Almon Fackrell on D&C 100:9-11 and its Fulfillment with Sidney Rigdon

  

Joseph of ancient Egypt prophesied of Joseph Smith as follows: “And his name shall be called after me; and it shall be after the name of his father . . . and I will make for him a spokesman. And I, behold, I will give unto him that he shall write the . . . (Book of Mormon) . . . and the spokesman of thy loins shall declare it.” (2 Nephi 3:15, 18)

 

This was published approximately two years before Joseph met Sidney Rigdon, a leader in the Campbellite Church movement. On October 12, 1833 Joseph received a revelation as follows: “And it is expedient in me that you, my servant Sidney, should be a spokesman unto this people; yea, verily, I will ordain you unto this calling, even to be a spokesman unto my servant Joseph. And I will give unto him power to be mighty in testimony. And I will give unto thee power to be mighty, expounding all scriptures, that thou mayest be a spokesman unto him, and he shall be a revelator unto thee, that thou mayest know the certainty of all things pertaining to the things of my kingdom on the earth.” (Doctrine and Covenants 100:9-11) (Almon Fackrell, Parallels of Moses, Jesus and Joseph Smith: A Study that Ties the Old Testament, the New Testament, and “Another Testament” Together [Salt Lake City: Hawkes Publishing Inc., 1996], 63-64)

 

 

Further Reading:

 

Resources on Joseph Smith’s Prophecies

Almon Fackrell on D&C 87 and the U.S. Civil War

  

The Civil War, which started in South Carolina on April 12, 1861, and ended in Virginia on April 9, 1865, caused the deaths and misery of more citizens of the United States than all other wars put together so far – yes, including the 1st and 2nd World Wars. The Union forces suffered more than 364,000 deaths, and it is estimated that the Confederate forces had approximately 450,000 deaths, a total of 814,000 Americans killed.

 

While most people found freedom of religion in the United States, the Mormons were compelled to leave the United States because of their religion. It was a blessing in disguise, however, because while Americans were killing each other in the Civil War, the Latter-day Saints were in the rocky mountains, safe from the death and misery taking place in the United States. They were “standing in holy places” just as Joseph had prophesied. (Almon Fackrell, Parallels of Moses, Jesus and Joseph Smith: A Study that Ties the Old Testament, the New Testament, and “Another Testament” Together [Salt Lake City: Hawkes Publishing Inc., 1996], 180)

 

 

Further Reading:

 

Resources on Joseph Smith’s Prophecies

Allen Brent (Professor of Early Church History; Anglican Convert to Roman Catholicism): Cyprian did not believe in Papal Infallibility

  

What happens if an influential bishop, like, above all, the bishop of Rome, along with some of his fellows, will not appear to stick 'with the glue of mutual concord', but break 'from the bond of unity'? It was a problem that was to surface, in more recent, twentieth-century, history, at the Second Vatican Council that wished to assert episcopal collegiality yet at the same time to maintain papal primacy. We must rely in that case on the Holy Spirit:

 

A divergence of view was impossible on our part, in whom the Spirit is one, and for that reason it is clear that he does not hold fast to the truth of the Holy Spirit with the rest of us whom we see holding a different view. (Cyprian, Epistulae 68.5.2.III-14)

 

Clearly Cyprian does not believe in the infallibility of the bishop of Rome, despite his acknowledgment of a Petrine supremacy in some sense. Indeed, if Stephen breaks with the consensus of Cyprian’s approved episcopal network, then he ceases to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. (Allen Brent, Cyprian and Roman Carthage [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010], 293-94)

 

Example of Debates Concerning Whether a Part of a Day is to Be Counted as a Full Day in the Jerusalem Talmud

 The following is from Tractate Shabbat in the Jerusalem Talmud:

9:3

 

[A] “How do we know of her who emits semen on the third day [after having had sexual relations] that she is unclean?

 

[B] “Since it says, ‘And be ready against the third day, come not near a woman’ (Ex. 19:15).

[C] “How do we know that they bathe a child on the third day after circumcision, even if this coincides with the Sabbath?

 

[D] “Since it says, ‘And it came to pass on the third day when they were sore’ (Gen. 34:25).

[E] “How do we know that they tie a red thread on the head of the scapegoat [which is sent forth]?

 

[F] “Since it says, ‘Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow’ (Is. 1:18).”

 

[I:1 A] Said R. Yohanan, “It was from the procedure at Sinai that they derived the rule [at M. 9:3A; alternatively, the rule in M. Miq. 8:3]. Moses came down on Tuesday [: “on the third (of the month)], saying to them, ‘Be ready against the third day, do not come near a woman’ (Ex. 19:15). Now whoever ceased to have sexual relations on the third day then may count Tuesday night, Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen on Thursday night [= five spans], she is unclean, but if it was on Friday, she is clean [after five spans]. [In this case there are five spans of cleanness.]

 

[B]       “As to whoever ceased to have sexual relations on Wednesday, we may then count Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and as to Thursday night and Friday, if a woman emitted semen at night on Thursday night, she would be unclean, while if it was on Friday by day, she is clean. [In this case there are fewer than five spans of cleanness, but it was acceptable.]”

 

[C]       Said R. Yohanan, “This is the arrangement at Sinai. But for future generations, [there will be either] four or six [spans of cleanness].”

 

[D]       R. Aqiba says, “There must always be five such spans, even in the generations to come.” [This is now amplified.]

 

            [E]        There we have learned: “She who discharges semen on the third day after having intercourse is clean, the words of R. Eleazar b. Azariah. R. Ishmael says, “Sometimes there are four spans [after which the semen loses its efficacy], sometimes five, sometimes six.” [Ishmael wants two spans, a complete night and the day following it, to elapse to render the discharge clean. If inter course took place at the end of the first day, and the discharge at the beginning of the fourth, two complete days or four spans intervening, it is clean. But if intercourse took place in the morning of the first day, the discharge will not be clean until the beginning of the fourth day, a lapse of five spans. So too if intercourse took place in the evening preceding the first day, the discharge will be clean at the beginning of the fourth day, that is, six such spans.] R. Aqiba says, “They are always five spans” [M. Miq. 8:3J–L].

 

            [F]        If part of the first span had passed, they reckon that part of the sixth span completes it [T. Miq. 6:6D].

 

            [G]       Lo, R. Ishmael treats a day as a span and a night as a span. R. Aqiba treats a day as a span and a night as a span. Then what is at issue between them?

 

            [H]       It is whether spans serve to complete [the necessary period]. R. Ishmael treats part of a span as the whole of it, and R. Aqiba does not treat part of a span as the whole of it.

 

            [I]         It has been taught contrary to the view of R. Aqiba: Therefore if part of the first season has passed, they reckon that part of the sixth season completes it [T. Mid. 6:6D].

 

            [J]        It has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Azariah says, “A day and a night constitute a span, and part of a span is equivalent to the whole of it.”

 

            [K]        And thus has it been taught contrary to the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, “There are occasions in which there is a day and any small amount of time in addition, and yet [a woman] is clean. There may be two days lacking a [small] amount of time, and the woman will be unclean.” [Hence part of a span is not equivalent to the whole of it.]

 

            [L]        “A day and any small amount of time in addition, and she will be clean”: What would be a practical illustration of such a case?

 

            [M]      If the woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath prior to sunset, and she emitted semen at the end of the Sabbath after sunset, lo, we have a full day and just a bit more time, and yet she is clean.

 

            [N]       “Two days less any amount of time, and she will be unclean”: What would be a practical illustration of such a case?

 

            [O]       If a woman had sexual relations on the eve of the Sabbath after sunset, and she emitted semen on Sunday prior to sunset, lo, we have two days lacking only a small amount of time, and yet she is unclean.

 

            [P]        Said R. Yohanan, “In accord with the views of all parties, it was in the status of people who had immersed [and awaited sunset for the purification process to be complete that] the Israelites received the Torah.”

 

            [Q]       That which you have said applies perfectly well to women, but the men already had completed the rites of purification, did they not?

 

            [R]       What is the scriptural basis for that view? “[And the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to the people and] consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments’ ” (Ex. 19:10).

 

            [S]        Said R. Yohanan, “This represents the view of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, R. Ishmael, and R. Aqiba. But in the view of sages, the semen remains valid for three days. From that point onward it putrefies.”

 

            [T]        This accords with that which R. Zeira said, in the name of R. Yohanan: “ ‘This is the law for the Zab and for him who has an emission of semen, becoming unclean thereby’ (Lev. 15:32). Just as the law for the Zab applies for three days, so the law for the one who emits semen applies for three days. (Jacob Neusner, The Jerusalem Talmud: A Translation and Commentary [Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008], Logos Bible Software edition)

 

Examples of "Time is no Longer" in 19th-century theological literature (cf. D&C 84:100)

  

. . . so now being brought into life, in that life he swims; and the river is God, without measure, limits, or bounds, but perfect liberty, and an eternal and everlasting increase of light, power, and virtue, because time is passed away; time is no longer in Zion, but eternity. The state of Adam at First is Time; but the state of Adam at Last, is Eternity. (John Ward, My Last Day: (No Man Hurt:) Man-Deity: Or Creation By Jesus [John Bradberry: Birmingham, 1848], 42)

 

 

. . . “Although it be perfectly true, that to all the wicked there remains, in the course of the present life, a space of time in which they may, by a sufficient help from God of their crimes; still, it is not less certain that the sinner, after he has become obdurate and abandoned by God by reason of his sins, will no longer be capable of being converted. Wherefore the great difficulty that occurs in the conversion of a blind sinner, as also the certain foreknowledge of God that he will not be converted, these things I say, are sufficient to allow of its being said most truly, that to wicked men of this kind the time is at an end, in which God might effectually procure their salvation. To signify this most unhappy state, therefore, it is truly and significantly said when God abandons, hardens, and blinds a sinner, that to a sinner of this kind the time is no longer.” (Augustus Clissold, The Spiritual Exposition of the Apocalypse, 4 vols. [London: Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans, 1851]: 2:397; here, the author is quoting Alcasar’s commentary on Rev 10:6)

 

 

“TIME IS NO LONGER.”

 

Connect with it what St. John the Divine tells us is in store for the Christian when “time is no longer,” and thou must surely rejoice to think that the rolling years are but as chariot wheels that are bearing you onwards to Canaan’s blissful land. Time is no longer—eternity no end. (G. C., “’Time No Longer’ Rev. x.6,” The Gospel Magazine, no. 96 [December 1864]: 553)

 

 

V. “Now is the accepted time” in which to prepare to meet God.

 

The time of life is the only time to prepare for death; you must die; are you prepared for death? Do not procrastinate any longer. Death is the king of terrors to every unprepared soul. The blood of Christ and the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit, are necessary to a preparation for death. When time is no longer, the soul is before the tribunal of God.

 

VI> When time is no longer all earthly comforts and amusements are for ever ended.

 

Set not your hearts upon those things you can enjoy but for a little while. What comforts will be yours when time shall be no longer? Have you secured eternal possessions? (T. W. M., “Reflections suggested by the Sad Explosion on board H.M.S. ‘Thunderer’,” The British Flag and Christian Sentinel, no. 80 [October 2, 1876]: 115)

 

Allen Brent on Ignatius, Ephesians 19:2-3

  

Ignatius, Ephes., 19.2-3: The star-hymn

 

In what Lechner falsely represents as a Valentinian star hymn, the three mysteries (τρία μυστήρια) of Christ's birth and death, and Mary's virginity, previously unknown because they were "wrought in the stillness of God (äruva έν ήσυχία θεού έπράχθη)," are now made known:

 

How, therefore, were they made known (πως ούν έφανερώθη) to the ages (τοϊς αίώσιν)? A star shone in heaven (άστήρ έν ούρανω έλαμψεν) above all the stars (ύπέρ πάντας τούς άστέρας) ... and the rest of the stars together with sun and moon (τά δέ λοιπά πάντα άστρα άμα ήλιω καί σελήνη) formed a chorus around the star (χορός έγένετο τω άστέρι), and its light excelled above all things (αύτος δέ ήν ύπερβάλλων τό φώς αύτου ύπέρ πάντα) ... In consequence all magic was dissolved (όθεν έλύετο πάσα μαγε ία), and every bond of wickedness was wiped away (καί πάς δεσμός ήφανίζετο κακίας); ignorance was removed (άγνοια καθηρεϊτο), and the old kingdom destroyed (παλαιά βασιλεία διεφθείρετο), with God appearing hu- manly (θεού άνθρωπίνως φανερουμένου) for the renewal of eternal life (είς καιν- ότητα άϊδίου ζωής) ... From that time on all things were disturbed (ένθεν τά πάντα συνεκινεϊτο), because the destruction of death had been planned (διά τό μελετάσθαι θανάτου κατάλυσιν).

 

Part of the case for Lechner's forgery hypothesis is that this passage is a kind of late second-century orthodox response to the Valentinian star hymn. Yet as we have seen from Aristides, the stars as gods forming a chorus is a familiar pagan theme, and applied to the political, pagan theology of ouóvota. There is no need to posit a Valentinian source for Ignatius' description because he uses the concept of πλάνη. This word we saw was used also by Dio of the contrast between the heavenly ouóvora reflected in the ideal city, and those cities "not wandering in mindless error (ού πλανωμένων άλλως άνόητον πλάνην)." In Ephes. 10.2 Ignatius clearly refers, not to any group of false teachers within the church, but to the general behaviour of a Christian community in the pagan world. πλανη is one of the civic features of a discordant society, along with όργαι, βλασφημία, τό άγριον etc.

 

Of course for Ignatius, as for the Seer of the Apocalypse, earth and heaven were not destined to remain eternally separate, with the former reflecting the latter in its more beneficial arrangements. Both have an eschatology of the present age in process of being replaced by the age to come. When the star of the tradition of Ignatius' Matthaean, Syrian church shone at Bethlehem, then πάσα μαγεία, and πάς δεσμός κακίας that was for the writer to Diognetus part of the πλάνη of the pagan past was dissolved along with άγνοια. For Ignatius, as an early Christian writer, these too were part of the diagnosis of the sick societies of the city-states, and not simply the milder negation of ομονοια by the writers of the Second Sophistic, however much for Ignatius the lack of ομονοια was an integral part of the problem of social and natural disorder too. They were features of the παλαιά βασιλεία on its way to destruction in consequence of the incarnation, the θανάτου κατάλυσιν pursuant upon θεός άνθρωπίνως φανερουμένος. Thus Dio Chrysostom, who writes slightly before Ignatius' traditional dating, clearly produces a pagan parallel to Ignatian theology in this passage. (Allen Brent, Ignatius of Antioch and the Second Sophistic: A Study of an Early Christian Transformation of Pagan Culture [Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 36; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006], 240-42)

 

Adam-God Taught in Australia in August 1854

Adam-God is a topic I have studied a lot. I was the primary researcher for the B. H. Roberts/Mormonr project which collected over 1,000(!) records relating to the topic and other issues (e.g., Daniel 7 and the Ancient of Days). See:

Adam-God Theory (Primary Sources)

This evening, I found evidence that Adam-God was taught as far as Australia by August 1854.

 

Brigham’s April 9, 1852, sermon is, in part, reproduced as “Adam, Our Father and Our God,” in The Zion’s Watchman 1, nos. 18-19 (September 16, 1854): 137-39. The issue then reproduces a talk from Elder John Jones, August 20, 1854, which is unique to the issue (he was serving as a missionary in Australia):

 

To be Gods implies the possession of not only of a fulness of wisdom and knowledge but also power, power to create or organize; there must also be matter to be organized, and there must be a continued increase of systems, organized by such as attain unto this power and glory; each stands at the head of the systems over which they are respectively placed, and are the head or father’s of those who inhabit them, just as Father Adam is the head of the human family.

 

Perhaps some one is ready to cry out, what Brother Jones, do you mean to say that Father Adam is our God? Well I will answer by asking and answering another question: What is the nature of God’s governmeni ?- It is Patriarchal ? To illustrate the subject, I will refer to a family circle .- Let us suppose a father ruling his family in wisdom and goodness, every person moving in their proper places, the word of such a father is the law of government for that family. He is, as it were, a God unto them; the family attains unto maturity, then each son organizes a family for himself, and he in relation to his family stands in the like position as his father did to him; but does he here throw off the restraint of the father, by no means, for that which he saw his father do, he does; his family are governed in like manner, and by the same laws, and should he lack in anything, he would apply to his own father whose word would be the rule of action; carry the figure out to the fourth generation, and then we should have the great-grandson governing his family by the laws and counsel of the great-grandfather. If we carry this back from generation to generation, until we come to the first man, Adam, we shall then see the relation that he stands in to the human family. But says one, will not the world rise against such a doctrine, and with one voice declare it blasphemy. To this I will answer:- Was it not blasphemy to them when the Prophet declared that an angel had ministered unto him, yea, the world said that the first principles of the Gospel were blasphemy, not only so, but they said the same of the Holy Priesthood received through the ministration of Peter, James, John, of the commands to gather and to build temples. When the Lord revealed the law, through which man is exalted in the eternal world, they with one consent cried blasphemy, every principle of truth connected with salvation, will be blasphemy to the world.

 

Father Adam is not the only God spoken of in Scriptures, for the Apostles says,-"There be Gods many, and Lords many, but to us there is but one God the Father." God is one eternal round. I fancy I hear some say, you have now gone out of the Bible, for this doctrine can never be substantiated therefrom.

 

Well I know there are many people that will not believe anything unless it can be proved from the Bible; yet, there are many things that are true that cannot be proved from the Sacred Writings. Did Abraham and the other ancients seek proof for that which was communicated to them by the Lord or his Servants ? but here again we can bring the Bible to our aid. We find that our Saviour commanded us to commence praying with the following asseveration :- "Our Father." Christ is also called our Elder Brother. How could the one be our Father unless we had proceeded from him in the relation of children? How could Christ be our brother unless he with us had proceeded from the same Father? but it may be asked do not the Scriptures represent God as the Father of many other things besides man? I answer No! they never represent him as the Father of the animal, nor of that which we call the inanimate creation.

 

We also by reference to the first chapter of Genesis find, that when Adam was placed on the earth he had absolute power to rule and govern. In the 26th verse it is recorded,-"And God said, let MS make man in our own image after our own likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth over the earth." Here then is the testimony of the Bible; it does not mean anything less than is here positively stated. But it will be here objected that Adam fell and became a transgressor. In reference to this I would say, that he had an understanding in this thing; the Book of Mormon says, that Adam fell that men might be ; and Paul in reference to the same subject says: “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

 

But we find by a revelation given to the Prophet Joseph, in December, 1830, that the Lord said unto Adam,-"Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgressions in the garden of Eden;" by this he would be restored to the power and glory from which he fell. This will appear more clear from the 12th chapter of Daniel. We find there that at the time of the end, Michael shall stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people, and there shall be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation, even to that same time; and at that time thy people shall be delivered every one that shall be found written in the book. In the 7th chapter he is called the "ancient of days," and the description there given of him is the same as is given of God in other places. One like the Son of man comes to him and receives from him dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. That Michael the prince and the ancient of days, are the same personage is clear from that which is to accompany their appearance.

 

Who can the ancient of days be, but he that has the most ancient relation to time on this earth? this must be father Adam ! but we are not left in doubt on this subject, for we are told in the revelations given to the Church in these days, that Adam in the Valley of Adam-ondihman blessed his posterity that were righteous, and that the Lord appeared unto them, and that they rose up and blessed Adam and called him Michael, the Prince, the Archangel. And the Lord comforted Adam and said unto him,-"I have set thee to be at the head; a multitude of nations shall come out of thee; and thou art a prince over them for ever. (“A Discourse. Delivered by Elder John Jones, in the Old Assembly Room, King Street, on Sunday Morning, August 20th,” The Zion’s Watchman 1, nos. 18-19 [September 16, 1854]: 141-43)