Apologette
12-08-2013, 12:31 PM
Following are statements by two men who were Mormon "apostles." If anybody should know about the priesthood myths created by Joseph Smith, these men should:
"I never heard that an Angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic Priesthood until the year 1834[,] [183]5. or [183]6—in Ohio.… I do not believe that John the Baptist ever ordained Joseph and Oliver… (Whitmer, quoted in Early Mormon Documents, ed. Dan Vogel, 5:137).
In August, 1829, we began to preach the gospel of Christ.The following six elders had then been ordained: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowder, Peter Whitmer, Samuel H. Smith, Hyrum Smith and myself . . . We preached, baptized and confirmed members into the Church of Christ, from August, 1829, until April 6th, 1830, being eight months in which time we had proceeded rightly; the offices in the church being Elders, Priests and Teachers . . . We were as fully organized—spiritually—before April 6th as were on that day . . . .In no place in the word of God does it say that an Elder is after the order of Melchisedec, or after the order of the Melchisedec Priesthood.An Elder is after the order of Christ.This matter of “priesthood,” since the days of Sydney Rigdon, has been the great hobby and stumbling-block of the Latter Day Saints.Priesthood means authority; and authority is the word we should use.I do not think the word priesthoodis mentioned in the New Covenant of the Book of Mormon.Authority is the word we used for the first two years in the church—until Sydney Rigdon's days in Ohio.
This matter of the two orders of priesthood in the Church of Christ, and lineal priesthood of the old law being in the church, all originated in the mind of Sydney Rigdon.He explained these things to Brother Joseph in his way, out of the old Scriptures, and got Brother Joseph to inquire, etc.He would inquire, and as mouthpiece speak out the revelations just as they had it fixed up in their hearts.As I have said before, acording to the desires of the heart, the inspiration comes, but it may be the spirit of man that gives it . . . This is the way the High Priests and the “priesthood” as you have it, was introduced into the Church of Christ almost two years after its beginning—and after we had baptized and confirmed about two thousand souls into the church.(Whitmer, An Address To All Believers in Christ: By a Witness To The Divine Authenticity Of The Book Of Mormon, pp. 32, 33, 64)
I joined the church in 1831. For years I never heard of John the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver. I heard not of James, Peter, and John doing so . . . [A]s to the story of John, the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver on the day they were baptized; I never heard of it in the church for years, altho I carefully noticed things that were said (McLellin, quoted in Grant Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, pp.224-25).
Why should true blue Mormons simply ignore the statements by these men? Oh, they might whine about "apostates," but that's hooey! Why believe Whitmer at all then when he claimed to have been a Book of Mormon plates witness? The Mormons you meet today have no clue about the testimonies of early Mormons, and when they do encounter them on apologetic boards like this they simply dismiss them out of hand if they contradict the current myths.
But for those not as indoctrinated as the average TBM, I think Whitmer's and McClellin's words have survived to condemn the very system which shackled them to a false religious system. It's important to evaluate their statements in light of Mormon claims to have a "restored" priesthood.
"I never heard that an Angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic Priesthood until the year 1834[,] [183]5. or [183]6—in Ohio.… I do not believe that John the Baptist ever ordained Joseph and Oliver… (Whitmer, quoted in Early Mormon Documents, ed. Dan Vogel, 5:137).
In August, 1829, we began to preach the gospel of Christ.The following six elders had then been ordained: Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowder, Peter Whitmer, Samuel H. Smith, Hyrum Smith and myself . . . We preached, baptized and confirmed members into the Church of Christ, from August, 1829, until April 6th, 1830, being eight months in which time we had proceeded rightly; the offices in the church being Elders, Priests and Teachers . . . We were as fully organized—spiritually—before April 6th as were on that day . . . .In no place in the word of God does it say that an Elder is after the order of Melchisedec, or after the order of the Melchisedec Priesthood.An Elder is after the order of Christ.This matter of “priesthood,” since the days of Sydney Rigdon, has been the great hobby and stumbling-block of the Latter Day Saints.Priesthood means authority; and authority is the word we should use.I do not think the word priesthoodis mentioned in the New Covenant of the Book of Mormon.Authority is the word we used for the first two years in the church—until Sydney Rigdon's days in Ohio.
This matter of the two orders of priesthood in the Church of Christ, and lineal priesthood of the old law being in the church, all originated in the mind of Sydney Rigdon.He explained these things to Brother Joseph in his way, out of the old Scriptures, and got Brother Joseph to inquire, etc.He would inquire, and as mouthpiece speak out the revelations just as they had it fixed up in their hearts.As I have said before, acording to the desires of the heart, the inspiration comes, but it may be the spirit of man that gives it . . . This is the way the High Priests and the “priesthood” as you have it, was introduced into the Church of Christ almost two years after its beginning—and after we had baptized and confirmed about two thousand souls into the church.(Whitmer, An Address To All Believers in Christ: By a Witness To The Divine Authenticity Of The Book Of Mormon, pp. 32, 33, 64)
I joined the church in 1831. For years I never heard of John the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver. I heard not of James, Peter, and John doing so . . . [A]s to the story of John, the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver on the day they were baptized; I never heard of it in the church for years, altho I carefully noticed things that were said (McLellin, quoted in Grant Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, pp.224-25).
Why should true blue Mormons simply ignore the statements by these men? Oh, they might whine about "apostates," but that's hooey! Why believe Whitmer at all then when he claimed to have been a Book of Mormon plates witness? The Mormons you meet today have no clue about the testimonies of early Mormons, and when they do encounter them on apologetic boards like this they simply dismiss them out of hand if they contradict the current myths.
But for those not as indoctrinated as the average TBM, I think Whitmer's and McClellin's words have survived to condemn the very system which shackled them to a false religious system. It's important to evaluate their statements in light of Mormon claims to have a "restored" priesthood.