Parable of the Jury
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I ask you today to
consider a very important submission of evidence. This is evidence upon which this case may
very well be decided. It is evidence
which indeed proves the truth and is sufficient to close the case. Yet there are many more witnesses and a lot
more evidence which could be examined.
Today’s submission is not the sole proving factor. Additional details will certainly be brought
forth at a later time. However, today’s
submission is a sufficient proving factor in and of itself.
As you see the documentation that will be presented to you,
I ask you for a favor. Please set aside
any preconceived notions you may have.
And please…this is very important…wait to hear all of the presentation
before you formulate a conclusion.
Equally important is that at this time, you do not let fear interfere
with your ability to weigh the truth.
The problem that will confront you as you examine the truth is that if
this evidence proves to be true, there are consequences which may have
significant impact on the lives of many souls.
As a jury you are well aware of the potential consequences
that may follow your decisions in this case.
I know that each of you take that very seriously, as you should. Do not let fear of the possible reactions of
others interfere with your God-given capacity to hear and recognize truth. Do not let prejudice formed by long standing
traditions prohibit you in your duty to formulate judgement with
integrity. Be willing to admit your own mistakes of the
past and let them go as you see new evidence brought into the light line upon line
and precept upon precept, here a little and there a little until you have
received a full understanding.
Now I know I am just a dirty lawyer…[One stifled chuckle is
heard from the back]… But all I want is to see that TRUTH is brought forward
and future decisions are based upon the TRUTH.
If I am wrong, I want that evidence to be presented. And if I am right, I hope that evidence will
be considered. We will deal with the
implications as the consequences present themselves to us. Again I ask you, do not let fear prejudice
your ability to listen to the truth. Be
fearless, Ladies and Gentlemen. Hear the
truth, consider the truth, and speak the truth.
Do not throw out all evidence for fear that there are some lies among
the evidence presented by others, but rather learn to detect the lies and to
discern the truth. That is really all
that has ever been asked of you. Are we
in agreement in this?
Yes? Very good. Then let us begin at once.
You have each been presented with a book at the beginning of
this case. All parties involved have
referenced this book many times. As a
jury you have actually been instructed to read and ponder and pray regarding
the material within that book. Now
today, we will examine specific entries.
Turn to the document entitled Doctrine and Covenants Section
124: 28 through 55.
At this time, please read the entirety of the text in full
to get an understanding of the overall context.
We will wait and give you as much time as you need. It is critical as we review any of these
sources that we do not lose context in which the documents were written. This includes both the internal context
within the text itself as well as the external context in which the document
was presented. Today we will examine
both. For that reason, I ask you to read
the verses enclosed below at this time.
[Waits patiently for all to read]
“ 28 For there is not a place found on earth that he may
come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken
away, even the fulness of the priesthood.
29 For a baptismal font there is not upon the earth,
that they, my saints, may be baptized for those who are dead—
30 For this ordinance belongeth to my house, and cannot
be acceptable to me, only in the days of your poverty, wherein ye are not able
to build a house unto me.
31 But I command you, all ye my saints, to build a house
unto me; and I grant unto you a sufficient time to build a house unto me; and
during this time your baptisms shall be acceptable unto me.
32 But behold, at the end of this appointment your
baptisms for your dead shall not be acceptable unto me; and if you do not these
things at the end of the appointment ye shall be rejected as a church, with
your dead, saith the Lord your God.
33 For verily I say unto you, that after you have had
sufficient time to build a house to me, wherein the ordinance of baptizing for
the dead belongeth, and for which the same was instituted from before the
foundation of the world, your baptisms for your dead cannot be acceptable unto
me;
35 And after this time, your baptisms for the dead, by
those who are scattered abroad, are not acceptable unto me, saith the Lord.
36 For it is ordained that in Zion, and in her stakes,
and in Jerusalem, those places which I have appointed for refuge, shall be the
places for your baptisms for your dead.
37 And again, verily I say unto you, how shall your washings
be acceptable unto me, except ye perform them in a house which you have built
to my name?
38 For, for this cause I commanded Moses that he should
build a tabernacle, that they should bear it with them in the wilderness, and
to build a house in the land of promise, that those ordinances might be
revealed which had been hid from before the world was.
39 Therefore, verily I say unto you, that your
anointings, and your washings, and your baptisms for the dead, and your solemn
assemblies, and your memorials for your sacrifices by the sons of Levi, and for
your oracles in your most holy places wherein you receive conversations, and
your statutes and judgments, for the beginning of the revelations and
foundation of Zion, and for the glory, honor, and endowment of all her
municipals, are ordained by the ordinance of my holy house, which my people are
always commanded to build unto my holy name.
40 And verily I say unto you, let this house be built
unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein unto my people;
41 For I deign to reveal unto my church things which
have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain
to the dispensation of the fulness of times.
42 And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things
pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it
shall be built.
43 And ye shall build it on the place where you have
contemplated building it, for that is the spot which I have chosen for you to
build it.
45 And if my people will hearken unto my voice, and unto
the voice of my servants whom I have appointed to lead my people, behold,
verily I say unto you, they shall not be moved out of their place.
46 But if they will not hearken to my voice, nor unto
the voice of these men whom I have appointed, they shall not be blest, because
they pollute mine holy grounds, and mine holy ordinances, and charters, and my
holy words which I give unto them.
47 And it shall come to pass that if you build a house
unto my name, and do not do the things that I say, I will not perform the oath
which I make unto you, neither fulfil the promises which ye expect at my hands,
saith the Lord.
48 For instead of blessings, ye, by your own works,
bring cursings, wrath, indignation, and judgments upon your own heads, by your
follies, and by all your abominations, which you practice before me, saith the
Lord.
49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a
commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons
of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and
cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them
from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more
at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings.
50 And the iniquity and transgression of my holy laws
and commandments I will visit upon the heads of those who hindered my work,
unto the third and fourth generation, so long as they repent not, and hate me,
saith the Lord God.
51 Therefore, for this cause have I accepted the
offerings of those whom I commanded to build up a city and a house unto my
name, in Jackson county, Missouri, and were hindered by their enemies, saith
the Lord your God.
52 And I will answer judgment, wrath, and indignation,
wailing, and anguish, and gnashing of teeth upon their heads, unto the third
and fourth generation, so long as they repent not, and hate me, saith the Lord
your God.
53 And this I make an example unto you, for your
consolation concerning all those who have been commanded to do a work and have
been hindered by the hands of their enemies, and by oppression, saith the Lord
your God.
54 For I am the Lord your God, and will save all those
of your brethren who have been pure in heart, and have been slain in the land
of Missouri, saith the Lord.
55 And again, verily I say unto you, I command you again
to build a house to my name, even in this place, that you may prove yourselves
unto me that ye are faithful in all things whatsoever I command you, that I may
bless you, and crown you with honor, immortality, and eternal life.” (D&C 124:28-55)
[A moment of silent reading passes]
Some of you have been tempted to
skim through quickly and have generally skipped over the passage. Once again I must remind you that as
entertaining as my narration of the text might be, it is critical that you have
a personal understanding of the text for yourself. I would ask you to carefully review it
again. Others of you have spent a great
deal of time reading the book as whole and are well versed in the history of
the church. You know doubt feel that you
already know exactly what the text says and have no need to read it again. May I ask you as well, to please take the
time to read the passage as if you had never seen it before. Do so prayerfully and with the idea in mind
that you do not fully understand it but are attempting to do so. Assume nothing! Do not even assume the most basic meaning of
the English words, but consider everything as if it is new to you. This is the approach all who would be taught
by the Lord through the scriptures must take.
Again I will give you more time to review.
[More time passes. Upon
seeing the last individual to look up from the pages and make eye contact,
begins again]
This is given in January of 1841. This is Joseph Smith as president of The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints providing a revelation to the
members of the church. Now I do not know
your specific beliefs about Joseph Smith or the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints. Your beliefs,
thoughts, and feelings may vary widely from that of your fellow jurors. For our purposes in examining this information,
it isn’t necessary that we agree on everything. You may differ. You may agree. I may differ.
I may agree. However, in 1841,
the audience receiving these words…they believed it was true information from
God. We only need to understand that the
people of Nauvoo accepted this as a revelation from God to them. They took upon themselves this as an
obligation from God to them and it is by their own standard that we are to
examine their own efforts as it relates to the story they have left behind for
us.
“For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to
and restore again that which was lost
unto you, or which he hath taken
away, even a fulness of the priesthood.” (D&C 124:28)
What did they, the members of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints lose at some point before January 1841? It is something they had previously! Otherwise it could not have been lost. Nor
would it need to be restored again, unless it had actually been tangibly
lost. In fact, it was not just lost…it
was actually taken away!
Who took it away? As
the people of Nauvoo accepted this as a revelation from the Lord, then we are
to understand that the Lord took it away.
They accepted Jesus Christ as The Lord.
Therefore Christ took something away from them. And He did not leave us to guess what it was
that was lost. We see that it was the “fulness
of the priesthood”.
They had lost the Fullness of the Priesthood!
In a moment we will take the time to define the phrase “Fulness
of the Priesthood”. We must study that
out carefully to determine just exactly what was lost (D&C 128:6-14). However, for this moment, I want to ask you a
question to ponder over as you research this topic. Also, I want to pose this same question to
the Prosecution who dragged my Defendant into this courtroom for these
trialsome proceedings. Where is the
revelation that has restored the Fulness of the Priesthood?
Where is the revelation after 1841 that restored that which
was lost and was even taken away by the Lord?
If the Lord gave it to begin with and the Lord promised to
restore it after they met certain conditions; then if they met those conditions
there ought to be a revelation declaring that restoration to enough of the individuals
involved that the church could be said to once again have the fulness of the
priesthood. The fact of the matter is that fulness of the
priesthood was not restored to the group as a whole. It can only be obtained on a case by case
basis until a sufficient number can together constitute the whole. This is why all evidence in regards to
fulness of the priesthood relates to one man receiving it. That is to say one man at a time, case by
case. My client maintains that fulness
of the priesthood can indeed be received on a personal basis directly from the
Lord. However, the Prosecution declares
that belief heresy by insisting that only they themselves as an institution can
authorize the use of any Priesthood, for the Lord and the Redeemer hath done
his work, and he hath given his power unto men (2 Nephi 28:5). As we see from the following, such a claim is
faulty:
“And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever;
and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because
that I have spoken one word ye need not
suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither
shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and
forever”(2 Nephi 29:9).
There is evidence of an attempted cover up to mask the fact that
there was a loss of the fulness of the priesthood among the individual members
of the group. For an example of this
cover up, turn to the index of the same book (Doctrine and Covenants). Find the entry titled “Fulness”. Search down the “Fulness” entry until you
read the reference for D&C 124:28.
What does it state? In my 1986
edition it states:
“f. of priesthood revealed”
Which has the following meaning:
“fulness of priesthood revealed”
Why doesn’t this entry state: “fulness of the priesthood
lost”? Verse 28 does not say anything
about revealing the fulness of the priesthood.
In fact, it states the opposite.
It states that the fulness of the priesthood is taken away! The exact opposite of revealed. And yet the index attempts to obscure the
meaning and lead us into an opposite conclusion if we are not careful. Is the index entry intentionally misleading
or is it a subconscious blinder to the actual information contained in the
referenced revelation?
Next reference D&C 1:30 in which it is stated “the only
true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the
Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually.”
This was the revelation of November 1831.
Something happened between November 1831 and January 1841
that displeased the Lord in regards to the church as whole. So much so that He took away the fulness of
the priesthood from so many individuals that the whole of them were described
as having lost the fulness of the priesthood.
We have no indication that He gave it back to a sufficient number of
individuals that the church at any time since could be described as retaining
the fulness of the priesthood.
Now for a moment, consider the phrasing of D&C 1:30 wherein
it states the terms “collectively and not individually”. In this case the Lord was pleased with the
church collectively but not necessarily with the members individually. Could the inverse be true? Can the Lord be pleased with members individually
but not the church collectively? Ladies
and Gentlemen of the Jury, I propose that the inverse can be true and that
Section 124 demonstrates this.
Examine D&C 124:49 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, that
when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name,
and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform
that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and
hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that
work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings.”
Now cross reference D&C 124:1 “Verily thus saith the
Lord unto you, my servant Joseph Smith, I
am well pleased with your offering and acknowledgments, which you have
made; for unto this end have I raised you up, that I might show forth my wisdom
through the weak things of the earth.”
There are many individuals who received a personalized
message from the Lord in Section 124.
Very few received a message that their offering was accepted by the
Lord, but Joseph did! Collectively the
church had placed itself under condemnation (See D&C 88:55-59), but on an individual
basis, relief from the condemnation was and is still available (D&C 132:
46-50).
Furthermore in regards to this consideration, take notice of
the verse following: “And the iniquity
and transgression of my holy laws and commandments I will visit upon the heads
of those who hindered my work, unto
the third and fourth generation, so long as they repent not and hate me, saith
the Lord God.” (D&C 124:50).
Cross reference that with verses 44 and 45 “If ye labor with
all your might, I will consecrate that spot that it shall be made holy. And if my
people will hearken to my voice and unto the voice of my servants whom I have appointed to lead my
people, behold, verily I say unto you, they
shall not be moved out of their place.”
Who is it that hindered the work? Really, who actually? Was it the Missourian mob? Or was it the Missourian Saints? Who is the enemy alluded to in verse 51? Well, the answer should be plain enough. God gave a promise that if the members will
hearken to God’s voice and to the voice of His servants, and if they actually
did so, they would not have been “moved out of their place”. It made no difference what the mobs of
Missouri may have attempted to do, God would have protected the people and
their work by His own promise and the work would not be hindered. It could not be hindered! Therefore the only enemy with any real
capacity to hinder the work was the Saints themselves. Their weapons to hinder the work are listed
in Section 124:46-47:
“Not hearken to the Lord’s voice”
“Nor unto the voice of these men whom the Lord appointed”
“Polluting the Lord’s holy grounds”
“Polluting the Lord’s holy ordinances”
“Polluting the Lord’s holy charters”
“Polluting the Lord’s holy words which He gave them”
By use of these tools the work could be hindered, and only
by these tools. Only the members of the
church had any capacity to handle and use these tools. Only the members had any real ability to
commit the crime (sin).
There is a condemnation warned of in Verse 50 in which the
Lord declares: “And the iniquity and
transgression of my holy laws and commandments I will visit upon the heads
of those who hindered my work, unto the
third and fourth generation, so long as they repent not, and hate me, saith
the Lord God.” This refers particularly
to the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and other
Mormon denominations and the descendants thereof. That is to say that the cursing pronounced is
placed directly upon the descendants of the Nauvoo church. The church is under condemnation, not the
Missouri citizens, not the Missouri mob, not the Federal Government. None of these could have raised up a
sufficient opposition to challenge God who promised that “they shall not be
moved out of their place” unless “they will not hearken to my voice”.
This raises the question, were they moved out of their
place? Did the church founded by Joseph
Smith that was built up in Nauvoo and promised that it would not be moved out
of its place if it would hearken, was it actually moved out of its place?
We know that they were not just moved, but also driven out
of their place.
Only the members of the church had any real potential to
hinder the work due to the stipulations and conditions necessary to accomplish
that work. This is a fact identified by
the Lord Himself in verses 31-32: “But I
command you, all ye my saints, to build a house unto me; and I grant unto you a
sufficient time to build a house unto me; and during this time your baptisms
shall be acceptable unto me. But behold
, at the end of this appointment your baptisms for your dead shall not be
acceptable unto me; and if you do not these things at the end of the
appointment ye shall be rejected as a
church, with your dead, saith the Lord your God.”
The church may have been acceptable in 1831 (D&C 1:30),
but by 1841 it had lost the fulness of the priesthood and was in jeopardy of
being rejected as a whole. The only
individuals with capacity to thwart that rejection were the members of the
church, if they met certain conditions.
One condition was tangible and easily measurable. That condition was to “build a house unto my
name [the Lord]” in “sufficient time”.
That one condition, if they could meet it, Ladies and Gentlemen, would
be sufficient according to the revelation to demonstrate that they do in fact
hearken unto the Lord. That they do in
fact, hearken unto the servants that He appoints. That they do not pollute His holy grounds,
holy ordinances and charters, nor His holy words.
And this Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury is the burden that
is before us today. We must answer this
question and we must answer it honestly.
Did the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints build
the temple in the appointed time?
[Dramatic pause created by reaching for a drink of water]
I am going to state the question again, because it is the
critical element that must be determined in deciding this case correctly. Did the church in Nauvoo build the temple in
the appointed time?
Now before we present the evidence, let us lay out the scale
by which we may determine if the early members met the terms offered by God or
if they did not. Here are the terms:
Requirement 1
“And again, verily I say unto you, let all my saints come
from afar. And send ye swift messengers,
and say unto them: Come ye, with all
your gold, and your silver, and your precious stones, and with all your
antiquities; and with all who have knowledge of antiquities, that will come,
may come, and bring the box- tree, and the fir-tree, and the pine-tree,
together with all the precious trees of the earth; And with iron, with copper,
and with brass, and with zinc, and with all your precious trees of the earth;
and build a house to my name, for the
Most High to dwell therein.”(D&C 124:25-27)
They are to build a house for the Most High to dwell
in. This is to be a temple. We see in the entry a list of materials
mirroring the construction of the temple of Solomon (1 Kings 6) or the temple
of Nephi (2 NE 5:16), and also like unto the Tabernacle of Moses (D&C
124:38). The purpose of this temple
would be for the Most High to dwell therein.
To “dwell therein” would at a minimum require that the Lord actually
visit the people within the halls of the temple.
Requirement 2
The temple is to be constructed within a certain time
period. Not an indefinite time period,
rather a “sufficient time to build a house unto me”. This is designated by the Lord. The temple must be completed by the deadline
set by the Lord.
Notice in what we have just read that the wages received
unto the church members is to be paid out in the form of “Baptisms for the
Dead”. During the grace period given to
build the temple, the Lord states that He will accept their Baptisms for the
Dead outside the temple, in the rivers as they had previously practiced. This practice was acceptable to the Lord
“only in the days of your poverty”.
However if the members did not complete the temple in the appointed
time, He declared the Baptisms for the Dead would not be acceptable unto
Him. If they did not meet the appointed
time to build the temple, then the payout would no longer be received. There was a time appointed and Baptism for
the Dead marked the grace period of that time.
Notice the seriousness of this clause in the contract. It is a three-fold warning pronounced by the
Lord.
(Verse 32) “if you do
not these things at the end of the appointment, ye shall be rejected as a church, with your dead, saith the Lord
your God.”
(Verse 33) “For verily I say unto you that after you have
had sufficient time to build a house unto me…your baptisms for your dead cannot be acceptable unto me, saith the
Lord.”
(Verse 35) “And after this time, your baptisms for the dead,
by those who are abroad, are not
acceptable unto me, saith the Lord.”
This is not something buried in the fine print! This is not nit-picking the details, nor is
it taking it out of context! The Lord
makes the terms very explicit. Build the
temple in the time designated. If you do
so, then Baptism for the Dead outside the temple will be acceptable before the
temple is built and inside the temple after it is completed. But once the time has expired, Baptism for the
Dead is no longer acceptable, neither in the temple nor outside the temple.
Requirement 3
“And I will show unto
my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood
thereof, and the place thereon it shall be built.” (D&C 124:42)
Joseph is the designated General Contractor. No other individual is designated to receive
the blue prints and authorization to construct this particular edifice.
Requirement 4
“And ye shall build it on the place where you have
contemplated building it, for that is
the spot which I have chosen for you to build it.” (D&C 124:43)
Nauvoo is the designated place. No other place is indicated will be
acceptable in the revelation. That place
is Nauvoo. No other temple can meet the
requirement. Nauvoo is the spot.
Nauvoo is the spot.
There is a sufficient but limited time period. Joseph will be shown how to accomplish the
work. Those are the terms.
Next review the additional benefits if they meet the
conditions.
Benefit 1
“If ye labor with all your might, I will consecrate that spot that it shall be made
holy.” (D&C 124:44)
Benefit 2
“And if my people will hearken unto my voice, and unto the
voice of my servants whom I have appointed to lead my people, behold, verily I
say unto you, they shall not be moved
out of their place.” (D&C 124:45)
Benefit 3
“For I deign to reveal
unto my church things which have been
kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things pertaining to the
dispensation of the fulness of times.” (D&C 124:41)
If acceptance of the ordinance of Baptism of the Dead could
be considered the salary for the Saints of Nauvoo, then these three would
constitute the Bonus after the completion of the work. The temple would be made holy, they would not
be moved out of their place and things revealed which have been kept hid since
the foundation of the earth would be given.
Let us also take note of how the final inspection and
acceptance of the House is conducted.
Turn your attention now to the Dedication of the Kirtland Temple. “Thanks be to thy name, O Lord God of Israel,
who keepest covenant and showest mercy unto thy servant s who walk uprightly
before thee, with all their hearts---Thou who hast commanded thy servants to
build a house to thy name in this place [Kirtland]. And now thou beholdest, O Lord, that thy
servants have done according to thy commandment. And now we ask thee, Holy Father, in the name
of Jesus Christ , the Son of thy bosom, in whose name alone salvation can be
administered to the children of men, we
ask thee, O Lord, to accept this house, the workmanship of the hands of us,
thy servants, which thou didst command
us to build.”
Did the Lord actually accept this house in Kirtland? What manner did the Lord demonstrate His
acceptance of the House?
“The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our
understanding were opened. We saw the Lord standing upon the
breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of
pure gold, in color like amber. His eyes
were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his
countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the
sound of the rushing of great waters, even the
voice of Jehovah, saying:
I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am your advocate with the
Father. Behold, your sins are forgiven
you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice. Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and
let the hearts of all my people rejoice, who have, with their might, built this
house to my name.
For behold, I have
accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself
to my people in mercy in this house.
Yea, I will appear unto my
servants, and speak unto them with mine
own voice, if my people will keep my commandments, and do not pollute this
holy house. Yea the hearts of thousands
and tens of thousands shall greatly rejoice in consequence of the blessings
which shall be poured out, and the endowment with which my servants have been
endowed in this house. And the fame of
this house shall spread to foreign lands; and this is the beginning of the
blessing which shall be poured out upon the heads of my people. Even so.
Amen.” (D&C 110:1-10)
Here is an example of how the Lord accepted the temple. The literal appearing of the Lord marks the
acceptance of the House. He stated it
during a personal visitation to the House wherein He would dwell. “I have accepted this house” (D&C
110:7).
And to prevent any misunderstanding, He clarifies what this
means. “Yea, I will appear unto my servants, and speak unto them with mine own voice, if my people will keep my
commandments, and do not pollute this holy house.”(D&C 110:8)
He will appear. He
will speak. He will speak with his own
voice. This is the exchange that marks
the acceptance of the work after it is completed.
The Nauvoo temple received no such visitation and no such
acceptance.
Returning our attention back to the Nauvoo temple, we find
the following verse “And again, I say unto you, how shall your washings be acceptable unto me, except ye perform
them in a house which you have built to my name?” (D&C 124:37)
There is that word again…”acceptable”. How does the Lord demonstrate His
acceptance? In Kirtland, He came in
person and declared, “I accept it”.
Therefore if the “washings” are only acceptable in a house built unto
His name. Can the washings begin in the house before the house is acceptable as
indicated by a visitation from the Lord?
The validity of the washings is in doubt if it is performed in the
temple which has not been “accepted” by the Lord.
Unfortunately, that is precisely what occurred. You see in January of 1841, they were
commanded to build the temple. During
that grace period, baptisms in the Missouri River were acceptable. Ten months later, October 1841, Baptisms in
the Missouri River were no longer acceptable.
The temple was not anywhere near completion. The saints had not put their best effort into
building the temple. The “salary” was
retracted. The saints of Nauvoo were
troubled when Joseph announced in the October 1841 conference that at that
moment there would be no more baptisms (for the dead) until after the temple
was completed. They had already received
fair compensation, now it was time for them to actually perform their own part
of the agreement. Thus far, they had
failed in their part of the agreement.
This is not a personal interpretation of the events. This is the actual history of the
church. You will find it in the record
offered by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as their own version
of events. See page 426 in Volume 4 of
the record titled “History of the Church”.
Keeping in mind that in this account, the church put forth the record
events in a manner that placed it in the greatest light possible. In the retelling of its own history, the
church admits that the Baptisms for the Dead were taken away from them in
October 1841.
“According to the minutes of the church held in Nauvoo on
October 2 1841, the Prophet declared it was the Lord’s will that baptisms for
the dead stop until they could be performed in His house” (History of the
Church, 4:426).
Now consider Exhibit One.
The Times and Seasons of October 1841.
This issue of the periodical was published as a report of
the General Conference of 1841. In this
conference Joseph Smith and members of the quorum of the twelve spoke to the
members of the Church. For modern day
members of the Church, this periodical would be the equivalent of the General
Conference issue of the Ensign Magazine.
Ten months after the revelation was given that Nauvoo saints had a
limited time to build the temple or else the Baptisms for the Dead would not be
acceptable the prophet makes the following announcement in Conference as
reported by The Times and Seasons:
“The Speaker then announced, “There shall be no more
baptisms for the dead, until the ordinance can be attended to in the font of
the Lord’s House; and the church shall not hold another general conference,
until they can meet in said house; for thus saith the Lord.”
This announcement came as a shock to the members of the
church. The time was running out for
them to complete the construction. The
closing of the grace period had begun.
What was formally acceptable was now no longer permissible. The wage or salary would no longer be paid by
the Lord. The Lord would no longer
accept their Baptisms for the deceased.
They would be required to finish the temple first.
Strangely, just weeks later a temporary font is set up in
the basement of the unfinished temple and baptisms resume. As if God is just another permissible parent
setting stipulations, declaring the consequences and then just as quickly back
peddling away from the consequences moments after children fuss under the
punishment.
“The basement housed a temporary baptismal font built by
Elijah Fordham. It was made from
Wisconsin Pine and mounted on twelve carefully crafted oxen. On 8 November the font was dedicated by
Brigham Young. It was first used two
weeks later when Elders Brigham Young, Heber C Kimball, and John Taylor
performed forty baptisms for the dead;
Elders Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, and George A Smith performed
the confirmations.”(Joseph Fielding Smith, Essentials in Church History, 27 ed,
pages 256-257)
Recall that the form of approval was given by example in the
Lord’s appearance in the Kirtland temple.
Recall also, that the Lord had only weeks prior reprimanded the saints
by telling them there will be no more Baptisms for the Dead until AFTER the
temple was completed. This places the
validity of these ordinances in question.
At the very best possible interpretation, it puts the Nauvoo Saints in a
precarious position of being warned that they are approaching a rapidly closing
deadline without having accomplished the task put to their responsibility.
Curiously Joseph Smith is not mentioned as participating in
these baptisms. However there is commentary
left by Joseph regarding additional details about Baptism for the Dead in the
form of letters recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 127 and 128. These letters follow a full year later in
1842. These demonstrate that Joseph may have been complicit to the ordinances
proceeding in the unfinished temple.
Thus at best, the October General Conference of 1841 could be seen as a
warning shot across the bow. The Lord
is serious about the time limitation; but He is Merciful enough to provide an
unmistakable warning that He cannot retract the laws of Justice. Time is
running out.
In 1842, “And again, verily thus saith the Lord: Let
the works of my temple, and all the works which I have appointed unto you, be
continued on and not cease; and let your diligence, and your perserverance,
and patience, and your works be redoubled, and you shall in nowise lose your
reward, saith the Lord of Hosts. And if
they persecute you, so persecuted they the prophets and righteous men that were
before you. For all this there is a
reward in heaven.” (D&C 127:4)
There was also a second warning shot fired. Why was Joseph giving instructions by letter
instead of directly in person?
“Forasmuch as the Lord has revealed unto me that my enemies,
both in Missouri and this State, were again in pursuit of me; and inasmuch as
they pursue me without cause, and have not the least shadow or coloring of
justice or right on their side in the getting up of their prosecutions against
me; and inasmuch as their pretensions are all founded in falsehood of the
blackest dye, I have thought it expedient and wisdom in me to leave the place for a short season, for my own safety and the safety
of this people. I would say to all
those with whom I have business, that I have left my affairs with agents and
clerks who will transact all business in a prompt manner, and will see that all
my debts are canceled in due time, by turning out property, or otherwise, as
the case may require, or as the circumstances may admit of. When I
learn that the storm is fully blown
over, then I will return to you again.” (D&C 127:1)
Recall that the Lord had said “I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining
to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be
built.” (D&C 124:42)
And recall that the promise of the Lord was “if my people
will hearken unto my voice, and unto the voice of my servants, whom I have appointed to lead my people, behold verily
I say unto you, they shall not be moved
out of their place.” (D&C 124:45)
It is no mere irony then that the one appointed to be shown
all things pertaining to this house has been completely removed out of his
place (in 1842). Note that while he is
in that state of removal what is it that weighs most heavily on his mind? It is the very thing that if completed would
prevent both he and his people from being removed due to the promises
associated. The people as yet have not
been removed, but their leader has been removed. The removal is at the moment in 1842 only
temporary, but if repentative action is not taken the removal would prove to be
permanent. This warning example is a
clear demonstration of the mercy of God whose philosophy is that the greatest
shall be least or in other words, the leader must carry the burdens of the
people. Thus Joseph was demonstrating
that the people would suffer the same consequences of removal if they did not
follow through with counsel given in his previous revelations regarding the
topic found in his very letters written in exile.
“Now, the nature of this ordinance consists in the power of the
priesthood, by the revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein it is granted
that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Or in otherwords, taking a different view of the translation, whatsoever
you record on earth shall be recorded in
heaven, and whatsoever you do not record on earth shall not be recorded in
heaven; for out of the books shall your dead be judged, according to their own
works, whether they themselves have attended to the ordinances in their own
propria persona or by the means of their own agents, according to the ordinance
which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the
world, according to the records which they have kept concerning their dead.
It may seem a very bold doctrine that we talk of --- a power
which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven. Nevertheless, in all the ages of the world,
whenever the
Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man
by actual
revelation, or any set of men, this power has always been
given. Hence, whatsoever those men did
in authority, in the name of the Lord, and did it truly and faithfully, and
kept a proper and faithful record of the same, it became a law on earth and in
heaven, and could not be annulled, according to the decrees of the great
Jehovah. This is a faithful saying. Who can hear it?” (D&C 128:8-9)
Again I would caution you to examine the terminology
carefully.
Where does the Power in the Priesthood come from?
It is from Jesus Christ.
He reveals that priesthood to those who receive it.
The term “dispensation” as used here does not refer to a
large block of years encompassing generation after generation who receive the
priesthood as a whole group from the authority of one man who received the revelation
at the beginning of the time period specified and hence established an unbroken
chain of authority. Joseph had already
rejected that notion as claimed by the Catholic Church. Joseph had rejected that notion by proclaiming
the apostasy of previous generations. The
term dispensation as used here refers to the dispensing of a portion of
priesthood authority to one individual.
For example, Christ dispensed the priesthood to Peter. That revealed priesthood would only qualify
that one man. Peter is given as just one
example (D&C 128:10). Joseph was
another (D&C 132:45-50). Nephi was
also yet another (Heleman 10:4-10).
These men by their examples and by their words demonstrated that it was
necessary to receive that power directly from the Lord. However, no other man could borrow it from
them. Peter’s authorization could not be
borrowed by Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846) which is why Joseph did not and could
not make an appeal to the Pope of his day to receive that authority. Joseph was instructed that he must receive
that authority for himself from the Lord in person. So too, we have no more capacity to borrow
authority from Joseph in our day than Joseph did to borrow from the Pope of his
day. But we have that invitation to
receive it from the Lord, as he did.
Hence we can determine that the conducting of the Baptism of
the Dead would be mere form only without eternal substance until the
individuals involved actually received a direct authorization from the Lord in
person.
Again, we cite to Kirtland as the example of the Lord
demonstrating how He accepts an offering once it is completed according to His
instructions (D&C 110:1-10).
Likewise we cite to the examples of how the fulness of the Priesthood is
received. Such examples include Peter,
Nephi, and Joseph Smith.
And again, in regards to the Nauvoo temple, we ask the
question, where is the Lord’s acceptance of the offering?
The acceptance never came before Joseph’s death. The General Contractor was removed from his
duty among the people of Nauvoo on June 27, 1844 (D&C 135:1). The only replacement appointed by the Joseph
was his brother Hyrum Smith and he too was taken from the people of Nauvoo just
moments before Joseph. Hence the church
of Nauvoo had lost its connection to the true vine until such time as someone
else could reestablish an actual relationship with the Lord.
“ And then at that day will they not rejoice and give praise
unto their everlasting God, their
rock and their salvation? Yea, at that day, will they not receive the strength and nourishment from the true vine? Yea, will they not come unto the true fold of God?”
(1 Nephi 15:15)
It is time to examine Exhibit B.
At this time I present to you the record of Heber C Kimball and
William Clayton.
You will find their record in the following publication:
An Intimate Chronicle:
The Journals of William Clayton, Edited by George D. Smith
By the time William Clayton came to Nauvoo, he had already
been a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for some
time. He served as a record keeper and
scribe for Joseph Smith personally during the Nauvoo years. He kept a journal consistently throughout his
life and many of the events of the early church can be understood by reviewing
his recording of his daily activities during those years. In fact, in later years he wrote a great
portion of the History of the Church under the direction of Brigham Young. His journals were used in the compiling of
that history.
For a portion of time in Nauvoo, William Clayton also served
as scribe for Heber C Kimball. Kimball
had been with the church from the Kirtland years as well as the Nauvoo
years. He would act as an apostle and
during the Utah years would serve in the First Presidency along with Brigham
Young. The following entry was written in
Heber’s journal. William Clayton served
as scribe for the entry. So we have two
witnesses to the event. Heber who
dictated the journal and William who put it to writing.
This entry is made over a year after Joseph is murdered.
“ [December 10, 1845]
This morning went up to the
Temple in company with my wife and sister [Sarah Ann] Whitney. The morning very fine and pleasant but
cold. I arrived at 10 o clock and found
a number of the brethren already present and some of their wives. President
[Brigham] Young engaged himself, by fixing the curtains on the East
Window. I assisted him with Sisters
Kimball, Pratt and Whitney. About half
after 10 o clock it was reported that priest
[Hamilton] Tucker (Catholic) and his associates were below waiting an interview
with the Twelve and Council. At 11
1/4 Mr. [Hamilton] Tucker and Mr. []
Hamilton were admitted into the upper room of the Temple accompanied by Bishop
Joseph L. Heywood who gave the gentlemen
an introduction to those present. The
propositions of the council in regard to the sale of our property were
presented to Mr. Tucker in writing who read them over and then handed them to
Mr. Hamilton who also read them. The gentlemen were then invited into
President Youngs room with myself, President Young, Willard Richards, Orson
Hyde, John Taylor, Amasa Lyman, John E. Page, George A. Smith, P[arley] P. Pratt, George Miller, John M. Birnhisel, Joseph L. Heywood, W[illiam] Clayton. Mr Tucker made some observations respecting
the two Main Rooms of the Temple. He
thought they were so high it would be difficult for a speaker. President Young replied and explained in
regard to that matter, also the pulpits, place for the Organ &c. and also the side rooms. Mr.
Hamilton asked a question as to the disposal of our public
buildings. In answer to which Elder Hyde
read aloud the written propositions and offered some explanations. A conversation then followed between Mr.
Tucker, President Young and Elder Hyde on the subject. President
Young remarked that we wish to realise from the sale of our property,
sufficient to take all our poor with us in a comfortable manner. If he was alone he could take his rifle and
make his way to the Pacific with little difficulty but at the same time he
don’t wish to do it. He would rather
have his wagons and go with all the rest of the Church comfortable.
Mr Tucker said he thought it would be wisdom to publish our
propositions in all the Catholic papers, and lay the matter plain before their
people. He should also think it
advisable for the Catholic Bishops to
send a competent committee to ascertain the value of our property
&c. at the same time they will use all their influence to effect a sale as
speedily as possible. He thinks they
have men in St Louis, New York and other Cities who could soon raise the amount we want, but the time is so very short, he
don’t know whether it can be done so soon.
He then asked if we would be willing to have our propositions published
in their papers. President Young replied we should have no
objections providing it was understood that we reserve the right to sell when we had a chance.
Elder P.P. Pratt thought it
would be well to talk over the propositions
and investigate them so as to have every thing perfectly and clearly
understood. My Hamilton wished to
ascertain upon what conditions they could obtain two of our public buildings,
one for a school and one for a Church.
They intended to write to the Bishop and wished to be able to supply him
with some information on this subject.
President Young said
he was well aware that there were many men in the Catholic Church who could
furnish all the money we want at once, but he supposed it was with them as
it was with a Mr. Butler who owned a wealthy Bank and asked why he did not sign
off more Bills. He supposed it was too
much trouble for them to dig their money out of their vaults. But he wished it understood that while we
make a liberal proposition to dispose of
our property we must have the means to
help ourselves away.
Mr. Tucker said their
object was to write to the Bishop and enclose our propositions in his letter,
at the same time advising him either to come himself or to appoint a committee
of efficient men to come and value the
property and enter into terms for a final agreement. He said the sum to be raised was large and
the time very short to the first of April but he thinks it can be
accomplished. He thinks they can be able
to give us a decided answer by the 25th inst.
President Young said he would like to add a note to our
proposals before it goes for publication to this effect that If they agree to our propositions we will lease them the
temple for a period of from five to thirty 5 years at a reasonable price, the
rent to be paid in finishing the Temple Block and the Block West of the Temple,
and keeping the Temple in repair.
The council agreed to the amendment which was accordingly
added to the proposals and handed to Mr. Tucker. Mr Tucker seemed to give much encouragement
that an arrangement would speedily be entered into, to accomplish what we
want. Both the gentlemen seem highly pleased with the Temple and the City and
appear to feel sanguine that the Catholics should get this Temple and vicinity.
About half past 12 they departed evidently feeling well
towards us.”
Having read this, it is necessary to consider the
facts. The Saints in Nauvoo on December
10 of 1845 are selling the temple. It is
up for sale. Who are they selling it
to? They are selling it to the
Catholics.
In 1820, when Joseph went into the grove and prayed, he
asked a question and he received an answer.
“My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that
I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of
myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above
me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had
never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they
were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds
were an abomination in his sight;
that those professors were all corrupt;
that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me,
they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness,
but they deny the power thereof.”
20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things
did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time.” (Pearl of Great Price,
Joseph Smith – History, Verse 18-19).
The Catholic Church would have been among the Sects that
Joseph would have considered joining before he received this answer from the
Lord. Arguably it would have been first
on the list to inquire after due to its size of population, political and
historical influence. Also, we must
consider that it made a claim to hold the authority of Jesus Christ, having
that authority passed down from Peter and every leader that was to follow. Yet the Lord told Joseph to join none of them
and that would most certainly included one of history’s most influential sects.
Yet here is Brigham Young still “hanging the curtains” and
taking the unfinished, undedicated, unaccepted temple and offering it for sale
to the most prominent Sect among all the Sects that God had “forbidden” Joseph
to join. Oh and by the way, said Brigham,
if you prefer to do so, you may rent it.
For the rental payment, all we ask is that you finish the Temple Block
and surrounding area for us.
He references several times the reason to sale. That reason being that they are moving out of
their place.
The Catholics are being asked to finish and complete the
“house unto the Lord’s name”. They are
being asked to finish the work because the original saints given the
commandment to build it are being moved out of their place.
What does that say about the fulfillment of Doctrine and
Covenants 124? Doctrine and Covenants
124 was indeed fulfilled, but in what manner was the promises of the Lord
fulfilled?
Were the Saints successful in fulfilling the requirements of
the Lord?
Or did the Saints fail in fulfilling the requirements of the
Lord?
The truth speaks for itself.
The records show that the four Requirements were not met in
the completion of the House of Nauvoo.
The Lord did not appear and declare that He accepted the House in Nauvoo
as He had in Kirtland. The House was not
completed before the closing of the grace period as forewarned in the
acceptance of Baptism for the Dead before October of 1841 and the ceasing of
Baptism for the Dead outside of the temple in that month. After that month, there was no accepted house
in which washings could also be accepted.
The General Contractor was removed from his appointment in the month of
June, 1844. And the “spot designated”
was lost as evidenced by the offer to sell and the church being driven out of
their place in 1846.
The Prosecutor has indicted my client on charges of
apostasy. And yet…and yet! What if in fact the prosecutor is the
apostate! What if that apostasy was committed by the Prosecutor in Nauvoo when
the Prosecutor was given the mandate to build a house unto the Lord? Now if that be the case, then the Prosecutor
has no standing and my client who only sought to speak of truth is no apostate
and is free to go. Ironically, so too
the Prosecutor goes free and walks out of this courtroom because there is no
man who cares to formally charge the Prosecutor with apostasy. Therefore such a case is not laid before us
to decide in this court. We don’t claim
the jurisdiction. We leave that
jurisdiction to God. We do make the claim
that the Prosecutor so too, ought to leave that charge in the jurisdiction of
God. Let the Great Judge decide who
shall be apostate. And therefore, Ladies
and Gentlemen of the Jury, I ask you to clear my client of this charge. Let all be free to connect to the Living Vine
in whatsoever manner the Lord may direct each individual.
I ask you if God be a God of Truth, can someone be an
apostate for seeking for and speaking of only the truth?
My client would have the following statement read in this
court today:
“If I have spoken that which is not true, bare witness of
the Lie; but if I have spoken truth, why call ye me an apostate?”
I now close and I hope to leave the following idea for you
to reflect on as you weigh the evidence:
All of this presupposes that there is a God.
All of this presupposes that God did in fact reveal himself
to Joseph.
All of this presupposes that God does in fact desire to
reveal himself to you.
And today, we have demonstrated that there is a “fulness of
the priesthood”.
And that you may also receive a fulness of the priesthood.
The failings of the past are not given that we may condemn
one another but they are given they we may learn from their mistakes and
thereby repent and in so doing we find that we may be redeemed. As too they are redeemed for the chain of
their errors are corrected in us and by so doing we assist in their redemption.
People of the Court, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, Your
Honor…for today that is all I would like to present.
Thank you for your attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment