restoration of the miechizedek priesthood
From BYU’s Encyclopedia of Mormonism…
“The Prophet and Oliver Cowdery received the Aaronic Priesthood on May 15, 1829, under the hands of John the Baptist. He informed them that he acted under the direction of Peter, James, and John, who held the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and that that priesthood would be given to them (JS-H 1:72). Although the precise date of this restoration is ***NOT KNOWN***, it is certain that it occurred after May 15, 1829, and before August 1830 (D&C 27:12). The documents available and the date of the formal organization of the Church give support to a time of restoration before April 6, 1830. Many students have concluded that late May or early June 1829 is the most probable time frame (HC 1:40n-42n; Porter, pp. 5-10).
Sometime before June 14, 1829, the Lord instructed Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery concerning their ordination as elders, which is a Melchizedek Priesthood office (HC 1:60-61). Furthermore, when Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph and Oliver, they ordained them also as apostles (D&C 27:12) and committed to them "the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fullness of times" (D&C 128:20; cf. 27:13).”
MY THOUGHTS: Why do we not know the exact date when the Melchizedec priesthood was restored, when we know the exact date when the Aaronic Priesthood was restored to Joseph? Why wouldn’t Joseph document it or write it down somewhere? Why didn’t Oliver Cowdery write it down? We know the exact date of the Aaronic Priesthood restoration. We know the exact date of the 1st vision. We know the exact date of what day the church was restored and officially organized. Heck, we even “know” the exact day of Christ’s birthday! Why not this ever important day? Doesn’t make sense to me.
PROBLEMS with the RESTORATION… (not from me, but I agree)
Several quotes from the same reference above... “Even Joseph's own family heard nothing from him concerning the two priesthood restoration events. D. Michael Quinn noted that when Joseph's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, wrote a letter in 1831 to her brother to tell him about the new church, she made no reference to the angelic visits of Joseph's later telling (Origins of Power, p. 19). Even as late as 1844-45, when the stories of the resurrected visitors were known among many members, Lucy still failed to mention the events when she dictated her history of the prophet to Martha Jane Corray:
One morning [Joseph and Oliver were translating in Third Nephi in the Book of Mormon] the first thing that presented itself to Joseph was a commandment from God that he and Oliver should repair to the water & each of them be baptized. They immediately went down to the Susquehanna (sic) river and obeyed the mandate given them . . .They had now received authority to baptize (quoted in Grant Palmer, "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins", pp. 215-216).
As Grant Palmer has noted, “Accounts of angelic ordinations from John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John are in none of the journals, diaries, letters, or printed matter until the mid-1830s” (Grant Palmer, "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins", pp. 223-224”
“If Christ's resurrected apostles appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1829 with the express purpose of authorizing them preparatory to the restoration of the true Church of Christ again on the earth, why didn't Joseph and Oliver mention these angels and their authority on the historic day of the Church's organization (April 6, 1830)? Why did they wait 5 years before mentioning these ancient apostles?”
“If Joseph and Oliver did not claim at first to have received their divine appointments from resurrected apostles, how did they convince early converts that they were indeed authorized to preach, baptize, and, ultimately, to organize a new Christian church?”
“Oliver Cowdery remarked in 1848 about his attendance at the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood: "I was also present with Joseph when the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred by the holy angel on high. This Priesthood, we then conferred on each other by the will and commandment of God" (recorded by Bishop Reuben Miller and quoted in History of the Church, Vol. 1, p. 40 footnote). Despite Joseph's 1838 claim that three angelic personages, Peter, James, and John, had come, why did Oliver forget and refer to them as “the” holy angel?”
Mormon scholar Richard Bushman stated this regarding the restoration of the Priesthood in his landmark biography about Joseph Smith...
"As Joseph told the story in 1838, the person said he was John the Baptist and that he had been sent by Peter, James, and John. Then he laid his hands upon their heads to ordain them…but Joseph did not tell anyone about John the Baptist at first. Summarizing the key events in his religious life in an 1830 statement, he mentioned translation but said nothing about the restoration of priesthood or the visit of an angel. The first compilation of revelations in 1833 also omitted an account of John the Baptist. David Whitmer later told an interviewer he had heard nothing of John the Baptist until four years after the Church’s organization. Not until writing in his 1832 history did Joseph include “reception of the holy Priesthood by the ministering of angels to administer the letter of the Gospel” among the cardinal events of his history, a glancing reference at best…The late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication. Did Joseph add the stories of angels to embellish his early history and make himself more of a visionary? If so, he made little of the occurrence. Cowdery was the first to recount the story of John’s appearance, not Joseph himself. In an 1834 Church newspaper, Cowdery exulted in his still fresh memory of the experience. ‘On a sudden, as from the midst of eternity, the voice of the Redeemer spake peace unto us, while the vail was parted and the angel of God came down clothed with glory, and delivered the anxiously looked for message, and the keys of the gospel of repentance! When Joseph described John’s visit, he was much more plainspoken. Moreover, he inserted the story into a history composed in 1838 but not published until 1842. It circulated without fanfare, and more like a refurbished memory than a triumphant announcement
MY OPINION: This sums up pretty well how I feel about this subject… As Richard Bushman admits (Rough Stone Rolling, 75): “the late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication” Why would Joseph Smith not write down how and when exactly he received the Melchizedec priesthood if it was such an important event in church history? Why would he wait years to say anything to anybody? Was the priesthood restored BEFORE or AFTER the beginning of the Mormon Church? You pretty much have to take it on faith that it was restored, but I can’t say that I believe it completely.
“The Prophet and Oliver Cowdery received the Aaronic Priesthood on May 15, 1829, under the hands of John the Baptist. He informed them that he acted under the direction of Peter, James, and John, who held the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and that that priesthood would be given to them (JS-H 1:72). Although the precise date of this restoration is ***NOT KNOWN***, it is certain that it occurred after May 15, 1829, and before August 1830 (D&C 27:12). The documents available and the date of the formal organization of the Church give support to a time of restoration before April 6, 1830. Many students have concluded that late May or early June 1829 is the most probable time frame (HC 1:40n-42n; Porter, pp. 5-10).
Sometime before June 14, 1829, the Lord instructed Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery concerning their ordination as elders, which is a Melchizedek Priesthood office (HC 1:60-61). Furthermore, when Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph and Oliver, they ordained them also as apostles (D&C 27:12) and committed to them "the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fullness of times" (D&C 128:20; cf. 27:13).”
MY THOUGHTS: Why do we not know the exact date when the Melchizedec priesthood was restored, when we know the exact date when the Aaronic Priesthood was restored to Joseph? Why wouldn’t Joseph document it or write it down somewhere? Why didn’t Oliver Cowdery write it down? We know the exact date of the Aaronic Priesthood restoration. We know the exact date of the 1st vision. We know the exact date of what day the church was restored and officially organized. Heck, we even “know” the exact day of Christ’s birthday! Why not this ever important day? Doesn’t make sense to me.
PROBLEMS with the RESTORATION… (not from me, but I agree)
- Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery failed to testify to the members nor record anything about the appearances of “John the Baptist” and “Peter, James, and John” in any publications prior to 1834 (five years after the events purportedly took place)—nor did they teach that men ordained to offices in the church were receiving “priesthood authority”.
- Nobody in or out of the church knows the exact date of the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and Oliver Cowdery was inconsistent in describing which heavenly being(s) had come to confer that authority.
- Joseph Smith and other early members stated that the first conferral of the Melchizedek priesthood happened in June 1831 in Ohio at a conference of Elders, and that Joseph himself was ordained to the high priesthood by church elder Lyman Wight at that time. (This point was mentioned in Richard Lyman Bushman’s book “Rough Stone Rolling”. There is some definite confusion because of this. If the priesthood was first confirmed in June 1831, then how did Joseph have the authority to organize the church in April 1830?)
- Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery changed the wording of earlier revelations when they compiled the 1835 D&C, adding verses about the appearances of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John AS IF those appearances were mentioned in the earlier revelations, which they weren't. The Book of Commandments, which later became the D&C says nothing about these appearances.
Several quotes from the same reference above... “Even Joseph's own family heard nothing from him concerning the two priesthood restoration events. D. Michael Quinn noted that when Joseph's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, wrote a letter in 1831 to her brother to tell him about the new church, she made no reference to the angelic visits of Joseph's later telling (Origins of Power, p. 19). Even as late as 1844-45, when the stories of the resurrected visitors were known among many members, Lucy still failed to mention the events when she dictated her history of the prophet to Martha Jane Corray:
One morning [Joseph and Oliver were translating in Third Nephi in the Book of Mormon] the first thing that presented itself to Joseph was a commandment from God that he and Oliver should repair to the water & each of them be baptized. They immediately went down to the Susquehanna (sic) river and obeyed the mandate given them . . .They had now received authority to baptize (quoted in Grant Palmer, "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins", pp. 215-216).
As Grant Palmer has noted, “Accounts of angelic ordinations from John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John are in none of the journals, diaries, letters, or printed matter until the mid-1830s” (Grant Palmer, "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins", pp. 223-224”
“If Christ's resurrected apostles appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1829 with the express purpose of authorizing them preparatory to the restoration of the true Church of Christ again on the earth, why didn't Joseph and Oliver mention these angels and their authority on the historic day of the Church's organization (April 6, 1830)? Why did they wait 5 years before mentioning these ancient apostles?”
“If Joseph and Oliver did not claim at first to have received their divine appointments from resurrected apostles, how did they convince early converts that they were indeed authorized to preach, baptize, and, ultimately, to organize a new Christian church?”
“Oliver Cowdery remarked in 1848 about his attendance at the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood: "I was also present with Joseph when the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred by the holy angel on high. This Priesthood, we then conferred on each other by the will and commandment of God" (recorded by Bishop Reuben Miller and quoted in History of the Church, Vol. 1, p. 40 footnote). Despite Joseph's 1838 claim that three angelic personages, Peter, James, and John, had come, why did Oliver forget and refer to them as “the” holy angel?”
Mormon scholar Richard Bushman stated this regarding the restoration of the Priesthood in his landmark biography about Joseph Smith...
"As Joseph told the story in 1838, the person said he was John the Baptist and that he had been sent by Peter, James, and John. Then he laid his hands upon their heads to ordain them…but Joseph did not tell anyone about John the Baptist at first. Summarizing the key events in his religious life in an 1830 statement, he mentioned translation but said nothing about the restoration of priesthood or the visit of an angel. The first compilation of revelations in 1833 also omitted an account of John the Baptist. David Whitmer later told an interviewer he had heard nothing of John the Baptist until four years after the Church’s organization. Not until writing in his 1832 history did Joseph include “reception of the holy Priesthood by the ministering of angels to administer the letter of the Gospel” among the cardinal events of his history, a glancing reference at best…The late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication. Did Joseph add the stories of angels to embellish his early history and make himself more of a visionary? If so, he made little of the occurrence. Cowdery was the first to recount the story of John’s appearance, not Joseph himself. In an 1834 Church newspaper, Cowdery exulted in his still fresh memory of the experience. ‘On a sudden, as from the midst of eternity, the voice of the Redeemer spake peace unto us, while the vail was parted and the angel of God came down clothed with glory, and delivered the anxiously looked for message, and the keys of the gospel of repentance! When Joseph described John’s visit, he was much more plainspoken. Moreover, he inserted the story into a history composed in 1838 but not published until 1842. It circulated without fanfare, and more like a refurbished memory than a triumphant announcement
MY OPINION: This sums up pretty well how I feel about this subject… As Richard Bushman admits (Rough Stone Rolling, 75): “the late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication” Why would Joseph Smith not write down how and when exactly he received the Melchizedec priesthood if it was such an important event in church history? Why would he wait years to say anything to anybody? Was the priesthood restored BEFORE or AFTER the beginning of the Mormon Church? You pretty much have to take it on faith that it was restored, but I can’t say that I believe it completely.
REFERENCES:
- http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Melchizedek_Priesthood
- http://www.mormonthink.com/priesthood.htm
- Rough Stone Rolling, Richard Bushman, Page 75 (https://books.google.com/books?id=Mz3tpz4eRBQC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA75&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false)
- https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/06/dating-the-restoration-of-the-melchizedek-priesthood?lang=eng
- http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_priesthood/Restoration/Melchizedek/Date
- http://cesletter.com/debunking-fairmormon/priesthood-restoration.html