29:4, coming out of the ground, “And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.” Think of the familiar spirit. A second witness to the Bible. Very much a familiar spirit.

Okay. Ezekiel 37, the two sticks. Now, remember Lehi and Mulek were both from the tribe of Joseph there. Here it talks about the Stick of Joseph and the Stick of Ephraim to be written on, and that the coming day would come when these two would be joined together and become “one in mine hand.” And you think today the Stick of Joseph being the Book of Mormon and then the Stick of Judah being the Bible and they’re one in our hand today.

And critics hate this scripture, Latter-day Saints pointing to this because they say, “Well, it could just have been sticks that were to be written on. That’s what it says.” Well, you could say that. But you could also say it could very easily be scrolls. And that even makes more sense if you think about it, why would you just write the name on a stick? So I think it’s very powerful evidence too. And also where is this happening? Who else is talking about this?

Okay, let’s take a look at the specific blessing given by Jacob to his sons, his patriarchal and prophetic blessing to his 12 sons before he died. This one to Joseph was very specific in Genesis 49:22 through 26. He talked about, “Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well …”, think water, ” … whose branches run over the wall.” Think of the ocean as kind of a wall, going over the ocean.

Again, think of Lehi and Mulek both coming from the tribe of Joseph. And then look at the end. “The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound to the everlasting hills. They shall be on the head of Joseph and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.”

And he was going to be separate. Very interesting. Everlasting hills. Take a look at the globe and you’ll find the everlasting hills in the Americas, the Rockies up in the North, the Andes. In fact, the Andes, they are the longest continental mountain range in the world. So definitely the everlasting hills.

Now let’s go to John 10:16, other sheep. This is Jesus Christ Himself. “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” Notice the emphasis. It was Him. Christ that was going to bring it. They were going to hear His voice. This was not the apostles going out to the Gentiles, which is often quoted there.

Isaiah 29. This is fascinating as we look back and see some of the events in the Restoration happened. “And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of the book that is sealed, which men delivered to one that is learned, saying, ‘Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot: for it is sealed.’ And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, ‘Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.'”

Then, Verse 14, “I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder.” If you go to watch the video on the production of the Book of Mormon, the miraculous nature of it, it simply boggles the mind. 65 days with the unlearned farm boy producing this stuff. It is truly a marvelous work and a wonder.

And then also Joseph was not learned. Yeah. He didn’t feel up to the task. I mean, this was overwhelming for him. And then the learned was actually Professor Charles Anthon. You can read this in Joseph Smith History. In fact, Joseph said he used these exact words when Martin talked about some of the book being sealed. He says, “I cannot read a sealed book.”

Okay, let’s look at witnesses, the law of witnesses. Here’s two, Matthew 18:16 and 2 Corinthians 13:1, both. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” Doesn’t it just make logical sense that the Lord would want to have a second witness to the Bible? For me, it’s why I believe the Bible there.

Okay. Now, new category. Let’s talk about Joseph Smith. All right. I love 1 Corinthians. Paul says, “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the wise, which are mighty.”

It reminds me of Joseph’s calling of the young boy prophet, David was called. And Moses had this speech impediment and inferiority complex almost, Enoch. It’s just like the the Lord to have called somebody like Joseph, the weak of the earth, and actually to really even show more miraculous nature of what happened.

Okay. Messiah ben Joseph. I did an entire video on this. There’s actually a book, 25 years of research, David Mitchell has gone into this. It’s very fascinating here.

But this is the Jewish tradition of a Latter-day restorer that would be called Messiah ben Joseph. So I’m going to give you Randal Chase in the Church History Study Guide that he did. I’m going to give you a quick commentary on this and there’s a whole video, as I mentioned.

He says, “The disciples in Jesus’ day knew all about the coming prophet of the Restoration, known as the Messiah ben Joseph, that would gather Israel together prior to the coming of the Messiah to reign on earth. This great prophet, a descendant of the tribe of Joseph, was especially important to the Samaritans, partly descended from Joseph, and a sore subject for the Jews, who despised the Samaritans as unworthy half-breeds.”

Okay. Now, here’s the verse, John 1:19 through 21, and he gives some commentary about the verses. “Troubled by his rising popularity, mighty preaching and baptisms, the leaders of the Jews sent priests to ask John the Baptist, ‘Who are thou?’ There had been many who had pretended to be the Messiah over the years, but John made it clear, ‘I am not the Christ.’ ‘Well then, who? Art thou Elias?’ meaning Elijah, who they knew would come prior to the advent of the Messiah. John said, ‘I am not.’ There was only one other possibility if he was not the Christ and not Elijah. They asked, ‘Art thou that prophet?’ meaning the prophet descended from Joseph who would also come before the Messiah. And John said again, ‘No.'”

Okay. Cleon Skousen said: “From the most ancient times, Jewish tradition has proclaimed that a great servant of God from the House of Joseph would come in the latter days to prepare the way for the coming of Shilo, the great Messiah. In fact, so profound was the respect of the rabbis for this Joseph that they began calling him Messiah ben Joseph and called their Savior, Messiah ben David. Literally translated, these appellations mean, the anointed one, Son of Joseph, and the anointed one, Son of David. A comprehensive study of this mysterious Messiah ben Joseph was made by Dr. Joseph Klausner, Professor Emeritus of Hebrew literature and Jewish history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who put down the basic attributes which Jewish tradition variously ascribed to him.”

Here’s how Skousen summarized that. He says, “He will rise up shortly before the coming of Messiah ben David. He will be a descendant of Joseph through Ephraim. His mission will commence at about the time Elijah comes in preparing the world for the coming of the Messiah ben David. The Messiah ben Joseph will enter into a great contest with the anti-Christ forces. As part of that contest with the anti-Christ, Messiah ben Joseph will be killed.”

And you can see there the other Samarian traditions there. So that is fascinating. Like I said, a whole video on that.

Okay. Let’s talk about the apostasy. Amos 8 talks about a famine in the land that was going to come. Look at verse 12, “They wander sea to sea, from north to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord and shall not find it.” And it was the famine, in verse 11, it says the famine was for hearing the words of the Lord. Interesting. They shall not find it.

Here, Isaiah 24. It talks about, “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken their everlasting covenant.” I did the video on restoring original Christianity. Just one example of the baptism. Think about children being baptized. In the New Testament, they weren’t; they were blessed. Jesus blessed the little children, not baptized them. Think about the mode of baptism. Jesus came up straightway out of the water. It was a symbolism of death and burial and newness of life. Sprinkling doesn’t do that. So changing the mode of the ordinance as an example.

2 Thessalonians 2. Paul wrote to the saints in Thessalonica. He says, talking about the Second Coming, don’t be concerned or worried about it. And then, verse 3, “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day …”, meaning Christ’s second coming, ” … shall not come, except there come a falling away first.” Very clear. Very fascinating.

Okay. How about some of these comments from various types of reformers? One of the old ones, Roger Williams, pastor of the oldest Baptist Church in America, in Rhode Island there. “There is no regularly-constituted church on earth, nor any person authorized to administer any church ordinance; nor can there be, until new apostles are sent by the great Head of the Church, for whose coming I am seeking.” He went on to say, “The apostasy hath so far corrupted all, that there can be no recovery out of the apostasy until Christ shall send forth new apostles to plant churches anew.”

Okay. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, prepared my 73 noted theologians and Bible students. “We must not expect to see the Church of Holy Scripture actually existing in its perfection on the earth. It is not to be found, thus perfect, either in the collective fragments of Christendom, or still less in any one of these fragments.”

Dr. Fosdick, prominent American Baptist clergyman and author. He said, “Christianity today has largely left the religion which he prepared, taught, and lived, and has substituted another kind of religion altogether. If Jesus should come back to now, hear the mythologies built up around him, see the creedalism, denominationalism, sacramentalism carried on in his name, he would certainly say, ‘If this is Christianity, I am not a Christian.'”

Then, John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, “It does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy spirit were common in the church for more than two or three centuries. We seldom hear them after that fatal period when the emperor Constantine called himself a Christian, and from a vain imagination of promoting the Christian cause thereby, heaped riches and power and honor upon Christians in general, but in particular upon the Christian clergy. From this time, they almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind were found. The cause of this was not as has been supposed because there was no more occasion for them because all the world was become Christian.”

“This is a miserable mistake; not a twentieth part of it was then nominally Christian. The real cause of it was the love of many, almost all Christians, so-called, was waxed cold. The Christians had no more of the Spirit of Christ than the other heathens. The Son of Man, when he came to examine his church, could hardly find faith upon the earth. This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in a Christian Church because the Christians were turned heathens again, and only had earth a dead form left.”

Okay. Will Durant, famed historian. “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated [new] life in the theology and liturgy of the Church.” I did an entire video on that called Original Christianity Restored: Part One.

“Thomas Jefferson, who was a serious student of Christianity, acknowledged the loss of the original gospel and looked forward to the prospect of a restoration of primitive Christianity.”

Now for some passages on the Restoration. So this one, Matthew 9, talks about the importance of a restoration rather than a reformation of something that was already there. Verse 17, “Neither do men put new wine into old bottles; else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish; but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.”

Okay. One of my favorites is Acts 3. We read there: “Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” So there would need to be this restitution of all things before Christ would come again.

And then my all time favorite is Daniel 2, how Daniel interprets King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. You can look on the page. I’ll just read the key part and then again describe the dream. The last part where he says, “Whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided. And the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings…” This is so important. “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed.”

Look at the calendar. When could this have happened? So the vision of the… Here’s what it looks like. The gold head was Babylon and this King Nebuchadnezzar. The silver, the breasts and arms were those in the Medes and the Persians. The brass was the Grecian empire, Alexander the Great. The legs of iron were the Roman empire. But the 10 toes were the 10 divisions that ended up coming out of the Roman empire, and that’s actually exactly what happened. By 476 A.D., Rome had lost its power, and the tribes that sacked the Roman empire became the 10 nations of Europe.

So the earliest that this could have been on the calendar, and others marked this as much later, but the earliest was 476 A.D. Think about that for a minute. It had to be after that. So I want to point to… The history of Christianity, I’m saying that His kingdom had to have been set up after 476 A.D. Note that, that is so critical. So think about any church formed before 476 and then those that claim that that’s their authority, they link off from that church. And then think about this, the Church itself being restored, the newness, the restoration, and in the fullness. But also it talks about consuming all these kingdoms. That’s obviously not going to happen until the millennium, but it will be a part of the way the millennium works there that will be established.

Okay. Now let’s talk about the temple. And I did an entire video on the temple. So I’m just going to hit a couple of super quick highlights. Isaiah 2, of course, this is an amazing one. It says, “… in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall say, Come and let’s go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths.”

Utah comes from the Native American Ute tribe. “Ute” means actually high places or mountain tops. Think about that. It’s right there. Then “Utah” means people of the mountains. So I think it’s a great example.

Now, Obadiah. This one is fascinating just because it talks about saviors, plural, upon Mount Zion prior to the Second Coming. “For the day if the Lord is near … And saviours shall come up on Mount Zion.” So think about that. We understand that now from the aspect of proxy temple work and how people have those ordinances.

Let’s look at Elijah here. We know this one well. Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. “And he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers.”

It’s fascinating when you think about proxy temple work and saviors on Mount Zion. I did an eternal marriage video, talks about this specifically. In fact, when Elijah came on April 3rd, 1836 it was a very unique day. The only one that would wind up like this within the 19th century. But then to take it one step, it was just crazy. This lunar solar calendar, there’s kind of this very scientific. In fact, it’s on the Church website a link to it there. But this was in the video. It says, “It means that the Easter of 1836 to this very day was calendrically the most similar in history to the Easter of 33 A.D. And if the earth’s orbit continues unchanged, that Easter should retain this distinction for another 3,000 years, when a better realignment interval is due.” So quite fascinating.

Okay. Now, a few verses on prophets, apostles, and priesthood authority. Amos 3:7, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” This is so important. Where are the prophets today?

And in that vein, how about the apostles? Paul says to the Ephesians, “Ye … are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.” And then he says two chapters later that this will last, that we will have apostles and prophets, the key part of that until we all come in the unity of the faith. So we aren’t in the unity of the faith so you can say, “Well, where do you find apostles and prophets on the earth today?”

Hebrews 5:4, how this is done, “No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” For example, you don’t become a pastor by going to divinity school and then applying for a job as a pastor, is an example of that potentially.

Okay. Missionaries and prophesied gathering of Israel. Romans 10:14 and 15. So verse 15, “And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things.” So we’ve had over a million people serve full-time missions at their own expense that are bringing the glad tidings even in foreign languages in the history of the Restoration.

And then some on the gathering. “He will lift up an ensign and they shall come”, says Isaiah. “With great mercies will I gather thee.” “Israel and Judah are to be gathered to their lands.” “The Lord shall gather the house of Israel from the people among whom they are scattered.” Just think about our prophet today who’s talking about the gathering of Israel out there on the earth today. And I was definitely part of it. It was a huge theme of the prophets of old.

And then think about the patriarchal blessing given to Ephraim. Genesis 48, this is Jacob giving the blessing here. I don’t know if you remember this, but he puts his hands like this. In the right hand is the one to get the birthright blessing. The firstborn, right? And that was supposed to be to Manasseh, but he’s putting it on the head of Ephraim. And Joseph says, “No. No, father, it’s not supposed to be that way.” Look at verse 19, “I know it, my son, I know it. He also shall become a people … “, meaning Manasseh, ” … and he also shall be great. But truly his younger brother shall be greater than he and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.” Verse 22, “I have given to thee one portion above thy brethren.”

And so this birthright that Joseph had of the sons went to Ephraim. Now that birthright, you have a double portion, but you also with that have the responsibility to take care of the family. And that is the responsibility that Ephraim has today, gathering and helping bring the gospel to all of Israel today.

If you look at, think about, 1 Peter 2:9 says that these saints, they would be a peculiar people, and you think about the saints today, how peculiar they are relative to the world. We talk about sending out these missionaries, I mean it’s stunning what you see happening there. Who’s talking of this? Even Moses himself brought the keys of the gathering of Israel. Talk about Elijah turning the hearts. Who’s talking about this? What about the temples being built? Look of the map here all over. Who’s paying tithing? Malachi says, “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. And ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.”

Here you can see the Pew research study. 79% of active Latter-day Saints pay a full tithing. Only 4% of Christians actually pay full tithing. Who’s serving? I did a video on this study of the University of Pennsylvania. The hours spent serving, the active Latter-day Saints spends nine times the hours serving of active religious volunteers in United States. And then you look at the doctrine, you go to the Restoring Original Christianity video that I did, two parts on that. And it’s no surprise when Bishop Causse talked about the city in France, in Paris that did the study of the church before they would agree to build a temple. After a month long study, they came and reported that they viewed it as the church on the earth that was the closest to the original Christian Church anywhere to be found.

I hope this video did help in showing that as well. I hope you enjoyed the video. Subscribe for more.

---

Resources:

Book:

Biblical Roots of Mormonism – Eric Shuster

Many related videos on Latter-day Saints’ Q&A which are mentioned throughout this video

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.

This video discusses various issues surrounding the sustaining of fallible church leaders.

---

Okay. On this video, I want to wrestle with the topic of sustaining fallible church leaders. Many are familiar with the statement from President Wilford Woodruff, where he stated that God would not allow him to lead the church astray. So many have taken that to say, “well then that means that the prophet’s not going to make mistakes. He can’t make mistakes, or he’s perfect”, essentially. It’s become a little cliche, but the saying you may have heard that the Catholic church says is that the Pope is not fallible, but the members don’t believe it.

Our church says that the prophet is fallible, but the members don’t believe it. Now, especially as the international growth of the Church happens and more and more members are removed from Church headquarters geographically, essentially, they can also put the leaders on a higher perfection pedestal in a sense.

Ironically, there’s also this trend too, in some senses just culturally, of bucking authority and institutional distrust, if you will, that’s also affecting in some ways or impacting the sustaining of church leaders. So we’ll talk about that a little bit too. So also, please listen at the very end. There’s some really great stuff I want you to be able to hear from Terryl and Fiona Givens, great gospel scholars, on ways to look at this topic you may have not considered. I think it was fascinating.

So if you look at the Bible, just to start, I think God wanted to make it clear that the prophets and apostles are not perfect. There’s lots of examples in the Bible. A couple of quick ones from the Old Testament: We’ve got Moses who’s rebuked by the Lord for his actions at Meribah and his punishment was to not go into the promised land with the people. You have Jonah who ran from his assignment. He didn’t want to do it. And then even after he did do it, he was upset that the people of Nineveh repented. This is the prophet. Then you’ve got, let’s go to the New Testament. You’ve got the apostles bickering about who was to be the greatest of them. And then you’ve got Paul who’s rebuking Peter in Antioch. So, just some examples from the Bible.

And then look at the Doctrine and Covenants. So the Lord reveals section one, and he calls it the preface to what would become the Doctrine and Covenants. And listen to this, does this sound like He would have perfect and infallible leaders?

He says, “The weak things of the world shall come forth and break down the mighty and strong ones, that the fullness of my gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the world, and before kings and rulers. Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding. And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known; And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed; And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent.”

That’s quite profound. How about section 21, verses four and five? “Wherefore meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.”

I want to talk about that a little more throughout the video. Section 112, “Whosoever receiveth my word receiveth me, and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth those, the First Presidency, whom I have sent, whom I have made counselors for my name’s sake unto you.”

Okay. Now how about a few quick examples from the Book of Mormon. Moroni in Ether 12:6 says, “Condemn me not because of mine imperfections, neither my father … but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.”

Now on the title page of the Book of Mormon we read, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.” I love what Joseph Smith we have recorded to new arriving converts. “I told them I was but a man, and they must not expect me to be perfect; if they expected perfection from me, I should expect it from them; but if they would bear with my infirmities and the infirmities of the brethren, I would likewise bear with their infirmities.” And his famous statement, “A prophet is only a prophet when he’s acting as such.”

Now how about this? The First Presidency, the current First Presidency in their first press conference, President Nelson says this, “Give your leaders a little leeway to make mistakes, as you hope your leaders will give you a little leeway to profit by your errors.” President Oaks, “We don’t believe in the infallibility of our leaders.” And then April 2013, Elder Holland wanted to emphasize this leader fallibility issue. He says in General Conference, “Except in the case of His only perfect Begotten Son, imperfect people are all God has ever had to work with. That must be terribly frustrating to Him, but He deals with it. So should we. And when you see imperfection, remember that the limitation is not in the divinity of the work. As one gifted writer has suggested, when the infinite fullness is poured forth, it is not the oil’s fault if there is some loss because finite vessels can’t quite contain it all. Those finite vessels include you and me, so be patient and kind and forgiving.”

And six months later, President Uchtdorf in the October 2013 conference, “And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles or doctrine. I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us–His imperfect children–and imperfect people make mistakes.”

Then the Church Newsroom website back in 2007. They really wanted to clarify that not everything that’s said by a general authority means its official doctrine of the Church. I shared this by the way in the video, one of the first videos I did, and I apologize for some of the poor production quality back in some of those early videos. But this one was called “Doctrines, Opinions and Practices: Sorting It All Out”, and I’ll link it on the end screen of this video.

But this statement here, “Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture, official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.”

Then the Encyclopedia of Mormonism states online under the topic doctrine, “There are many subjects about which the scriptures are not clear and about which the Church has made no official pronouncements. In such matter, one can find differences of opinion among Church members and leaders. Until the truth of these matters is made known by revelation, there is room for different levels of understanding and interpretation of unsettled issues.”

There’s a lot of those. All right, so this is fascinating from Henry Eyring, “Reflections of a Scientist”, the book that he wrote there. This is the scientist Henry Eyring, President Erying’s father. He said, “The Lord uses imperfect people. He often allows their errors to stand uncorrected. He may have a purpose in doing so, such as to teach us that religious truth comes forth ‘line upon line, precept upon precept’ in a process of sifting and winnowing similar to the one I know so well in science.”

But how does this jive with the statement from Wilford Woodruff about the prophet not leading the people astray? Well, let’s look at the actual statement. You find this in the Official Declaration 1 underneath the Manifesto, some statements from President Woodruff. And this is when he was really trying to calm the saints that were affected by the Manifesto.

He says, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place.”

More recently, this was in 1996, President Hinckley, he had been the prophet for one year. He says, “I want to make you a promise. I know it’s true. The Lord will never let the General Authorities of this Church lead it astray. It won’t happen. We have a presidency of three. We have a Council of Twelve Apostles. We meet together in the temple every Thursday. We pray together, we discuss together, we seek the inspiration of the Almighty, and it’s my testimony that it comes.”

Now, Elder Ballard gave a a devotional at BYU just a couple of years ago. I’m going to share it towards the end of the video a little more on that, but he actually said the Lord called the apostles and prophets, he said, to invite others to come unto Christ. That’s their job, their mission essentially, and also we’re promised this is the last dispensation. There will be no apostasy. The Church will not fail. So if you think about it in that broad sense though, inviting others to come unto Christ, they’re not going to fail in that mission. I love the recent talk Elder Anderson gave, a prophet doesn’t stand between you and the Lord, the prophet stands by your side and points you to Lord Jesus Christ. But it doesn’t mean that errors won’t occur. Another quick one on that, President J Reuben Clark, “We are not infallible in our judgment, and we err”.

And I love this as a wonderful clarifying quote from President Packer. In fact, he was talking about the protection from councils. He says, while explaining benefits of councils, also included an important clarification: “men of very ordinary capacity may be guided through counsel and inspiration to accomplish extraordinary things.” Yet he added, ” … even with the best of intentions, it does not always work the way it should. Human nature may express itself on occasion, but not to the permanent injury of the work.'”

I love that. That’s fascinating. Not to the permanent, it may even cause injury to the work, but not the permanent injury to the work. It’s kind of fascinating wording.

Okay, so the gospel scholar Taylor Halverson has a great blog, and he just did a piece on sustaining the brethren, and I’ll link to it in the description. But one of the things that really fascinated me, he talked about the etymology of the word sustain, and in Latin it means, there’s a number of things, it means “stand up, bear up, support, suffer and endure.” I thought those were fascinating words that could apply. I’m going to bring this back in a minute on some things we’ll talk about. But think about those words.

I wanted to share a brief story from somebody who went through a very tough experience of receiving stark consequences from an announcement from a prophet. And this was shortly after the Manifesto had been issued against polygamy by President Woodruff, and this was the experience of somebody experiencing this and what they went through. There’s some lessons here, and I’ll get into some of those here in a little bit, but this is a autobiography of Lorena Larsen who was in a polygamous marriage when the Manifesto came out.

“My husband told me about it and my feelings were past description. I had gone into that order of marriage because I believe God had commanded his people to do so, and it had been such a sacrifice to live it as I thought God wanted me to. It seemed impossible that the Lord would go back on a principle which had caused so much sacrifice, heartache, and trial before one could conquer one’s carnal self and live on that higher plane and love one’s neighbors as one’s self. My husband walked out without saying a word, and as he walked away, I thought, ‘Oh yes, it’s easy for you. You can go home to your other family and be happy with her, while I must be like Hagar, sent away.'”

“My anguish was inexpressible, and a dense darkness took hold of my mind. I thought that if the Lord and the church authorities had gone back on that principle, there was nothing to any part of the gospel. I fancied I could see myself and my children and many other splendid women and their families turn adrift, and our only purpose in entering it had been to more fully serve the Lord. I sank down on our bedding and wished in my anguish that the earth would open and take me and my children in. The darkness seemed impenetrable. All at once I heard a voice, which said ‘Why this is no more unreasonable than the requirement of Abraham to offer up Isaac, and when the Lord sees that you were willing to obey in all things, the trial shall be removed.’ There was a light whose brightness cannot be described, which filled my soul and I was filled with joy and peace and happiness that I felt that no matter whatever should come to me in all my future life, I could never feel sad again.”

The spirit can also help us to sustain our leaders through difficult, challenging situations we may be in. Also, I thought of, I shared this in the Women and the Priesthood video about the oath and covenant of the priesthood and some thoughts that Sheri Dew shared about this, so I wanted to share that again. It’s perfect placement here.

“The words ‘also all they’ and the word ‘receive’, used no fewer than 10 times in these verses, arouse my curiosity. The phrase ‘also all they’ seems to refer to more than those who are ordained. And though we typically use ‘receive’ to mean ‘to acquire something’, receive can also mean ‘to believe’ or ‘to accept as true’. Interestingly, the secondary definition of ‘receive’ is used frequently in the scriptures by the Lord Himself.”

“As I read verses such as these and ponder the secondary definition of ‘receive’, I found myself wondering if the transcendent promises of D&C 84:35-40 might be tied to believing the priesthood is the power of God, accepting the manner in which the Lord has organized his kingdom, sustaining those who hold priesthood keys, and honoring priesthood power as the power of God.”

That was helpful to see. Now some say we have blind obedience and the critics will often deceptively point to a key phrase that was once published in our church magazine in 1945. Very unfortunate. It said, literally, quote, “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done.” Now, “This statement was printed in Ward Teacher’s Message in the June 1945 Improvement Era Church Magazine. Later it was discovered that it had been written by a young clerk in the Presiding Bishop’s office and was sent out without anyone in authority having approved it.”

Now critics won’t say that the error in publishing was addressed immediately by the prophet actually. And he was addressing criticism that had come immediately about this. So here’s what he said, President George Albert Smith, “The leaflet to which he refer …”, so he’s addressing this to Dr. Raymond Cope, “…and from which you quote in your letter, was not ‘prepared’ by ‘one of our leaders’. However, one or more of them inadvertently permitted the paragraph to pass uncensored. By their so doing, not a few members of the Church have been upset in their feelings, and General Authorities have been embarrassed. I am pleased to assure you that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does not express the true position of the Church. Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true idea of the Church, which is that every individual must obtain for himself a testimony of the truth of the Gospel, must, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, work out his own salvation and is personally responsible to His Maker for his individual acts.”

So I thought that was helpful. Okay, so I love this. 1969, then apostle George Q. Cannon wrote a great editorial in the Deseret News. He said, “We could conceive of a man honestly differing in opinion from the Authorities of the Church and yet not be an apostate; but we could not conceive of a man publishing these differences of opinion and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special pleading to enforce them upon the people to produce division and strife and to place the acts and counsels of the Authorities of the Church, if possible, in a wrong light and not be an apostate, for such conduct was apostasy as we understood the term. We further said that while a man might honestly differ in opinion from the Authorities through a want of understanding, he had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him, and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostasy and be found fighting against God and the authority which He had placed here to govern His Church.”

I want to talk about this. I want to share two other things and then share a couple thoughts on that. So the next one is Linda Burton at the BYU Women’s Conference 2013. I also shared this in the Women and the Priesthood video. She said “What a healthy discussion to have about the priesthood. What is cultural and what is doctrine? It is enlivening and wonderful. It helps us define: what is authority, what are the keys? But let’s go to the right sources for answers. Why would we believe the internet and not the prophets. We can figure out how to ask the questions in a way that facilitates cooperation and brings honest concerns to the table. If you aren’t in a leadership position, bring questions to your leaders in an honest and humble way. See what we can figure out together. Offer solutions. What would you do if you were the leader? But be patient and humble.”

And then the one that’s really stuck with me over the years is this modern-day example from Dallin H. Oaks and President David O. McKay. It illustrates a great point I want to make. So, “Decades ago when the U.S. …” now this was published in Interpreter Journal in 2015, Duane Boyce wrote this. “Decades ago, when the U.S. Supreme Court first ruled against prayer in the public schools, President David O. McKay publicly criticized the ruling: he considered it to be leading the country ‘down the road to atheism’. Dallin H. Oaks, on the other hand, who was a law professor at the time, saw good reason for the Court’s decision in the case before it and worried that criticism might be based on incomplete information and the full rationale and intent of the ruling. Brother Oaks began organizing his thoughts on paper, reviewing the Court’s reasoning and showing its application to secular influences in the public schools as well as to religious ones.”

“Soon after completing this document, he met President Henry D. Moyle of the First Presidency at a church function in Chicago. When President Moyle asked him about his work, Brother Oaks gave him a copy of this writing. President Moyle took interest in it and upon returning to Salt Lake City, shared it with President McKay. Interestingly, after reading Brother Oaks’ thoughtful treatment, President McKay directed that it be published in the Improvement Era. Thus, brother Oaks did not give up his ‘right to think’. He felt dissonance between his own judgment and the public expressions of the prophet. He wondered about the issue and prayerfully brought to bear his own best thinking on the relevant questions. Significantly, however, he did not publish a critical article or give a disapproving speech. Instead, he expressed his feelings respectfully and privately (remember that it was President McKay who directed that it be published), with no motivation other than to help and in the spirit of true discipleship.”

“The outcome of this story is also instructive..” And this is interesting. “Some 30 years later, and now one of the Twelve himself, Elder Oaks wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal on the subject of school prayer. He said, ‘When the Supreme Court decided the original school prayer case in 1962, I thought the case was correctly decided. What I did not foresee, but what was sensed by people who’s vision was far greater than mine, was that this decision would set in motion a chain of legal and public and educational actions that would bring us to the current circumstances in which we must reaffirm and even contend for religious liberty.'”

“While the Court’s decision was probably the correct one on the matter before it at the time, the way the majority opinion was written set in motion a chain of events that President McKay had originally feared. In recognition of the prophetic nature of President McKay’s warning, Elder Oaks wrote ‘My worldly wisdom in writing approving of the school prayer case on the facts of the decision was just a small footnote in history compared with the vision of a prophet who saw and described the pernicious effects of that decision in the years to come.’ It was, he says ‘a powerful learning experience on the folly of trying to understand a prophetic vision in terms of worldly wisdom.'”

And this brings me to the thought of, we sustain them as “seers”, “see-ers” and they can see. Remember, they’re the watchmen on the tower. We are not on the tower. We might be winning a battle, but losing a war that they can see the bigger picture of that. So I think it’s just a very helpful thing to remember this experience and the one I shared about Lorena Larson too. The Spirit can comfort and help us through some of these things.

But I also like some of these examples from Elder Oaks, I had them on the screen, that little box: politely, privately, respectfully, pure motives, prayerfully, best thinking, patience and faith. And I would say that one of the biggest things is prayer. Pray. Pray for our leaders that they will have the Spirit to guide them and direct them. They will seek this revelation. And this is particularly if you feel in conflict on something, pray for the body of the saints. I’m about to show you that the body of the saints matters too. The Lord can only move as the body of the saints moves.

So be aware of that too. And pray for yourself that you will have maybe experience like Lorena Larson, or that you’ll have the patience to endure, that you’ll sustain in that sense of that suffering and the enduring aspect of it, and that you’ll have that experience to add the comfort in the meantime there. And then to be patient, and the Church might change, the body of the church, the leaders, you might change there, but to be patient and be faithful in the meantime there.

So now about the saints themselves, listen to what the prophet Joseph said. It’s fascinating here. He said, “I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions: they cannot stand the fire at all.”

And listen to what he said about the great vision of the kingdoms of glory described in section 76. “I could explain a hundred fold more than I ever have of the glories of the kingdoms manifested to me in the vision, were I permitted, and were the people prepared to receive them.”

And here’s George Q. Cannon, even a more clarifying statement. He says, “There are many things that the leading men of the Church can see and understand that they cannot impart to the people nor ask the people to do. Why? Because they know that the people would not come up to the requirement and that therefore they would be disobedient. Better to give them line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little than to give them something that they could not receive and that they would rebel against. That is the manner in which the Lord deals with his children, and it is the manner in which wise men inspired of the Lord deal with their fellow man. Speaking as a First Presidency, if we could have our way, there are many changes that we would make; but you know how difficult it is to have people see alike upon many points.”

And the last thing on this is the Samuel Principle that President Benson talked about, limiting things. And I actually shared this in the priesthood ban video as one of the possible possibilities that could have been involved in that. I will link this on the end screen.

This is what he said, “If you see some individual in the Church doing things which disturb you, or you feel the Church is not doing things the way you think they could or should be done, the following principles might be helpful. God has to work through mortals of varying degrees of spiritual progress. Sometimes he temporarily grants to men their unwise requests in order that they might learn from their own sad experiences. Some refer to this as the ‘Samuel Principle’. The children of Israel wanted a king, like all the nations. The prophet Samuel was displeased and prayed to the Lord about it. The Lord responded by saying to Samuel, ‘They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.’ The Lord told Samuel to warn the people of the consequences if they had a king. Samuel gave them the warning, but they still insisted on their king. So God gave them a king and let them suffer. They learned the hard way. God wanted it to be otherwise, but within certain bounds he grants unto man according to their desires.”

Now switching gears for just a second, misunderstandings also come up with the thought of the prophet being a fax machine for the Lord. And I used to say that and now I should probably say receiving texts from the Lord, essentially there. They work and grow line upon line as well. Just as we’ve learned in Luke two, the Lord himself, Jesus, said He grew in wisdom and stature before God and man. And so we see this even in Joseph Smith changing revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, as he grew in revelation and experiencing this.

And I love what Robert Boylan runs a blog called Scriptural Mormonism. It’s a great blog and he wrote this back in 2015. I’ll link to it in the show description. It’s called Biblical Prophets Changing their Words and Words of Previous Prophets. So he first gives us a great example from a biblical scholar, Michael Heiser of how we know the Bible has had different changes from anachronisms and things that are in there. And then he says, “Who had the authority to edit the Bible like this? The short answer is whomever God moved to do so under inspiration. The longer answer is that, in the case of the prophetic writings, someone accepted by the believing community of Israel to be a member of the prophetic class or tradition served as editor of the preaching and teachings of the prophets.”

And then there was a master’s thesis at BYU in 1955 that had been written by Melvin Petersen on a study of the changes that had been made in the Doctrine and Covenants. And he summarized this, “Once a man has been recognized and accepted as a prophet and favored with communications from God, his great responsibility is to make sure, inasmuch as he has power to do so, that those to whom the communications are directed, understand what God has revealed for them. The power is his to revise, correct, omit, or change any of his writings in order that he might manifest more clearly what God revealed through him.” And he, the prophet, might understand more and more as we grow line upon line.

This was actually, the Church website did an article called “How the Revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants Were Received and Compiled”. And I love this in the middle where he says “he updated them in light of continued revelation.” And I was thinking, I had an experience just a couple of months ago. I was reading some notes that I had written in my scriptures just five or six years ago in 1 Nephi. And I read this comment I wrote and I literally thought, “I don’t think that’s right. And I feel very different about that right now.” I thought “why?” And it’s from experiences I’ve had and from greater light and knowledge I’ve gained from learning and studying. I thought “this happens with the prophets too.”

Think about Joseph Smith. Compare his early sermons and teachings to the King Follett Discourse right before he died. Fascinating to see that growth. And think about even the institutional church, how we have grown and built upon the foundation from the past. It’s just a fascinating thought.

Okay. Now a handful of quick items here, various things. So seek personal revelation. Elder Marion G. Romney, “those who will through mighty prayer and earnest study inform themselves as to what these living prophets say, and act upon it, will be visited by the spirit of the Lord and know by the spirit of revelation that they speak the mind and will of the Father.”

So President Nelson, he just spoke at BYU in September of 2019. He said, “Ask your Heavenly Father if we truly are the Lord’s apostles and prophets. Ask if we have received revelation on this and other matters”, that he had been speaking about. “Ask if these five truths…” that he just taught “…are, in fact, true. My dear brothers and sisters, I plead with you to seek earnestly a confirmation from the Spirit that what I have told you is true and it’s from the Lord.”

Okay. Now look at this example of how Brigham Young dealt with the teaching from Joseph Smith on the three degrees of glory, which were totally new to him. He grew up with heaven and hell concept, as most Christians did. He said, “I was not prepared to say that I believed it, the three degrees of glory, and I had to wait. What did I do? I handed this over to the Lord in my feelings, and said ‘I will wait until the Spirit of God manifests to me for or against.’ I did not judge the matter, I did not argue against it, not in the least. I never argued the least against anything Joseph proposed, but if I could not see or understand it, I handed it over to the Lord.”

Also, it’d be great to have Lorenzo Snow’s attitude that he had about Joseph Smith’s weaknesses. He says, “I saw Joseph Smith the prophet, do things which I did not approve of; and yet, I thanked God that He would upon a man who had these imperfections the power and authority which He placed upon him, for I knew I myself had weaknesses and I thought there was a chance for me.”

Okay. Now, are there exceptions sometimes to the rules? Yes, but the general authorities do not teach the exceptions. Elder Oaks said, “As a General Authority, I have the responsibility to preach general principles. When I do, I don’t try to define all the exceptions. There are exceptions to some rules. For example, we believe the commandment to not kill is not violated by killing pursuant to a lawful order in an armed conflict. But don’t ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach the general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord.”

And I love what Elder Ballard just said a few years ago in a devotional at BYU on here. Remember what general authorities are and what they are called to do. Here’s a poignant reminder. He says, “As we begin to consider some of your questions, it’s important to remember that I’m a general authority, but that doesn’t make me an authority in general. My calling and life experiences allow me to respond to certain types of questions. There are other types of questions that require an expert in a specific subject matter. This is exactly what I do when I need an answer to such questions: I seek help from others, including those with degrees and expertise in such fields. I worry sometimes that members expect too much from Church leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities.”

And listen carefully here. This is what I said before, “The Lord called the apostles and prophets to invite others to come unto Christ, not to obtain advanced degrees in ancient history, biblical studies, and other fields that may be useful in answering all the questions we may have about scriptures, history, and the Church. Our primary duty is to build up the Church, teach the doctrine of Christ, and help those in need of our help. Fortunately, the Lord provides this counsel for those asking questions: Seek ye out of out of the best books by studying and also by faith.”

Okay, now remember also that the Lord often doesn’t explain why. Elder Maxwell says, “I found that the Lord gives more instructions than explanations.” Elder Oaks said, “If you read the scriptures with this question in mind, ‘Why did the Lord command this or why did He command that’, you find that in less than one in a hundred commands was any reason given. It’s not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to revelation. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do, we are on our own.”

Now this is the conclusion I wanted to share from Terryl and Fiona Givens in their book, “The Crucible of Doubt”. Just fascinating thoughts about the subject of fallible leaders. So they say here, “Mormons frequently describe priesthood as the authority to act in God’s name. Authority is the source of delegation, delegation involves humans, humans entail error, and error in the context of authority creates conflict and tension. These stresses, which involve fallibility in conduct as well as in words, can be a challenge to the most faithful. Delegation is a terrifying gesture on God’s part. To delegate or to deputize, both mean that the person receiving that authority has something like God’s power of attorney; the person’s acts, within circumscribed limits, carry the weight and efficacy of God’s own acts. But surely no human can act with the wisdom, the perfect judgment and infallibility of God. Precisely so. And if delegation is real principle, if God really does endow mortals with the authority to act in His place and with His authority, even while He knows they will not act with infallible judgment, then it becomes clearer why God is asking us to receive the words of the prophet ‘as if from my mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.'”

“A different question emerges when it is the action, not the person, that is imperfect. If a Bishop makes a decision without inspiration, are we bound to sustain the decision? The story is told of a Church official who returned from installing a new stake presidency. ‘Dad, do you brethren feel confident when you call a man as the stake president that he is the Lord’s man?’ the official’s son asked upon his father’s return home. ‘No, not always,’ he replied, ‘but once we call him, he becomes the Lord’s man.”‘

The Givens say some may say it’s arrogant to think God would work this way. I love what the Givens said, “It’s also possible that this church official’s reply reveals the only understanding of delegation that’s viable.” And then they went on to say, “If God honored only those decisions made in perfect accord with His perfect wisdom, then His purposes would require leaders who were utterly incapable of misconstruing His intention, who never missed hearing the still small voice, who were unerringly and unfailingly, a perfect conduit for heaven’s inspiration. And it would render the principle of delegation inoperative … After calling Joseph Smith to his mission, the Lord didn’t say, I will stand by you as long as you never err in judgment. He said, Thou was called and chosen … Devote all thy service in Zion; and … lo, I am with thee, even unto the end.”

Then Nathaniel Givens observed, “As for the question of what is or is not revelation, the answer is simple. People just don’t like to hear it. D&C 68:4 says, ‘And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.'”

“There’s your answer and, in terms of simple language, it’s not hard to understand. The problem is it doesn’t do what people want. What people want is to be absolved of responsibility. They want a formula, a rule book, or an oracle to which they can defer tough questions. God says: ‘if you want to know if it’s scripture or not, you’re going to have to have your own connection to the Holy Ghost sufficient to figure that out.’ In other words, ‘The burden is on you.’ People say, ‘That sounds like hard work. Please give us a cheat sheet.’ And when God refuses to give out a cheat sheet, people just invent one. They invent doctrines of prophetic or scriptural inerrancy or infallibility, that doesn’t ask us to do any genuine hard work.”

And I love how they finished this with Elder Todd Christofferson repeating counsel given earlier by J. Reuben Clark Jr. with an interesting caveat: “The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’: and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.” And then Givens then says, “Hence the ‘in all patience’ part of the Lord’s revelation on the subject.”

Which I think is a perfect way to end on. Hope you enjoyed the video. I hope it was helpful. Subscribe for more. Thanks.

---

Resources:

Other Latter-day Saints Q&A Videos:

Doctrines, Opinions & Practices – Sorting It All Out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ts5u…

Priesthood & Temple Ban – How Did This Happen? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqjlu…

Articles:

Taylor Halverson Blog Article on Sustaining Church Leaders: https://taylorhalverson.com/2019/09/3…

Robert Boylan Blog Article on Biblical Prophets Changing Their Words and the Words of Previous Prophets: http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.c…

Fairmormon helpful links:

https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2016/…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mo…

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mo…

Books:

Crucible of Doubt by Terry & Fiona Givens – Chapters 5 & 6

Planted by Patrick Mason – Chapter 6

Shaken Faith Syndrome by Michael Ash – Chapter 3

Other Videos:

Faith Matters Foundation – Can I Trust & Sustain Fallible Leaders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75juR…

FairMormon Podcast – Can A Prophet Make Mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g5kY…

FairMormon Podcast – Are Prophets Perfect https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g5kY…

FairMormon Podcast – Why Would God Allow Prophets to Make Mistakes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmznb…

Saints Unscripted – Can Prophets Make Mistakes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVIMq…

---

Latter-day Saints’ Q&A is a video series not produced by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but by me, an ordinary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an independent voice, with a passion for studying Church history and defending the faith. In this series, I provide evidences for the restoration, and address tough questions posed by critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, offering faithful answers based on accurate research and historical references which will be posted at the end of each video.