Sunday, November 6, 2022

"Scripture Focused Mormonism" : Recommended Scriptures, Resources: websites, podcasts, and books, etc.

The Top Resources of Restoration Scripture (or Standard Works) through the Emergent Mormon Perspective and/or Smith-Hyde-Pratt Paradigm:



  • Book of Mormon (2013 Edition): I like how this version has Arnold Forsberg paintings of Nephites as masculine Viking looking heroes in the book. Yet it is an update to the 1981 Edition, with a new introduction stating that the people in the book are "among the ancestors of the Native Americans."

  • Doctrine & Covenants (1891 Edition): This version has Orson Pratt's verse system and his footnotes referencing his pamphlets like Absurdities of Immaterialism, and contains the original doctrine of the Lectures on Faith (which Joseph Smith himself edited and republished in the 1844 D&C).




  • Key to the Science of Theology by Parley P. Pratt, read by James Bleckley (by LibriVox Audiobooks), on YouTube). I don't agree with everthing Pratt writes (like the "spirit birth" doctrine), but I present this book more in terms of the psychological energy behind the words and its more body affirming theology; which reminds me of Nietszche's emphasis on affirming life. This affirmation of the body and biologocal life is a kind of biotheology, which I think is best experienced in the audio book version read by James Bleckley.

  • The Proclamation on the Family


Note that these editions below allows one to read the Scriptures of Restored Christianity through "fresh eyes," with less gloss, or without only the interpretations of the Brighamite sect, or any particular sect for that matter, affecting one's reading experience:

  

  • The Book of Mormon (Revised Authorized Version) by The Community of Christ (written more in plain english to better understand the text without the ye or thou, etc.). To buy as an ebook click here; free online here. Note: the verse numbers are different than the Utah-based LDS Church version.

  • Doctrine and Covenants (1844 Second Edition). This book is particularly important because Joseph Smith edited and revised this edition, which includes the monotheistic Lectures on Faith, which he published as doctrine in this book of scripture in the same year he gave the King Follet Discourse and the Sermon in the Grove. So those latter two sermons are best interpreted with the understanding that Joseph Smith republished the 1835 Lectures on Faith in scripture again in 1844, presenting them again as containing the important doctrines of salvation, which he signed his name to; thus further emphasizing their doctrinal authority.

  • Simply Scriptures: Great Online Search Engine of Restoration Scripture that is unaffiliated with the Brighamite sect.


These core Scriptures are interpreted through the Emergent Perspective and thus seeing a trajectory, line upon line, precept building upon lower layered precepts -- from the 1830 Book of Mormon and it's early layers of Edwardian Victorianism and the Platonism in much of early pre-1835 Restoration Scripture -- to then through greater light and knowledge, including Joseph studying Hebrew in 1835, there then emerges post 1835 a more physicalist spirituality and the affirmation of the body. At which point you get Joseph composing D&C sections 130 to 131 on spirit matter and the embodied sociality of the heavenly beings; the defining of priesthood as bodily seed in Abraham 2:11, the pro phallic image of God in Fascimile 7: Figure 2; the Happiness Letter and God's more "liberal views" on bodily sensuality as the pathway to joy and happiness, culminating in Parley P. Pratt's essay on Intelligence and Affection in 1844. Thus we find a pro-body theophilosophy emerging in the ongoing restoration for the 21st Century. Just as many philosophers and theologians have their earlier, less matured writings, and then there is later in time in their more mature writings later on. I see Joseph Smith going through a similar growth spiritually and philosophically. I see his more mature phase ocurring post 1835, that contains his more mature philosophizing and revelations that present a "spiritual physicalism" that affirms life and the body. This post 1835 upper philosophical layer is the interpretive lens through which I interpret all earlier pre 1835 Restoration Scripture. In other words, I begin with reading the upper layers (post 1835) and interpret the lower layers based on the more mature theophilosophy, just as Joseph Smith and Parley P. Pratt themselves did.


On a practical level, The Book of Mormon for me acts as a midrashic form of Muscular Christianity as American Apocrypha and at times provides the tactics of the warrior when necessary for self-defense, while seeking peace and the ideal of Zion; while esteeming your brother, sister and neighbor as thyself; emphasizing the development of healthy families for the good of society; and earning riches in order to do good instead of being like those for whom their treasure is their god. So that being business minded and focusing on wealth is righteous and holy as long as it's done in the spirit of not just enhancing your own well-being selfishly but that of others as well.


I see the 1844 Doctrine and Covenants as containing the true nature of Deity: as the only supreme being, which was the origional doctrine of The Lectures on Faith: see Lecture 2:2 and D&C 121:32 that mentions " ... the Council of the Eternal God [cf. Lecture 2:2] of all other [lesser] gods ..."


The Lectures on Faith are also practical by presenting faith as a principle of action, as a type of positive mental attitude and visualization technique toward growing in power and righteous dominion (or healthy souled expansion); which practice of seeing it and doing it is the nature of God and his creative power: as faith is a principle of action and God creates things visually in His mind before he creates it physically.


 The Lecture on Faith focuses the reader on imitation: imitating the character and attributes of God, just as Paul says to imitate him and Jesus says to imitate him by basically following him by walking in his footsteps as a Rabbi; thus completing the circle of imitation and a form of positive emotional contagion. Rather than the Traditions of the Elders and checking off boxes based rules-based religiosity and puritanical policies put in place by controlling personalities, causing the false dichotomy of the so-called "Worthy versus Unworthy," often resulting in an uppity holier than thou attitude; instead of it being about actual character formation and Zion creation; having an actual internal change of mind, soul, and attitude toward loving joy and unity; as you ideally have a luminous change in your countenance in imitation of the positive energy of Christ and his shining face of joy; who is depicted in Restoration Scripture as repeatedly smiling opon his disciples.


New Testament Translations I recommend:


For the Best Bibles (and New Testament Translations) I personally recommend see here. 

In brief, first I recommend The Remedy (2nd Edition) by Timothy R. Jennings. It's a paraphrase of the New Testament, rephrasing the gospel as "the remedy" to heal spiritual-sickness, providing loving healing; which matches well with the book I recommend, The Christ Who Heals by Terryl and Fiona Givens. 


Second, I recommend The Evolution of the Word by Marcus Borg, which presents the New Testament in chronological order; which supports my emergent paradigm. 

Finally, The Unvarnished New Testament: A New Translation From The Original Greek by Andy Gaus. I like this translation because it removes all the sectarian translator's distortions and the glossing or varnishing of the origional words with later Catholic and Protestant dogma. For example, instead of reading Holy Ghost you will read Holy Breath, as the word spirit in Greek means wind or breath. Thus, translating it more literally as breath returns one's mind to the original more physicalistic meaning of receiving a wind-like fluid substance that one then breathes out (as Jesus did onto his disciples); as it is not of the fluids or food you take in that spiritually pollutes your soul, but the type of spiritual breath you breathe out in words and deeds that pollutes you. So that meditating on one's in and out breath can be a great spiritual  meditation technique for focusing on your internal state and thus reducing stress as also a visualization exercise. 

The term angel in the origional Greek means "messenger," thus removimg the visual of angels with wings, etc.; and instead of the word "sin" you will read words like "mistakes." This removes the Augustinian gloss that gets in the wave of understanding the origional meaning of the text.

For more details and links to these translations to read for free online or purchase see here.

Notable mentions:



What My Reconstructed Emergent LDS "Standard Works" does for me as a Source of Relational-Spirituality:


What I realized while restructuring my Restored Christian lifestance, was that my reconstruction required completely changing nearly everything I once believed and considered doctrine and even scripture. For example ...


The Record of the Nephites


Following the example of another Restoration sect, I began thinking in terms of the Book of Mormon as The Record of the Nephites (and often calling it that instead) which caused me to think in term of keeping records, as sacred scripture acts as a record of past cultures engraven on your conscience as a form of ethically collective metamind: as you are absorbing the collective wisdom of past ethical cultures that provide their collected virtues, values and principles: based on good traditions (collective habits) that act as the wiser path in contrast to bad traditions that cause societal decay; and how good traditions as good ideas and relational philosophies produces positive generational contagion (rather than negative generational contagion).

The Lectures as The Doctrine

I began to rethink The Doctrine & Covenants, by learning that The Lectures on Faith are the original Doctrine, which are all about imitating the character and attributes of the Deity in order to experience deification (see Lecture #7) after receiving a "fullness" of the breath-like divine fluid energy (see Lecture #5). Understanding the origional doctrine of The Lectures on Faith, I began to study other Restoration groups and began to understand that the Record of the Nephites is not just a cautionary tale about the Nephites being unable to overcome their prejudices; but is also a guide to personal transformation by mystically ascending to the throne of God and visualizing the face of God. For me this means for me "theologically," the understanding that it is only through the merits of Christ and being perfected in Christ (recieving the divine "fulness" described in Lecture 5) that one experiences the empowering energy and entrance into the throne room of God (without any human gatekeeper impeding your way); and that rather than the Augustinian and Calvinist understanding of things, leading to a gloomy face or countenance, one is freed from stifling dogmatic legalism and one is instead liberated through grace. One is then more ready to experience seeing God, or visualizing God, through the face of Christ : as a smiling face of joyful radiant energy that like sunrays burns away unhealthy guilt and shame and low self-worth and fills one with with a healthy pride as an enlightened son or daughter of God. Thus realizing the gospel is not a message of endless-rules and gloomy piety but an easier way and simple plan of happiness; for Adam fell that mankind might be and we are that we might have joy.

So the Record of the Nephites became for me an empowering source for feeling loved by God by thinking of Christ as a smiling joyful presence and a source of healing and happiness. The origional understanding of the doctrine of Restored Scripture led me to begin doing exercises like visualizing being filled with Divine Love as a shining light or a luminous fluid substance filling me with joy; symbolized in Lehi's Dream of a shining tree of shining fruit: which symbolizes one's deification through having the Tree of Life grow within you (see Alma 32) and thus one having a metaphorical skin of glowing brightness: becoming like "shining lights in the sky" as "the sons of God," as Paul puts it in Philippians 2:15. So this metaphorical language of skins or a countenance as bright lights like shining fruit peelings, like the stars in the sky, began to make sense of Lecture 2:2 and the Deity as "the Father of lights." As the restored gospel is about producing the sons (and daughters) of the Light, as an expansion of God's Divine Council: to include humans who have been divinized to become sons/daughters of God (as shining lights like luminous stars in the sky). So this understanding of imitating the character and attributes of God in the Lectures, and the Record of the Nephites as a mystical "Ascension text" toward deification and visualizing the smiling face of a joyful Christ, and faith as "a principle of action" (Lecture #1), combined with Jonathon Mitchell's essay on God's Garden; all led to the realization that it's not about rigid rules and policies and checking off legalistic boxes to appear perfect and "worthy" (for example, the Word of Wisdom was not given by commandment nor constraint), and it's not about the outward pious appearance and what goes into your body, but what comes out of your body in the form of what you communcate and how you treat people, as Jesus put it. So it's about being truly transformed by realizing you are ideally reborn with the Deity's character and attributes, like downloaded software; and by feasting on the words of Scripture you are ethically reprograming yourself toward esteeming your neighbour as yourself; and are to ideally express your appreciation for being exalted and made worthy in Christ through his merits alone, despite your best efforts. Thus receiving that in breath of divinity (the divine genome) and exhaling words of unifying love and acts of care and generosity as an expression of your gratitude for the divine gift of Abundant Life (see John 10:10).


So for me, Restoration Scripture is American Apocrypha, an addition to the biblical texts in the Bible, just like the Apocrypha in the Catholic Bible is not contained in Protestant Bibles; as the Smith-Pratt Restoration's Apocrypha has a rich reservoir of inspiring metaphors and symbolism for any Christian.


To Summarize:


  •  Everything changes when you re-examine LDS Scripture from outside seeing things only through the Salt Lake Church paradigm. You start to see the practical empowering "energy" of original LDS Scripture as motivating and inspiring (at least it is for me). For example consider seeing Restoration Scripture through these titles:


    • The Record of the Nephites (See the last minute of this YouTube video to understand the title): This title helps us focus on the Nephites as a culture, and their rise and fall as a People; it's a record of healthy and spiritually bright cultures and an unhealthy and gloomy cultures, and how a good and thriving cultures can become bad (rotten) and whither (decay) through destructive viral traditions that lead to endless disputes and contentiousness from hate-filled resentment leading to a downward spiral into cultural decay and unhappiness from what I call negative generational contagion. 

    • The Book of Commandments: This makes one realize the Restoration Movement was an active movement of directives by a Divine Commander to build Zion. For the Bible makes it clear that God is Jehovah Sabaoth, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies. So it's not a "hippie" pacifistic meditation group here, but an active energetic movement. The goal is peace (Shalom) and Zion but this is achieved through action. As today's Doctrine and Covenants 33:8 puts it, "Open your mouths and they shall be filled, and you shall become even as Nephi of old, who journeyed from Jerusalem in the wilderness." Note the emboldening "energy" of being like Nephi as an example of courage in action. As Nephi himself argued in 1 Nephi 4:1–2:

      And it came to pass that I spake unto my brethren, saying: Let us go up again unto Jerusalem, and let us be faithful in keeping the commandments of the Lord; for behold he is mightier than all the earth, then why not mightier than Laban and his fifty, yea, or even than his tens of thousands? Therefore let us go up; let us be strong like unto Moses; for he truly spake unto the waters of the Red Sea and they divided hither and thither, and our fathers came through, out of captivity, on dry ground, and the armies of Pharaoh did follow and were drowned in the waters of the Red Sea. 
  • The Lectures on Faith: The original doctrine of Mormonism were these theological Lectures and herein "faith" is defined as the "principle of action." The Lectures aim to teach the attributes of Deity with the goal to know and imitate God and grow toward full deification and enthroned power to dominion (see Lecture 7). 

Additional Recommended Reading & Listening:


The following are websites and books related to the Scripture Focused Movement in Mormonism:

Note that I do not necessarily agree with all the interpretations and positions presented in each of these blogs, book or websites and movements.



The Lectures on Faith & Reform Doctrine & Covenants:


I recommend these two books below for their simplicity in presenting the uniqueness of Mormon Philosophy & Theology. "The Reform Mormon D&C" below also includes key sections of the Pearl of Great Price; hence, its a great summary and primer of the best of Mormonism. 


  • A Compilation Containing the Lectures on faith (1940 Edition), published by N.B. Lundwall. This document is important because it's a snapshot in time showing the change in theology away from the original doctrine of the one supreme Deity of Lecture 2:2, and and the man-made doctrines of Brigham Young and the "spirit birth" dogma; leading to James Talmage reconstructing Joseph Smith's origional theology in 1916 which led to the removal of the origional doctrine (the Lectures on Faith) from the Standard Works. For example, see the added excerpt on page 47 and how page 53 states: "Note:—That which follows has been added only in this compilation and, of course, is not part of the Lectures on Faith as originally delivered in Kirtland. Further light was revealed to the Prophet subsequent to the giving of these Lectures, as will be noted by the quotations following." However, some of that "revealed light" did not come from Joseph Smith at all, but was made up by Brigham Young with his Adam as God dogma; and so later James Talmage, in 1916, basically made up a Godhead (not found in Restoration Scripture) where Jehovah was not the Father (yet D&C 109 clearly presents Jehovah as the Father). LDS scholar Blake Ostler, for his part, has attempted to return to the original doctrine and theology of LDS Scripture: where there is only one original Deity (as a Lecture 2:2 clearly teaches).

The 1830 Edition of The Book of Mormon


I recommend this because of its unbiased and objective presentation; and according to the introduction: "This edition, published in 1840, was the last of three revisions undertaken by Joseph Smith Jr., the author/ translator of the book, before his death in 1844. There have been numerous revisions since that time, but this edition most closely approximates Smith’s final concept of the text" (Loc 138). 


I also recommend this version because the introduction by Laurie F. Maffly-Kipp is a fair and honest summary of the beginning events of Mormonism; which is good for both the Mormon and never-been-a-Mormon to read. There is another 1840 version recommended in one of the lists below. I recommend this version because it presents The Book of Mormon in more of a novel style format (in paragraphs), not segmented into short numbered scriptural verses (as in other editions), which is how the original looked. As professor Maffly-Kipp explains regarding the 1840 edition, "the text as Smith left it upon his death in 1844 was formatted more like a novel than like contemporaneous versions of the Holy Bible. He intended it to be read as an accessible chronicle, a record of vanished peoples" (Loc 261). I think this is important in order to experience the Book of Mormon for the first time; so as not to read it only intellectually, bracketing sections and paragraphs off into tidy citations and for referencing it by verse; but instead as an all encompassing experience like reading a novel; and thus better experiencing it as a grand sweeping story of cultures rising and falling, with a core message of recognizing the cultural ideal of spiritual liberation, empowerment, and joy through authentic Christianity.


Professor Maffly-Kipp, further adds in the intro:

The Book of Mormon does not dictate lifestyle traits or health codes, nor does it educate readers about priesthood hierarchy, ordinances for the dead, esoteric rites, or eternal marriages. The Book of Mormon is, first of all, a story of ancient peoples ... The story contained within the book transports readers to a new imaginative realm ... it is a fascinating tale well worth reading for a number of reasons ... the Nephite story ... furnishes [a] morality tale demonstrating the power of faithfulness and enjoining readers to obey the commands of God or risk the fate of past civilizations. ... the Book of Mormon could be read as a sacred drama of the Americas that correlated with biblical accounts of early human history, verifying the importance of both texts. [It placed] the Americas squarely at the center of future prophecies, subsuming it within a larger providential story. ... What makes this book most remarkable, however, is not simply its complicated chronicling of valiant but doomed societies. Its full historical importance and enduring power reside in the layering of meanings ... and connections to biblical history asserted within the text ... 

(Loc 147-200, 323). 


 Next I recommend these other  editions of LDS Scripture that seek to be true to the original edition, and also versions of The Book of Mormon in Plain English; and a good non-KJV New Testament Translation (specifically for Mormons), as well as The Joseph Smith Translation (showing the changes Smith made to the KJV), and finally a really good Scripture Search Engine, etc., all listed below:



Online Mormon Scriptures from the Remnant Fellowship (aka Restoration Movement):



Recommended Books & Pamphlets that provide alternative Perspectives from the Brighamite Branch:








  • 95 Theses by Ogden Kraut (note: Again, as noted above, I do not support or endorse everything in this document but there is enough good material that I recommend it)






YouTube Channels & Podcasts:



Mormon Rescue (taken down as of 4/21/2023)


Uncorrelated Mormonism


Restoration Archives


Iron Rod podcast


Websites:
(About The Church Handbook of Instructions and Thinking on Your Own)
at

The Case for "Scripture Focused Mormons" & What that Means?

 


After learning about the various alternatives to the Utah-based Mormon Church (aka Brighamite sect), which I first began exploring after I served part of my LDS mission in Missouri, I began to think of the way of describing a common denominator of these various Book of Mormon sects or movements. So I decided to call them Scripture Focused Mormons. These are basically "Mormons" who believe that the Scriptures that were voted on by the early Saints in the 1830s to be included in the Standard Works (Canon), are truly revelations from the Lord to Joseph Smith. They believe that the Scripture is the Standard Works (aka the Mormon Canon).


Someone might call them "Protestant Mormons" but this is inaccurate because it not only carries too much baggage from Lutheran Protestantism, but "Scripture Focused Mormons" do not believe that the LDS Scriptural Canon is closed like Protestant do. They believe in continuous revelation and the other gifts of the Spirit described in 1 Corinthians 12; but revelation needs to come through an actual seer and revelator who is actually revealing the words of the Lord ("thus saith the Lord") that is to be bound in Scripture as was the case with the apostle Paul and Joseph Smith.  


In a scripture-focused Mormonism, as Joseph Smith taught, "a prophet is a prophet only when he is acting as such," and some revelations (like the ones through Hiram Page's stone) are not always considered divine writ by the body of LDS believers. For a doctrine or policy to be binding it needs to go through the process of common consent. Many LDS sects today have anadoned the way set out in LDS Scripture and as I see it there is a cultural phenomenon where some (not all) LDS members (and other LDS sects) engage in the formation of a "cult of personality": wherein the top leaders are treated like infallible Pope's and celebrities. So that every 20 years Mormon culture is reformed by the personality and temperament and pet peeves or personal projects of that current LDS President. None of this behavior is supported by actual official LDS revelation, doctrine, in LDS Scripture. It is a cultural phenomenon.


According to Britannica.com, the core doctrines of the Protestant Reformation were: 


... justification by grace alone through faith, the priesthood of all believers, and the supremacy of Holy Scripture in matters of faith and order.


The reason for these core doctrines that made up the Protestant Reformation were due to the corruptions that took place in the Catholic Church: such as the sale of indulgences and a priestly hiearchy leading to an infallible Pope and a lack of checks and balances and corruption in the leadership. Also, the system of pious perfectionism through the confessional led to Catholic Monks like Martin Luther to feel perpetually inadequate and shamed, feeling like he could never live up to perfect piety; while also repressing his biological instincts as a celibate monk. When Luther gained the insight from scripture study, that he was worthy already and saved by grace alone and not through the constant attendance of the confessional, and that he did not need to be celibate; he must have been filled with a profound alleviation of stress and anxiety and an overwhelming feeling of freedom! 


I have experienced this same feeling of alleviation and freedom from a Mormon perspective, wherein I have realized that original Mormonism was more like Protestantism in giving members more security through the doctrine of grace alone and more freedom of conscience and speech and behavior.


Where Mormonism differs drastically from Protestantism is that Mormon theology left the Canon open and living oracles capable of adding to the spiritual canon. But there needs to be checks and balances to avoid "leadership worship." D&C 28 explains that revelations and commandments that are binding on all LDS members needed to align with other scrptural "covenants" in LDS scripture (otherwise they could be deemed writings not of God, see D&C 28:11). Binding practices also had to be approved "by common consent in the church" for authoratative cannonization, as section 28 makes clear: "For all things must be done in order" (D&C 28:13). This process is missing today in many of the LDS denominations where the mere opinioms of the leaeder is trated as if scripture without being approved by common consent or cannonized. A good example of this is a recent Area 70 dealing with the toxic shame taught by a previous LDS leader and him saying we can reject dead prohets and go with living ones. I discuss this in the section titled The Case for Many “Mormonisms” but One Zion People in the document here. The problem with ignoring dead prophets for living one's is one day those living ones with be dead ones too, so what's considered true today can be changed to untrue tomorrow. I think a better criteria for truth is the Standard Works, the Canon of LDS Scripture and the checks and balances laid out in those scriptures as to what is what is not binding on LDS Christians.


Cannonized LDS Scripture over Even Popular LDS Doctrines and Traditions taught by Church Leaders 


In a podcast discussion in January 24, 2026 about Creedal Christianity versus Mormon Christianity,  Jacob Hansen responds to the question of whether or not LDS members believe God the Father had a God and a father by saying the following at the 1 hour and 20 minutes mark: 


There is nowhere in our scriptures where you will ever find [the belief or doctrine] that God became God. In fact, you can find the exact opposite. In our sacrament prayer that we say every Sunday over the bread and water, it is God the Eternal Father. The notion that God has always been fully divine is what Latter Day Saints scriptures teach. Now, there have been LDS Leaders who have theorized, there are Latter-Day Saints who believe in an infinite regress of Gods, but that notion is not reconcilable with Latter-day Saint scripture; and even in the famous King Follett discourse (that was given by Joseph Smith), Joseph talks about this idea of a Head [God] of all gods; so you can find a debate, a theological debate, about this [in LDS culture] but it is not -- and and I would say even a large majority of Latter Day Saints during a particular period in our history held the sort of infinite regress model -- that is not what our scriptures teach; and ultimately I go with what our scriptures say as the more authoritative voice on who God is. 


It is important to note here that Jacob Hansen even chooses scripture here over his otherwise standard epistemology of what he calls the Collective Witness model. For an argument could be made for the collective witness of the majority of LDS Leaders (prophets and apostles) stating the infinite regress of Gods model as doctrine published in official LDS manuals. In fact, the person he is talking with responds to Jacob by saying to go to mrm.org/regress to see all the statements by LDS apostles and prophets teaching the infinite regress model. I did not need to this LDS Critic's site to know that the majority of LDS prophets and apostles teach or taught that God the Father had a father and He wasn't always God or Divine and there is an infinite regress of Gods. So Jacob understands that LDS Leaders are infallible and there may even be a lot of LDS leaders who have collectively witnessed to the truth of an erroneous doctrine. So here we see that while Hansen would usually go with his collective model, and the common LDS saying that "living prophets trump dead prophets," its clear that he actually sees canonized scripture alone as the more authoritative source of truth and doctrine. So that he goes with canonized LDS scripture that teaches that God the Father has always been divine and does not have a father nor his own god, but is the God the Eternal Father.  Jacob then confirms his position at 1 hour and 40 minutes when he says regarding Brigham Young teaching some bad ideas at times:

Brigham Young, first and foremost, produced only one canonized revelation, I think. Brigham Young, in what he actually produced in canonized revelation for Latter-day Saints, there's very very little. Brigham Young was someone who would just say, “Hey this is what I think,” and the thing is that there's a big difference in the Latter-day Saint tradition between that which is given by revelation from God, claimed as such, and then accepted by the Church as binding upon them versus the ideas and theories that every man is entitled to. So yes we do have a variety of opinions within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints …


On this I agree with Jacob Hansen and I think it proves my contention that the true, ultimately authoritative source of doctrinal truth, is canonized LDS scriptures; that is revelations that have been voted on by Common Consent and considered scripture to be published as canonized scripture.


Previous revelations in the Scriptures should be consulted before seeking new prophetic guidance through new revelations: 


We learn from The Joseph Smith Papers, that Joseph Smith wrote a Letter to John S. Carter, 13 April 1833 that basically talks about priesthood hierarchy and it's orderly organization and how no one should claim to receive revelation directing those of a higher status in the priesthood in order to maintain order. Joseph Smith goes on to say that the rich should not cast out the poor. In regards to dealing with disagreements, Joseph Smith says to do what New Testament scripture says in regards to handling disputes. Joseph then later says, “we never enquire of at the hand of the Lord God for special revelation only in case of ther being no previous revelation to suit the case …” 


The Standard Works as the Yardstick:


Here is a good sampling of Brighamite (LDS) leaders on the authority of scripture over leader's opinions:


Harold B. Lee:


If anyone, regardless of his position in the Church, were to advance a doctrine that is not substantiated by the standard Church works, meaning the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion.  The only one authorized to bring forth any new doctrine is the President of the Church, who, when he does, will declare it as revelation from God, and it will be so accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church.  And if any man speak a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard  Church works, you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth. (The First Area General Conference for Germany, Austria, Holland, Italy, Switzerland, France, Belgium, and Spain of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, held in Munich Germany, August 24–26, 1973, Reports and Discourses, p.69)


Harold B. Lee:


It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they [speak] and write. Now you keep that in mind. I don't care what his position is, if he writes something or speaks something that goes beyond anything that you can find in the standard church works, unless that one be the prophet, seer, and revelator—please note that one exception—you may immediately say, "Well, that is his own idea." And if he says something that contradicts what is found in the standard church works (I think that is why we call them "standard"—it is the standard measure of all that men teach), you may know by that same token that it is false, regardless of the position of the man who says it. ("Place of the Living Prophet, Seer and Revelator," Stand in Holy Places, (1974), p.162-163; originally delivered on 8 July 1964)


Joseph Fielding Smith:


STANDARD WORKS JUDGE TEACHINGS OF ALL MEN


 It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teaching of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works [Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants, Pearl of Great Price] as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man's doctrine.

 

The standard works are scripture. They are binding upon us. They are the mind and will and voice of the Lord. He never has, he does not now, and he never will reveal anything which is contrary to what is in them. No person, speaking by the spirit of inspiration, will ever teach doctrine that is out of harmony with the truths God has already revealed.... 

You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only insofar as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works.

Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted.

Source: Page 575 of Doctrines of Salvation Volume 3 by Joseph Fielding Smith  


Bruce R. McConkie:


Men who wear the prophetic mantle are still men; they have their own views; and their understanding of gospel truths is dependent upon the study and inspiration that is theirs. Some prophets—I say it respectfully—know more and have greater inspiration than others. Thus, if Brigham Young, who was one of the greatest of the prophets, said something about Adam which is out of harmony with what is in the Book of Moses and in section 78, it is the scripture that prevails. This is one of the reasons we call our scriptures The Standard Works. They are the standard of judgment and the measuring rod against which all doctrines and views are weighed, and it does not make one particle of difference whose views are involved. The scriptures always take precedence. ("Finding Answers to Gospel Questions," Letter dated 1 July 1980. Published in Teaching Seminary Preservice Readings, Religion 370, 471, and 475 (2004))


President Gordon B. Hinckley:


“‘The Standard Works’ … are the reservoir of our doctrine from which flows the waters of gospel light. They provide the standard by which all gospel doctrine is measured. All other [materials] should spring from the word of the Lord as set forth in these volumes” (“Cornerstones of Responsibility” [regional representatives’ seminar, 5 Apr. 1991], 2).


Most of the Smith-Rigdon Restoration Movements stick to the LDS Scriptures as their source of authority as well. What this means for the Independent Mormon is that many ideas and practices thought to be binding on the LDS Christian is actually not binding at all, but are based on a particular sect's corporate policy and not actual scripture. For example, D&C 89 does not ban someone from the temple because they drink coffee and in fact the section says that this teachings are not given by commandment nor constraint. This has led one LDS YouTube channel Keystone (in April 2025), to say that someday coffee might be allowed in the Mormon Church again as it was for the first several decades.


In the New Testament the word church means Ekklesia, meaning the collective mystical body of Believers and not a church building, leadership hiearchy, or Dogma. The Book of Mormon follows this line of thinking when a group is kicked out of their house of worship they are told they can worship God in nature or anywhere, just as Jesus tells the Samaritan woman at the well.



In The Scriptural Teachings of Joseph Smith, at location 348-356 of the ebook we read, "Brother Joseph Smith, Jr. said: ... except the Church receive the fulness of the Scriptures (D&C 42:15; D&C 104:48.) that they would yet fail [5] (Oct. 25, 1831.) FWR, p. 16." Note as well the Book of Mormon passage: "Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore, they speak the words of Christ. Wherefore, I said unto you, feast upon the words of Christ; for behold, the words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do" (2 Nephi 32:3). The words of Christ are for us The Scriptures, especially the "thus sayeth the Lord" type passages, the Gospels, and the Doctrine of Christ in The Book of Mormon. Note that it does not say "feast upon the words of the Brethren (or any ecclesiastical leader), and they will tell you all things what you should do."


The Scripture Focused argument is simple: prophets prophesy (as Smith did), seers "see" things through spiritual eyes or use say a seer stone to reveal scripture, or they act as revelators declaring "Thus saith the Lord." The body of believers (the Ecclesia) then vote on those revealed words to become Scripture by common consent (see D&C 26). The succession of Brighamite leaders as Church Presidents (following in line from Brigham Young in Utah) most often do not do this; that is, they do not provide ongoing legitament revelations that are voted on by common consent. All we have are a few claims to revelation with D&C 138 and Official Declarations 1 and 2 (the latter of which was merely a policy change to remove a racial policy); and the Brighamite-Church leader Russel M. Nelson, in January 2016, claiming President Monson and the "12 apostles" received a revelation ("the revealed will of the Lord") to withhold baptism from children of gay parents (without first gaining the approval of the "Bretheren" to do so), which was then reversed with another alleged "revelation"; and the Brighamite Church website then saying "the changes reflect the continuing revelation that has been a part of the modern Church since the Restoration" (Source: Policy Changes Announced for Members in Gay Marriages, Children of LGBT Parents Contributed By Sarah Jane Weaver, Church News editor, 4 April 2019). What is obvious is that besides the exception of D&C 138, what you have is the leaders of the Brighamite sect basically appealing to "revelation" to mostly undo prior policies. This is because they are in the role of guardians of the Church most of the time and not acting as prohets, seers, and revelators as much as the Prophet the Joseph Smith. The undeniable truth is that you just don't have anything comparable to Joseph Smith channeling the voice of Jesus (just as the Apostle Paul did) in today's Utah-based Brighamite sect. This does not mean that the Brighamite Church Leaders have never been inspired or can't be inspired but that the facts of the matter are that they are obviously functioning more as administrators, managers and guardians of Joseph Smith's Revelations than anything else.



As Parley P. Pratt writes on pages 12-13 of Keys to the Science of Theology, regarding the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans and how the Lord then went to the Gentiles in 70 AD:


"From that very time to the present—One thousand eight hundred and fifty-one of the Christian era, the voice of a Prophet has not been heard among the Jews. Angels have not ministered unto them. There has been no vision from the Lord. No dream or interpretation. No answer by Urim or Thummim [or seer stone]. No Prophet. No voice. No sound. No reproof. No comforting whisper. All is silence—stillness— ..."


Can't the same be said of the Brigamite sect today, that ever since the days of Joseph Smith and Parley P. Pratt, there has been no real visions from the Lord, no dream or interpretation; no answer by Urim or Thummim [or use of the seer stone the LDS Church has in its possession]. No Prophet [that gives prophetic prophecies like Joseph Smith did]. No voice [of the Lord as came through Joseph]. No sound. No reproof [when are the Brethren ever reproofed/rebuked by revelation from the Lord like Joseph often was]?


Could this be because Joseph Smith was the last genuine prophetic seer and revelator of new scripture for the Restoration? Could it be that what we have in the LDS Scriptural Canon (voted on by common consent) is sufficient to move forward when the Standard Works are combined with wise guidance by LDS Leqders and receiving our personal revelation ourselves? Is not the best course to take to enact the core principles and values of the restored gospel by feasting on the words of Christ in scripture?


I am not saying that the LDS Q15 can't provide prophetic guidance, in fact I think they can and did with the Proclamation on the Family. But I think we need to get real in recogzing a prophet is a prophet only when he is acting as such, and not act like every statement or teaching from an LDS Leader is revelation to be blindly obeyed without one's own confirming personal revelation by the dictates of our own conscience after consulting scripture just as Sidney Rigdon was told to do as a checks and balances to Joseph's revelations. Formit is clear to me that the current Brighamite Leadership is not providing continuous revelation akin to the Apostle to the Gentiles (Paul) and the Prophet of the Restoration (Joseph Smith). So it behooves us to be wise as serpents and not be tossed to and from with every wind of doctrine and that when they seat in Moses and Joseph's seat that we follow that which is wise and if not we hold fast only to the good.



Could it be that when the heavens were opened and revelations poured forth through the Apostle Paul (with the Lord speaking through him) to integrate the Gentiles into Israel, that when Paul died the revolatory gift closed for a time, or at least no one had the spiritual skills to manifest the gift? After Paul's death, according to biblical scholarship, what we have is those who came after Paul were not speaking "the word of the Lord" but instead adding to Paul's revolatory words by providing structure and policy changes as maintenance; until new light and knowledge was needed through Joseph Smith: who was like Paul in that he had the prophetic gift, the ability to reveal the "word of the Lord." Could it be that today we just don't have somebody with that spiritual gift? Or is it because that spiritual gift is not needed and the Restored Scriptures are sufficient for now?


For Scripture Focused LDS, the Gifts of the Spirit is available to all the Saints. Yet when revelation truly comes there is usually only one who is a Spiritual Master of the Gifts (like Paul or Joseph): who both demonstrated strong leadership skills and the strength of going against established traditions. Paul challenged those who demanded Gentiles be circumcised and Joseph challenging the Augustinian Creeds. Both demonstrated the gift of producing scripture. Both challenged the leaders of their day.


So there is no "one true prophet" in a line of succession based on the seniority of the next leader in line (as in the Brigamite sect). Intead, the Lord can call anyone to lead, whether it be Moses or Paul, or an obscure farm boy like Joseph Smith: who is described as being "like unto Moses" in The Book of Mormon.


The truth is Paul was not "next in line" as prophet, seer and revelator. Bible scholarship shows that it was James the Just who was the leader of the Jerusalem Church after Jesus died. Paul came out of nowhere to challenge those who he referred to as the "super apostles." For more details see Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity by James D. Tabor.



Meanwhile, most of what Jesus did was challenge the religious leadership of his day, as many of the religious leaders of his Jewish Faith were emphasizing the Tradition of the Elders; while he was emphasizing a scripture focused approach by basically arguing "the spirit of the law" in interpreting the Torah (the Standard Works or Scripture Canon of his day) and not adding heavy burdens by adding man-made policies and traditions to the origional ways of The Scriptures. This is why Jesus said to his fellow Jews in Matthew 23:3 (EXB): "So you should ·obey [do; practice] and ·follow [keep; observe] whatever they tell you, but ·their lives are not good examples for you to follow [L do not follow their actions]. ·They tell you to do things, but they themselves don’t do them [L For they say but do not do]." In other words, do what they say when they sit on "Moses's seat" (while reading from the Torah) and what they say aligns with Scripture; but when they add their traditions and policies that don't match the Scriptures, don't bother following their false traditions. As he said earlier in Matthew 15:14 (EXB): "·Stay away from the Pharisees [L Leave/Ignore them]; they are blind ·leaders [guides]. And if a blind person ·leads [guides] a blind person, both will fall into a ·ditch [pit; hole].”


Jesus also challenged the leaders who ran the temple and basically spent most of his time criticizing those in charge at that time; and one could argue that he actually came to end controlling forms of "dogmatic religion."



So to recap, any Christian/Saint is capable of receiving revelation and producing description on par with The Book of Mormon or the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, we have just not seen that demonstrated.


What we have seen demonstrated was accomplished by Joseph Smith who produced The Book of Mormon and multiple revelations that has not been matched by anyone after him. So for Scripture Focused Mormons, Joseph alone is the Prophet of the Restoration and the "Church" (in Greek: Ekklesia, meaning "the assembled community") is the LDS Restorationists collectively and not a Corporation led by a CEO/Church President in Utah. In other words, the church is the "vine and the branches'' (as the Book of Mormon teaches) and not a church building or hiearchical leadership.


See episode (1), episode (4), and episode (47) of The Iron Rod Podcast. Note that I disagree with the concluding thesis of Taylor Drake, on this podcast, that Joseph Smith was a "fallen prophet." Taylor Drake explains his theory in detail in his book Joseph in the Gap: The Hidden History That Explains Mormonism's Past, Present, and Future. I do agree with the historical facts that Drake presents in his book and on this podcast. I also agree with their emphasis on being Scripture Focused, and not following any Mormon leaders blindly when they haven't proven the actual gift of revelation, and especially if they contradict Scripture. But I have an alternative theory and interpretation of the historical facts and data points that they discuss, which I discuss in my blog series Sex, Gods and Zion, and my website The Phases and Strategies of God. So I agree with most of their historical analysis and positions, just not their concluding argument that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet.


Moving on to what I do agree with them on. In episode 1 of the Iron Rod Podcast, one of the speakers makes an excellent point that very often when something is offensive or troublesome in Mormon teaching and culture, it is usually not in the actual Scriptures (the Standard Works) but is some additional tradition added by the Utah-based Brighamite leaders; that very often, turns out to be not in accordance with the Scriptures. For example, the Utah-based LDS Church teaching that African-Americans were the "seed of Cain" and thus restricted from holding the priesthood, was taught by their First Presidency in official statements in 1949 and 1969. According to fairlatterdaysaints.org, around this time Church President David O McKay:


 formed a special committee of the Twelve that "concluded there was no sound scriptural basis for the policy but that church membership was not prepared for its reversal."[Leonard J. Arrington, Adventures of a Church Historian (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1998), 183]


(Source) 



As we can see there was no scriptural justification for this erroneous doctrine and policy, it was simply based on tradition. Yet it was interpreted as official doctrine while it was actually false doctrine that remained doctrine and taught by the Brighamite leaders for over a century. The Utah-based LDS Church finally disavowed this false doctrine in the 2013 essay Race and the Priesthood, acknowledging it was never scriptural and was based on the racial attitudes of Brigham Young. Other examples can be given where the General Authorities (or "the Brethren") in the Utah-based LDS Church taught something as doctrine or church policy that was something completely contrary to and at odds with the Scriptures.


Before I continue I want to present a disclaimer: I am not encouraging all Utah-based Mormons to leave or go inactive from the Brighamite Church. I am more of a "big tent" type of person. Meaning I am seeking to present a variety of positions under the same big tent of the Smith-Rigdon Restoration Movement. I find that there are many roads and options to take in the broad Restoration Movement, other than one narrow option of what I call Brethrenism. It is true that I consider Brethrenism a blindly obedient attitude toward Utah-based LDS leaders and a dynamic of what transactional analysis calls a child-to-parent or parent-to-child dynamic. But I also know that everybody is different, and there are different personality types and intellectual styles. Some people prefer to be essentially "parented" so to speak and given absolutist answers and to have their life "controlled" or constrained to a certain degree. There is also the familial comfort and social stability of the institutional Utah-based church and its financial success and structural security. I do think the Utah-base Church does more good than harm overall, and I wish to see it continue to be a positive force for good in the world. Yet just as not all shoes are made to fit all, the varieties of Mormonisms (Restoration groups) is like a shoe store with many side shoes for different size feet. So Brighamite Mormonism can be restrictive and uncomfortable and thus "unhealthy" for some people, just as you can't force someone with a size 7 foot to fit into a size 4 shoe without causing a lot of a foot pains. Yet there are certain personalities and temperaments who have certain needs and preferences, so that the Brighamite sect fits them perfectly.



 



at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)