Matt's Mormon Thread

[downtown]

I and my wife dropped into the local Mormon service this morning (dressed up of course). We stayed for the sacrament and the intro gospel course, but had to leave before the mysterious third hour (because she was falling asleep).

I thought it was great how regular congregants would speak during the sacrament with their own stories, etc. instead of some paid priest. Definitely it was very noisy with all the kids though, but I suppose people just get used to it. The gospel class was good also, really nice people. I'll probably go again next week (although my wife will likely just hang around for sacrament to give me company since she's pretty strongly non-Christian).

hey, glad you enjoyed it. I'll just give you a heads up...after 18 years, i never really got used to the whole baby thing. I didnt know what to do when i went to a student ward that didnt have them

 

[Sir Bugsy]

All prophets were men just like us, and by definition sinners (except for Jesus of course, who was perfect). Why should the fact that a man is imperfect exclude him from being a prophet? It's not a question of just Joseph Smith, you would have to throw out Moses, etc.

If Joseph Smith had claimed he was just a prophet, I don't think people would be having so many problems with him. He has essentially rewritten all Christian doctrine and said that it is his way or the highway. Some examples:

"I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book." (History of the Church, Vol. 4, page 461) Note: The Book of Mormon has been changed over 4000 times since Smith first published it.

"Hence, the doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine. It is all over the face of the Bible . . . Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many . . . but to us there is but one God--that is pertaining to us; and he is in all and through all" (History of the Church, Vol. 6, page 474).

"In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 5).

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens...I say, if you were to see him to-day, you would see him like a man in form -- like yourselves, in all the person, image, and very form as a man....it is necessary that we should understand the character and being of God, and how he came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity, I will refute that idea, and will take away and do away the veil, so that you may see....and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 3).

"I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left . . . " (History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 394.) NOTE: This is a false phophecy

"God is in the still small voice. In all these affidavits, indictments, it is all of the devil--all corruption. Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on the top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet . . . " (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 408-409).

Moses only claimed to have received the ten commandents from the Lord. He had tablets as evidence. Joseph Smith said he received he entire Book of Mormon from God and he didn't show any one the plates. In fact, in all of the eyewitness accounts, he didn't even get anything from the plates. He got the words from looking at a stone he kept in his hat. I can cite sources for this if you would like.

Edit: See testimony of Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Emma Smith-Bidamon.

 

[Merzbow]

Moses may have had the tablets, but we certainly don't have them now. Joseph Smith may have had the golden plates, again we don't have them now. So what? If you don't have faith that Moses was a prophet, he was just some dude who walked up a mountain and scribbled something on some tablets, instead of having being given these tablets by God. If you don't have faith that Joseph Smith was a prophet, he just made stuff up as he was looking into a hat, instead of having the text of the plates translated to him by God directly.

My point is you're missing the point. If you're an athiest and discount completely the utility of faith, then every possible scenario of God prophesying to anyone is absurd, whether they are looking into a hat or standing on a mountain.

If you do accept the possibility of true faith, then admit that it's possible for either of these men to be a prophet, in fact any of the various prophets in the Bible. BOTH the books of the Bible and the Book of Mormon have undergone thousands of changes over the years - changes which have been almost exclusively grammatical and not textual in the case of the BoM. Who knows how many MORE changes the ancient books of the Old Testament have gone through since the days when they were first dictated/written/whatever by their various authors, sitting in desert huts, riding camels, living in palaces, who may or may not have been looking into hats ...?

And it's not manifestly obvious the BoM was a forgery - as it would be if there were numerous eyewitness reports that JS was sitting there with a Bible in one hand and a pen and paper in the other. Instead, the extant witness reports corroborate JS's claims. Of course they all might have been in cahoots, but I reiterate my point that in the absence of OBVIOUS forgery it's just going to come down to faith.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

refuting the above points made by Merzbow:

Point #1 - Moses actually showed the Israelites his tablets. They placed them in the Ark of the Covenent and they had them until Israel was conquered by Babylon. Then they disappeared. Thousands of people actually saw them. No one other than Joseph Smith has ever seen the golden plates.

Point #2 - I realize we all have to rely on our faith when it comes to religion. I also try to utilize my mind and I question everything. Being an engineer, I look at evidence and look for truth. For example, I do not believe in the creation story. Does that mean I don't believe that man and this world and this universe was not created by God? No. I believe that we can't possibly begin to understand God. Evolution just shows us one of his methods.

Point #3 - the only changes the Bible has undergone have been due to translations. Joseph Smith stated that "the Book of Mormon was the most correct book on earth." If that was true why did it have to be changed. Some are very significant changes.

Point #4 - I shall quote some of the eyewitness accounts. From Emma Smith Bidamon, Joseph Smith's wife, as interviewed by her son, Joseph Smith III:

In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us...

(The Word of God, Dan Vogel, p. 98-99)

From Smith's brother William. Note: William calls the sear stone the "Urim and Thummim":

The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God

(A New Witness for Christ in America, Francis Kirkham, 2:417)

Why dig up the plates if you aren't going to look at them?

From Martin Harris, one of the scribes Joseph Smith used to record the writing on the plates:

By aid of the Seer Stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say 'written;' and if correctly written, the sentence would disappear and another appear in its place; but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used

(Comprehensive History of the Church, Brigham H. Roberts, 1:29)

From this account, you would conclude that the Book of Mormon would never have to be changed.

If you want to talk about questionable documents how about the "Book of Abraham". Here is an excerpt from an article by Matthew Slick:

In July of 1835, an Irishman named Michael Chandler brought an exhibit of four Egyptian mummies and papyri to Kirtland Ohio, then the home of the Mormons. The papyri contained Egyptian hieroglyphics. In 1835 hieroglyphics were unreadable.

As Prophet and Seer of the Church, Joseph Smith was given permission to look at the papyri scrolls in the exhibit and to everyone's shock, revealed that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt" (History of the Church, Vol. 2: 236. July 1835). The Church bought the exhibit for $2400. Joseph finished the translation of the Book of Abraham some time later, but the book of Joseph was never translated. The papyri were lost soon afterwards and thought to have been destroyed in a fire in Chicago in 1871. There was, therefore, no way to validate Joseph's translation. If the papyri were re-discovered and translated it would either prove or disprove the abilities of Joseph as a prophet of God. After all, he was supposed to be a prophet and have the abilities of a Seer as the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham supposedly proved.

In October of 1880 The Pearl of Great Price, a collection of writings, which contained the book of Abraham, was recognized as scripture by the Mormon Church.

To every one’s surprise, in 1966 the papyri were rediscovered in one of the vault rooms of the New York’s metropolitan Museum of Art. The Deseret News of Salt Lake City on Nov. 27, 1967 acknowledged the rediscovery of the papyri. On the back of the papyri were "drawings of a temple and maps of the Kirtland, Ohio area."(Improvement Era, January 1968, p. 25; as cited in "..by His Own Hand Upon Papyrus" by Charles M. Larson, Institute for Religious Research, Grand Rapids, MI 49505-4604, 1992.) There could be no doubt that this was the original document from which Joseph Smith translated the book of Abraham.
With the papyri rediscovered and Egyptian hieroglyphics decipherable since the late 1800's, it would then be an easy task of translating the papyri and proving once and for all that Joseph Smith was a prophet with the gift of "Seer" as he and the Mormon church have claimed. This would then prove the truth of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham and would vindicate Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God.

Joseph Smith copied three drawings from the Egyptian scrolls, labeled them Facsimile No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3, and incorporated them into the Book of Abraham with explanations of what they were. Egyptologists have viewed the drawings and found Joseph Smith's interpretation of them to be wrong. But, the Mormons, in defense of the sacred book, maintained that the Facsimiles alone were not sufficient to prove that Joseph Smith was erring in his translating abilities. With the rediscovery of the papyri, not only were there the same drawings in the scrolls, but so was the text from which Joseph Smith made his translation. It was now possible to absolutely determine the accuracy of Smith's translating abilities.

Facsimile No. 1:

Joseph Smith said that Facsimile No. 1 was of a bird as the "Angel of the Lord" with "Abraham fastened upon an altar," "being offered up as a sacrifice by a false priest. The pots under the altar were various gods "Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, Pharaoh," etc.
In reality, this is "an embalming scene showing the deceased lying on a lion-couch."(Joseph Smith Among the Egyptians, by Wesley P. Walters. 1973, Reprinted by Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Box 1884, Salt Lake City, Utah 84110.)
In the original papyri, this drawing is attached to hieroglyphics (See figure A) from which Joseph derived the beginning of the book of Abraham which begins with the words, "In the Land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my father, I, Abraham, saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence"(1:1). In reality, the hieroglyphics translate as, "Osiris shall be conveyed into the Great Pool of Khons -- and likewise Osiris Hor, justified, born to Tikhebyt, justified -- after his arms have been placed on his heart and the Breathing permit (which [Isis] made and has writing on its inside and outside) has been wrapped in royal linen and placed under his left arm near his heart; the rest of the mummy-bandages should be wrapped over it. The man for whom this book was copied will breath forever and ever as the bas of the gods do."(Dr. Klaus Baer, The Breathing Permit of Hor. A Translation of the Apparent Source of the Book of Abraham, p. 119-120 as cited in Joseph Smith Among the Egyptians, by Wesley Walters.)
"It is the opening portion of an Egyptian Shait en Sensen, or Book of Breathings . . . a late funerary text that grew out of the earlier and more complex Book of the Dead." "This particular scroll was prepared (as determined by handwriting, spelling, content, etc.) sometime during the late Ptolemaic or early Roman period (circa 50 B.C. to A.D. 50)." (Larson, Charles M., by his own hand upon papyrus, Institute for Religious Research, Grand Rapids, Mich. 1992, p. 62.)

Figure A

Figure A is a professional reconstruction of the original (Figure B). Note the hieroglyphics on the right side from which Joseph Smith began his translation of the Book of Abraham.

In actuality, it "depicts the mythical embalming and resurrection of Osiris, Egyptian god of the underworld. Osiris was slain by his jealous brother Set, who cut up his body into 16 pieces and scattered them....The jackal-headed god Anubis is shown embalming the body of Osiris on the traditional lion-headed couch so that he might come back to life..." (Larson, p. 102.)

Figure B

Figure B (to the right) shows a reprint of the actual papyrus used by Joseph Smith
Note the areas where the Papyrus has been lost. It is in these that Joseph Smith "finished" the drawing resulting in Facsimile No. 1. His restoration, according to Egyptologists, reveals a complete lack of understanding of Egyptian practice and theology.

Facsimile No. 2

As is explained by Joseph Smith and included in the Pearl of Great Price, the second drawing contains different scenes which Joseph Smith interpreted. They vary: "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." "Stands next to Kolob, called by the Egyptians Oliblish, which is the next grand governing creation near to the celestial or the place where God resides." "God, sitting upon his throne, clothed with power and authority." "...this is one of the governing planets also, and is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, and to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key..."
But again scholarship disagrees with Joseph’s rendition. "It is actually a rather common funerary amulet termed a hypocephalus, so-called because it was placed under (hypo) a mummy’s head (cephalus). Its purpose was to magically keep the deceased warm and to protect the body from desecration by grave robbers." (Larson, p. 104.)

Facsimile No. 3

According to Smith, this drawing shows "Abraham sitting upon Pharaoh’s throne, by the politeness of the king, with a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood...King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head...Signifies Abraham in Egypt...Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince..."
But this is not what the Egyptologists say is the meaning of the Facsimile No. 3 is. Instead, it shows, "the deceased being led before Osiris, god of the dead, and behind the enthroned Osiris stands his wife Isis." (Walters, p. 29.)

It should be quite obvious that present scholarship has revealed that Joseph Smith did not translate the Book of Abraham by the power of God as he had claimed. It follows that if he did not translate the Book of Abraham by the power of God, then it would be very easy to conclude that he did not translate the Book of Mormon by the power of God either.

When Joseph first gave his translation, hieroglyphics were undecipherable. Today they are. He was safe in saying anything he wanted to and there would be no way of proving him wrong. But with the resurfacing of the same papyri he used to do his Book of Abraham translation, and the fact that he did not in any way do it correctly, should be proof enough that Joseph Smith lied about his abilities from God. He has been shown to be a false prophet.

Obvious forgery? You be the judge.

Edit: typos

 

[El_Machinae]

That 'false prophecy' bit jumped out at me. Isn't the sign of a prophet that they are never wrong?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Can you prove that any Israelites saw the tablets? After all it was thousands of years ago and the only record that they existed are the writings themselves, which could certainly be faked. 11 people saw the plates, and left written statements to that effect that can be easily verified, and are not shrouded in the mists of history.

Almost all the '4000' changes from the first printed edition of the Book of mormon to the current one are grammatical, and are actually to remove transcription errors that arose between the original manuscript of the translation and the first printing - and are thus more correct (Joseph Smith said 'most correct', but he meant more doctrinally than in a proofreading sense, as you seem to think).

The parts of the papyrus now held are not the parts that Joseph Smith translated. It is pretty easy to say that the fact that they are different proves him false, but that assumes a lot about the process of translating ancient scripture. It is entirely reasonable to think that possibly he didn't need to translate exactly, word for word, as he was doing it by the power of God, not his own knowledge (although, as in the case of the Book of Mormon, you seem to think this impossible) and I am not going to say how one can or cannot translate through the power of God.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

@El_Machinae: no ancient prophet ever made the claim that the sign of a true prophet was to never be wrong. It certainly helps the Biblical prophets that not everything they said was written (although there are still inconsistencies) but no one said prophets had to always be right until Joseph Smith came along and his critics claimed that any error on his part invalidated everything.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

The parts of the papyrus now held are not the parts that Joseph Smith translated. It is pretty easy to say that the fact that they are different proves him false, but that assumes a lot about the process of translating ancient scripture. It is entirely reasonable to think that possibly he didn't need to translate exactly, word for word, as he was doing it by the power of God, not his own knowledge (although, as in the case of the Book of Mormon, you seem to think this impossible) and I am not going to say how one can or cannot translate through the power of God.

How can you say that? The facsimilies that appear in the Pearl of great Price match.

I don't believe I can shake your faith Eran. I am just trying to show any non-Mormon readers that there are very many questionable aspects of the LDS Church. If someone wishes to investigate the teachings and doctrine of the Mormons with an open mind, you come away with more questions than answers.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

No, what you get out of investigating the LDS church depends entirely on what you bring to it. I actually have looked at the church critically, and found answers to more 'questions' than most of the church's detractors have ever had.

Regarding the Pearl of Great Price specifically, certainly it is not a scientifically rigorous translation of an ancient text, and if it claimed to be, that would be a problem. I am 99% certain that it is an established fact that the specific parts of the papyrus in question that we have now are not what Joseph Smith translated, and as far as the facsimiles go, what they may have meant to the Egyptians who made them and what God intended for them to mean to Joseph don't have to be the same thing. Again, whether the exact words on the papyrus matched what God inspired Joseph to write (if in fact He so did) is irrelevant because its purpose is completely different.

 

[El_Machinae]

@El_Machinae: no ancient prophet ever made the claim that the sign of a true prophet was to never be wrong.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

"`However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. (21) And in case you should say in your heart: "How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?" (22) when the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak. With presumptuousness the prophet spoke it. You must not get frightened at him.'"

I agree that it's not 100% clear interpretation, but unless it means "If it was wrong, then it clearly wasn't God", I would think it to mean "someone who is wrong was never a prophet"

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

It's not 'someone who was wrong was never a prophet', it's 'someone who is wrong while speaking in the name of God isn't a prophet'. Sure, Joseph Smith said lots of things that turned out not to be true, but what he claimed as prophecies have a much better sucess rate (100%, actually, although some claim otherwise - that may be another debate), just like Moses spouting his mouth off didn't invalidate his calling, but if he had claimed a false opinion as prophesy, that would have.

 

[El_Machinae]

'someone who is wrong while speaking in the name of God isn't a prophet'.

Yeah, that's what I meant. Sorry. But if Smith was wrong while claiming to be speaking for God, doesn't that mean he wasn't a prophet?

PS: not attacking, just that 'false prophet' was a hot button topic when I was studying this.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Yes, IF he was wrong while claiming to speak for God, then he wouldn't be a prophet. However, this has never been unequivocably shown to be the case. There are some prophesies he made that have been interpreted by some as being false, but that is highly debatable - in all of those cases I think it is clear that he wasn't actually shown to be wrong.

 

[Methos]

@SirBugsy: Interesting article. I'll have to google Matthew Slick tomorrow. Thanks.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Smith had a lot more than the one false prophecy I cited earlier. I am citing from the Institute of Religious Research. How about these gems:


Prophecy # 1 — The Coming of the Lord

President Smith then stated that the meeting had been called, because God had commanded it; and it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit. . . . it was the will of God that they should be ordained to the ministry and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh — even fifty six years should wind up the scene.

(History of the Church, Vol. 2, page 182).

This prophecy was spoken by Joseph Smith in 1835, and recorded by Oliver Cowdery. The fifty-six years were passed by 1891.

Prophecy # 2 — David W. Patten to go on a mission

Verily, thus saith the Lord: It is wisdom in my servant David W. Patten, that he settle up all his business as soon as he possibly can, and make a disposition of his merchandise, that he may perform a mission unto me next spring, in company with others, even twelve including himself, to testify of my name and bear glad tidings unto the world.

(Doctrine & Covenants 114:1)

This prophecy was made on April 17, 1838. David W. Patten died in October of 1838 and thus never went on a mission the following spring.

Prophecy # 3 — Congress to be broken up as a government

While discussing the petition to Congress, I prophesied, by virtue of the holy Priesthood vested in me, and in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that, if Congress will not hear our petition and grant us protection, they shall be broken up as a government, and God shall damn them, and there shall be nothing left of them — not even a grease spot.

(Millennial Star, Vol. 22, p. 455. See also History of the Church (HC), vol. 6, p. 116, though when this prediction was incorporated into the official history, Mormon Church leaders decided to leave out the "grease spot" part.)

The petition was not heard nor was protection granted (Deseret News, Vol. 1, p. 59). Yet, Congress was never broken up and continues to function to this day. It is interesting that the compilers of History of the Church, added an editorial note in an attempt to soften or explain this prophecy. They state that: "This prediction doubtless has reference to the party in power; to the ‘government’ considered as the administration;" (note, p. 116). According to the note in HC, this means the Democratic Party, which was in control at the time. However, the prediction is that "Congress shall be broken up as a government" and Congress is made up of representatives from both parties. The Saints were making an appeal to the General Government, not to the Democratic Party, a point made by a summary statement in the left margin beside this prophecy as it is recorded in HC.

Prophecy #4 —Finding Treasure in Salem, Massachusetts

This prophecy is recorded in Doctrine & Covenants Section 111. The introduction to this prophecy, found at the beginning of Section 111 states:

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Salem, Massachusetts, August 6, 1836. HC 2:465-466. At this time the leaders of the [LDS] Church were heavily in debt due to their labors in the ministry. Hearing that a large amount of money would be available to them in Salem, the Prophet, Sidney Rigdon, Hyrum Smith, and Oliver Cowdery traveled there from Kirtland, Ohio, to investigate this claim, along with preaching the gospel. The brethren transacted several items of church business and did some preaching. When it became apparent that no money was to be forthcoming, they returned to Kirtland. Several of the factors prominent in the background are reflected in the wording of this revelation.

1. I, the Lord your God, am not displeased with your coming this journey, notwithstanding your follies.

2. I have much treasure in this city for you, for the benefit of Zion, and many people in this city, whom I will gather out in due time for the benefit of Zion, through your instrumentality.

3. Therefore, it is expedient that you should form acquaintance with men in this city, as you shall be led, and as it shall be given you.

4. And it shall come to pass in due time that I will give this city into your hands, that you shall have power over it, insomuch that they shall not discover your secret parts; and its wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours.

5. Concern not yourselves about your debts, for I will give you power to pay them.

No treasure was ever discovered, nor did Salem ever fell into the hands of the Mormons.

So not only has Joseph Smith been wrong on several occasions, but the Mormon church has institutionalized these errors in their scripture. What else was he wrong about?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

The treasure is generally understood by members of the church to be both the numbers of converts found in Salem and the geneological records that were so helpful.

As far as David Patten, and many other instances, there is a difference between a command and a prediction - Patten was commanded to get ready for a work to be done in a year (it was, by the way), not told that he would.

The only reference I ever heard to the '56 year' thing before was in D&C 130, which is clearly not a prophesy of the Second Coming. Could you give more context? I don't have a copy of 'History of the Church' and could use your help.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Sounds like you need to spend $42 at Amazon and learn about the history of your faith.

History of the Church

Might be a copy at your local ward as well. I have mine from a Mormon lady who was a dear friend, and after she read it left the faith.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Smith claimed to be speaking for the Lord. "I, the Lord your God" and "Verily, thus saith the Lord:" If he was speaking for the Lord, then the Lord wouldn't have let David Patten die and he would have delievered up Salem to the LDS Church. To my unschooled eyes, those prophesies seem pretty straight forward.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That's not at all what I meant. I have read parts of the 'History of the Church', but I thought that since you seemed to be quoting it you would be able to do so in more detail.

I actually looked up that (possible) prophesy in more detail, and discovered that it is somewhat problematic, as there are no clear first-hand accounts that that it actually what Joseph said. Apparantly many thought that that is what he said, and many members were even disapponted when 1892 came around, but that doesn't mean he said it.

As I don't have a copy of 'History of the Church' (but you're right, I think I'll get one) I'm not sure that is what it actually says - like I said, since you seem to, could you give the exact quote as much as copyright law will allow?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

And as far as David Patten: you are assuming that if the Lord issues a command to a group, He will make sure that all involved will be able to; I am not so sure.

Concerning D&C 111 and Salem: some of the church leaders thought there was treasure (ie money) in Salem and so went without consulting the Lord; when they were disappointed, they got D&C 111 which explained that even though there was no money, they would still benefit from the trip; 'I will give this city into your hands' doesn't automatically mean 'you will have physical control over the city' but also 'you will have access to what you need'. In other words, some though there was financial treasure but Joseph, speaking prophetically on behalf of God, corrected them and said that the treasure was spiritual, and mentioned its 'wealth of gold and silver shall be yours', but in 'due time' - ie no time limit is set.