Question: Is there any contemporaneous record of the restoration of the priesthood? Journal entry or otherwise? Do the journals of those that were present with JS for the event exist and/or are they available? My recollection is no on the first. Not sure on the last. It has been awhile since I read up on this.

Many of the old journals were gathered by the church under tge pretext of preserving them for posterity.

These journals were never seen again and are presumed destroyed.

"Many of the old journals were gathered by the church under the pretext of preserving them for posterity.

These journals were never seen again and are presumed destroyed."

I see: "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"--

Unless it's because...maybe you got rid of the evidence of the evidence of absence?

No. In one of the most despicable and deceitful moves. Many trusting members turned over treasured family journals with a promise they'd be preserved.

Then suddenly no one had access to them.

Fortunately many were copied or transcribed prior to turni g ghem in.

My great great grandmother's talks about the second anointing and confirms several times she was sealed to Joseph. The church can't back away from her story as her journals have been made public and published at several times.

Unfortunately they begin after Nauvoo.

I was waiting for someone else with more information to respond, and I hope someone will, but here are the basics. No, there were no contemporary records of the event. As usual with Joseph Smith, he made it up as he went along to get him out of a tight spot and/or to impress a new group of dupes. Yes, if Peter, James and john appeared to me I would remember the exact date and would write it in my journal, and if I had a church I would announce it to everybody that very day. But in fact the church went along for years after the "fact" before Joseph retroactively made the claim. Just like his First Vision and Aaronic Priesthood and all the rest.

Contemporaneous record of Lyman Wight ordaining JS to the M priesthood in 1831.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2036458

Excellent! Thanks and also for links to good reference trail.

Are you aware of when angelic appearances where first mentioned?

MormonThink probably has this well covered already, but…

The earliest of which I'm aware is Smith's earliest (1832) "First Vision" story, where he claims to have been visited by angels sometime in the indefinite past.

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-circa-summer-1832/1

[As an aside, there's also Oliver Cowdery's letter in the Feb. 1835 Messenger & Advocate that ignored the FV entirely, explaining that the 1823 bedroom visit was First Contact.]

I don't know of any contemporaneous claims of angels while the BOM was being written. I think the BOM was concocted simply as bible fanfic, sort of a me-too version of Ethan Smith and Solomon Spaulding, and called a "translation of ancient records" simply as a marketing hook. But when the book and its copyright wouldn't sell, Smith & friends decided to start up a church. Only then did they need to come up with a theological justification (i.e., angels) for its existence.

That is in relation to the first vision, which was recorded approximately 12 years after the claimed event and in which there was one angelic visitor.

My question is regarding the restoration of the priesthood - when was the first record, not a retrospective one - of angelic visitors restoring the priesthood.

And yes, I have no doubts regarding the origins of the book of Mormon - the copying of parts/styles several published writings, mingled with elements of Methodism, frontier revivalist narratives, and the muddled thoughts of a charismatic sex cult founder.

Ever want to distress a TBM just pull out a copy of "The Late War" and ask them to read the first few pages...I keep mine next to the BoM in the living room book shelf.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2018 05:04PM by mannaz.

Along with Ethan Smith and Soloman Spaulding we must include Emanuel Swedenburg "Heaven and Hell and It's Wonders"

Thanks! I’ve done a little more investigation. Here are churches claims.
Aaronic Priesthood Restored: May 15, 1829
Melchizedek Priesthood Restored: May 1829 (end of month).
In Grant Palmer’s book. No written documentation in letters and journals etc. until mid-1830’s that claim angelic appearances in resroration. JS and OC did claim priesthood was restored in 1830’s around when church was organized. But I am not sure of where/when this is recorded. Mentions of higher & lower priesthood or office of Elder do not show up until awhile after 1830.
Did not appear in printing of Book of Commandments in 1833.
Did not appear in first printing of D&C in 1835.
Note: MormonThink was my first stop find references.

Does anyone have any more recent information? Did Oliver Cowdery keep a journal in 1829?

“Seer? Sucker!” notes above Lyman Writes ordination to Melchizedek Priesthood in June 1831 conference minutes (source: Joseph Smith papers). Thanks.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/28/2018 02:05PM by mannaz.

Since we're on the subject of imaginary priesthoods, what about the jedi priesthood ?

O/T: The Force is first documented in the near final Star Wars script in January 1976. It was developed further for the Phantom Menace. The notion of ‘the force’ and ‘Jedi’ and other underpinnings of Star Wars is a synthesis of numerous religious and philosophical belief systems.
BTW, I saw the first public opening night of Star Wars in 1977. It was epic.

I had an instructor in police academy who closed his classes, crying, "May the Force be with you--may you be with the Force!"

(Police) Force--get it?

I've said it before, several times, and will again, now.

One can't restore what one didn't have, namely, Peter, James and John. These three were apostles of Jesus, and didn't 'hold' the priesthood.

Aaron was an "Aaronic priest", a title given him my Moses, and the title was to be carried on through his linage, only(!).

As to the title, "Melchizedek", it means, "king of righteousness", of which there is only one: Jesus the Christ.

One won't find otherwise in the KJB, because it doesn't exist.
---

As it would appear, no Mormon--'active' or not--is aware of these facts, or if they are, they keep very silent reg. it.

'pollythinks' - yes, a well researched and supported point.

But I come to rfm in search of greater light and knowledge that is witnessed here by so many.

New documents and information are constantly showing up these days. I am as current as the JS papers, MormonThink level, and some of my own investigation. But alas, I am just one person.

Mannaz wrote: "'pollythinks' - yes, a well researched and supported point. But I come to rfm in search of greater light and knowledge that is witnessed here by so many."

The information I provided re. the priesthood, and published, certainly got the attention of 3 members of the 12, as they tried very hard to have me x'd for doing so---

So, I'm not sure what you mean by "greater light and knowledge".

You know the world is round, I'm sure. Could you please be more specific? 'Worldly'-type knowledge, or religious thinking?

Thanks.

I’ve read that the priesthood was the machinations of Sydney Rigitup to augment the codes of the true boys’ club.

But, who knows?