LDS Freedom Forum

I was foolish enough to lend my copy of this to someone and "Poof" it is gone. Does anyone have a copy they can post?
Gracias!

Is this it?
his is a vision John Taylor saw of events that are still to come. From the journal of Wilford Woodruff (Dec 16, 1877).

NOTE: There are some that dispute whether or not it was John Taylor that had this vision. The vision does, in fact, come from the journal of Wilford Woodruff. It is verified that it was not Wilford Woodruff that had the vision. Many believe it to be John Taylor’s vision.

I went to bed as usual at about 7:30PM. I had been read­ing a revela­tion in the French lan­guage. My mind was calm, more so than usual if possible, so I composed myself for sleep, but could not. I felt a strange feeling come over me and apparently be­came partially uncon­scious. Still I was not asleep, nor ex­actly awake, with dreary feeling. The first thing that I recognized was that I was in the tabernacle of Ogden, Utah. I was sit­ting in the back part of the build­ing for fear they would call on me to preach, which however they did, for after sing­ing the second time they called me to the stand.

I arose to speak and said that I did­n’t know that I had anything es­pecially to say, ex­cept to bear my tes­timony of the Latter-day work, when all at once it seemed as if I was lifted out of myself and I said, “Yes, I have something to say and that is this: Some of my brethren have been ask­ing, “What is be­coming of us? What is the wind blowing?” I will answer you right here what is coming very shortly.”

I was then in a dream, im­mediately in the city of Salt Lake, and wandering around in the streets and in all parts of the city, and on the doors of the houses I found badges of mourn­ing and I could not find a house but was in mourning. I passed my own house and found the same sign there, and I asked the ques­tion, “Is that me that is dead?” Someone gave me the an­swer, “No, you will get through it all.”

It seemed strange to me that I saw no person in the streets in all my wan­dering around the coun­try. I seemed to be in their houses with the sick, but saw no funeral proces­sion, nor anything of the kind, but the city looking still and as though the people were praying. And it seemed that they had controlled the dis­ease, but what the dis­ease was I did not learn; it was not made known to me. I then looked over the country, north, east, south, and west, and the same mourning was in every land and in every place.

The next thing I knew I was just this side of Omaha. It seemed though I was above the earth, and look­ing down upon it. As I passed along upon my way east I saw the road full of people, mostly women, with just what they could carry in bundles on their backs, trav­eling to the moun­tains on foot. I won­dered how they would get through with such a small pack on their backs. It was re­markable to us[?] that there were so few men among them. It didn’t seem to me as though the cars were run­ning, the rails looked rusty and the roads aban­doned; and I have no con­ception of how I traveled as I looked down upon the peo­ple.

I continued east by the way of Omaha and Council Bluffs, which were full of disease. There were women every­where. The state of Illinois and Mis­souri were in a tumult, men killing one an­other, women joining the fight­ing, fam­ily against family in the most horrid manner.

I imagined next that I was in Wash­ington and I found desola­tion there. The White House was empty and the Halls of Congress the same, and everything in ru­ins. The people seemed to have left the city and left it to take care of itself.

I was in Baltimore. In the square where the Monument of 1812 stands in front of the Char­les Hotel. I saw dead piled up so as to fill the street square. I saw mothers cutting the throats of their own children for their blood. I saw them suck it from their throats to quench their own thirst and then lie down and die. The water of Che­sapeake Bay was stagnant, and the stench arising from it on ac­count of their throw­ing their bod­ies into it so terrible, that the very smell carried death with it. I saw no man ex­cept they were dead or dying in the streets and very few women. Those I saw were crazy and in an ugly condi­tion. Everywhere I went I beheld the same sights all over the city; it was terrible be­yond description to look upon.

I thought this must be the end; but no, I was seemingly in an instant in the city of Philadel­phia. There eve­rything was still. No living soul was there to greet me. It seemed the whole city was with­out any inhabi­tants. In the south of Chestnut Street and in fact everywhere I went, the putrefaction of the dead caused such a stench that it was impos­sible for any living thing to breathe, nor did I see any living thing in the city.

Next I found myself in Broadway, in the city of New York, and there it seemed the people had done the best they could to overcome the disease, but in wandering down Broad­way I saw the bodies of beautiful women lying, some dead and oth­ers in a dy­ing condition, on the sidewalks. I saw men come out of cellars and ravish the per­sons of some that were yet alive and then kill them and rob their bodies of all the valu­ables they had upon them. Then before they could get back to the cellar they would roll over a time or two and die in ag­ony. In some of the back streets I saw them kill some of their own offspring and eat their raw flesh, and in a few minutes die them­selves. Every­where I went I saw the same scene of horror and de­struction and death and rap­ine.

No car­riages, buggies, or cars were running; but death and de­struc­tion were every­where. Then I saw fire start and just at that moment a mighty East wind sprang up and car­ried the flames over the city and it burned until there was not a sin­gle building left standing there, even down to the waters edge. Wharves and shipping all seemed to burn and follow in common destruction where the “great city” was a short time ago. The stench from the bodies that were burn­ing was so great that it was carried a long dis­tance cross the Hudson Bay and carried death and destruction wherever it pene­trated. I cannot paint in words the horror that seemed to compass me about; it was beyond description of man.

I sup­posed this was the end; but it was not. I was given to understand the same horror was being en­acted all over the coun­try, east, west, north, and south. Few were left alive, still there were some.

Immediately after I seemed to be standing on the left bank of the Mis­souri River, opposite e the City of In­de­pendence, but there was no city. I saw the whole state of Missouri and Illi­nois and all of Iowa, a complete desert with no living being there. A short dis­tance from the river how­ever, I saw twelve men dressed in temple robes, stand­ing in a square or nearly so (and I under­stood it repre­sented the Twelve Gates of the New Jerusa­lem.) Their hands were uplifted in consecration of the ground and lay­ing the corner stone of the tem­ple. I saw myraids of an­gels hovering over them, and saw also an immense pil­lar of clouds over them and heard the angels singing the most heav­enly music. The words were “Now is estab­lished the King­dom of God and his Christ, which shall never more be thrown down.”

I saw people com­ing from the river and from the desert places a long way off to help build the temple and it seemed that hosts of an­gels all helped to get material to build with and I saw some of them who wore temple clothes come and build the tem­ple and the city, and all the time I saw the great pillar of clouds hovering over the place.

Instantly, however, I found my­self again in the taber­nacle at Ogden. And yet, I could still see the building go on and I got quite animated in call­ing on the people in the tabernacle to listen to the beautiful music, for the an­gels were singing the same music I had heard be­fore. “Now is estab­lished the King­dom of God and his Christ, which shall never more be thrown down.”

At this I seemed to stagger back from the pulpit and Brother Francis D. Richards and some others caught my arm and prevented me from falling. Then I fin­ished so abruptly. Still even then I had not fainted, but was simply ex­hausted.

They I rolled over in bed and awoke just as the city clock was strik­ing twelve.

I suspect you are referring to the vision of John Taylor as recorded by Wilford Woodruff. It can be read in "The Cleansing of America" by Skousen, Page 13.

Also covered in detail in Brent and Blaine Yorgasen's Last Day's book....

and Duane Crowther's Master's Thesis that eventually became the book Prophecy: Key to the Future

How do they say it's not his vision if he wrote in his journal, "I had a very strange vision" then records it? I found a PDF of gems from his journal online. Did WW know french? Or is that why they think it's John Taylor's, because he knew french.

First time I heard this vision was in a sacrament meeting as a youth. The bishop told the speaker to stop reading it to not frighten the children. This was after he read the part about parents drinking the children's blood to quench their thirst.

Missouri sounds pretty swept clean in this vision. (I state this because we've had questions as to whether or not it's already been swept clean by other events.)

Is this vision officially accepted as a vision of a prophet?

Quiet Cricket wrote:
Is this vision officially accepted as a vision of a prophet?

accepted by whom? If he said it, I don't care who else accepts it, "officially" binding or not.

If this was given to the Lord's Prophet, the only thing left is for us to see for ourselves, through revelation, if it is true or not.

Mahonri wrote:

Quiet Cricket wrote:
Is this vision officially accepted as a vision of a prophet?

accepted by whom? If he said it, I don't care who else accepts it, "officially" binding or not.

If this was given to the Lord's Prophet, the only thing left is for us to see for ourselves, through revelation, if it is true or not.

Isn't it true that when a prophet speaks as a prophet, it is through the Holy Ghost? Otherwise, he only speaks as a man. Where is it written that states the dream referred to is scripture?

For dreams, writings or comments to be prophecy, doesn't it have to be cannonized? In the Journal of Discourses, it states that Wilford Woodruff did ordinance work for all the signers of Declaration of Independence, and 50 others,--a total of 100 persons. There were 56 signers, so if he did all the signers plus 50 more--that would make 106--not 100. Therefore, what is to be believed? Either he did not really do all 56 signers, or only fifty of them appeared to him. None of this is cannonized or it would be deemed as false doctrine, wouldn't it? I don't think Journal of Discourses is scripture. We read:
In 1877 the Founding Fathers appeared in vision to Elder Wilford Woodruff, president of the St. George Temple at the time and one of the Twelve Apostles, and desired their temple work to be done for them:

Before I left St. George, the spirits of the [Founding Fathers] gathered around me, wanting to know why we did not redeem them. Said they, “You have had the use of the Endowment House for a number of years, and yet nothing has ever been done for us. We laid the foundation of the government you now enjoy, and we never apostatized from it, but we remained true to it and were faithful to God.” These were the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and they waited on me for two days and two nights. . . . I straightway went into the baptismal font and called upon Brother McCallister to baptize me for the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and fifty other eminent men, making one hundred in all, including John Wesley, Columbus, and others.6

Likewise, I don't think John Taylor's dream, or vision is cannonized either.

http://www.latterdayconservative.com/ar ... ays-vision

The Lectures on Faith were taken out of Doctrine and Covenants because they are not cannonized scripture, Nevertheless, we are told to read and learn from them.

I set my alarm clock to wake me about one hour before I normally get up. When the clock wakes me up, I turn it off, lay flat on my back with my head supported by a neck pad, just a couple of inches, my hands on my stomach. Then I put my mind on something I'm concerned about, something I'm seeking information about, the well being of a friend or member of my family, things like that. after thinking for a few minutes,then I let my mind drift, my mind will drift naturally from subject to subject anyway, I don't try to control it, no concentration necessary. I'll go back to sleep and about 25% of the time I'll have a dream about the subject of my concern.

If I have no dream concerning the subject, I take it as a sign I need have no more concern about that subject. However, I have had the answer I sought for in dreams several days following. If I have the same dream twice, I record it, if I don't record it I'll keep having it until I do.

There are times when the dream just doesn't make sense, I'll puzzle over it for several days, then one morning I'll get another dream that clears up the puzzle for me. I always record those dreams. I keep a notebook besides my bed, or sometimes I'll get up and record my dreams on my computer for posterity,--- I have terrible handwriting, especially that early in the morning.

These dreams are meant for me, most of them would have no meaning to somebody else, they are usually based on my life's experiences, how I view things in my life, my family and in the world.

That's how it works for me!

Bob

freedomfighter wrote:

Mahonri wrote:

Quiet Cricket wrote:
Is this vision officially accepted as a vision of a prophet?

accepted by whom? If he said it, I don't care who else accepts it, "officially" binding or not.

If this was given to the Lord's Prophet, the only thing left is for us to see for ourselves, through revelation, if it is true or not.

Isn't it true that when a prophet speaks as a prophet, it is through the Holy Ghost? Otherwise, he only speaks as a man. Where is it written that states the dream referred to is scripture?

For dreams, writings or comments to be prophecy, doesn't it have to be cannonized? In the Journal of Discourses, it states that Wilford Woodruff did ordinance work for all the signers of Declaration of Independence, and 50 others,--a total of 100 persons. There were 56 signers, so if he did all the signers plus 50 more--that would make 106--not 100. Therefore, what is to be believed? Either he did not really do all 56 signers, or only fifty of them appeared to him. None of this is cannonized or it would be deemed as false doctrine, wouldn't it? I don't think Journal of Discourses is scripture. We read:
In 1877 the Founding Fathers appeared in vision to Elder Wilford Woodruff, president of the St. George Temple at the time and one of the Twelve Apostles, and desired their temple work to be done for them:

Before I left St. George, the spirits of the [Founding Fathers] gathered around me, wanting to know why we did not redeem them. Said they, “You have had the use of the Endowment House for a number of years, and yet nothing has ever been done for us. We laid the foundation of the government you now enjoy, and we never apostatized from it, but we remained true to it and were faithful to God.” These were the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and they waited on me for two days and two nights. . . . I straightway went into the baptismal font and called upon Brother McCallister to baptize me for the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and fifty other eminent men, making one hundred in all, including John Wesley, Columbus, and others.6

Likewise, I don't think John Taylor's dream, or vision is cannonized either.

http://www.latterdayconservative.com/ar ... ays-vision

The Lectures on Faith were taken out of Doctrine and Covenants because they are not cannonized scripture, Nevertheless, we are told to read and learn from them.

1st I never claimed it was scripture, I said that we needed to pray if it was true.

2nd you are being way too nit picky with the exact numbers. They were trying to get a point across when retelling the experience, they were not making an exact record of it at that point.

Joseph Fielding Smith lamented the fact that the lectures were taken out, but explained that although they were important and true, they were not direct revelations, which is (according to his explanation) what the purpose of the D&C was all about.

Who cares what is "canonized"? If it is true, it is a part of our religion. Not being a part of cannon just puts the responsibility upon ourselves more than if it were in the "standard works", but truth is truth no matter where it comes according to the Prophet Joseph.

I have never heard this before but I enjoyed reading it. I have no doubt that things will get very ugly. D&C 88:91 says: And all things shall be in commotion; and surely, men’s hearts shall fail them; for fear shall come upon all people.

I may be wrong but as I was reading this particular vision the impression came to me that its possible that this vision is spiritual in nature and is to be interpreted rather than to be taken literally. The "disease" could be sin or lack of spirituality. Mothers drinking the blood of their children could be symbolic of mothers being indifferent and not teaching their childen correct principles, and therefore harming them spiritually. Many people in those big cities are spriritually decayed, especially Baltimore. I have a good friend who lived in inner city Balitmore and the nearest member to him was miles away and I believe the branch was an hour or so away from him.

Someone in my ward was saying something about someone smelling like cigarettes in church. My father-in-law has always said "the smell of cigerette smoke is the sweetest smell in sacrament meeting" because that means someone is coming back......What if pornography had a smell? I'm sure it would probably smell much like the death and decay described in this vision.

wolfman wrote:
Someone in my ward was saying something about someone smelling like cigarettes in church. My father-in-law has always said "the smell of cigerette smoke is the sweetest smell in sacrament meeting" because that means someone is coming back......What if pornography had a smell? I'm sure it would probably smell much like the death and decay described in this vision.

I really enjoyed this. Thanks.

If a prophet says, "Thus saith the Lord, getting a tattoo is a sin" then it would be scripture -- if on the other hand it is given as counsel then it is not a sin, just advice (perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple). If a prophet makes a point to repeat a dream, which is a state of inspiration in many parts of the scriptures, then it is prophetic -- not just his opinion or "wise counsel" and to minimize it as perhaps just a dream might be denying the power of the spirit working through a prophet to give warning. just my two cents.

Fiannan wrote:(perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple).

so if we don't obey something by acting or not acting upon it (whatever the case may be) but can still go to the Temple, what we did is not bad enough to go to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom?

It seems like you are saying if you pass the Temple questions, you are good to go. Is that what you are saying?

Thanks Nan, That was it. I love this vision. I don't know if it will ever come to pass or how close it would be to this, BUT, I do know that enough of the brethren have had visions and said things so close to this that I think it will be very close to reality. AND SOON!
Obama is the man and will not give up power when the leadership changes next November. Trouble is a brewing.
One example is why the bill giving Obama power to kill the internet would ever be necessary and yet it just passed out of committee. Why would that not scare every man woman and child in the USA? Hugo Chavez's blood brother is in office here and following his pattern established in Venezuela and the sheep say, Great, give me more....( or to fans.. " Thank you sir, may I have another" )

[/quote]2nd you are being way too nit picky with the exact numbers. They were trying to get a point across when retelling the experience, they were not making an exact record of it at that point.

Joseph Fielding Smith lamented the fact that the lectures were taken out, but explained that although they were important and true, they were not direct revelations, which is (according to his explanation) what the purpose of the D&C was all about.

Who cares what is "canonized"? If it is true, it is a part of our religion. Not being a part of cannon just puts the responsibility upon ourselves more than if it were in the "standard works", but truth is truth no matter where it comes according to the Prophet Joseph.[/quote]

I'm merely pointing out that we don't have to believe everything we read as fact, unless it is within church canon. Furthermore, it does'nt matter who had the dream or why, it doesn't affect my salvation one way another. It's hard enough to live each day let alone worry about whether or not this dream has any significants. It's like the missing scriptures we hear about, many Mormons don't even read what we have, let alone "feast upon" them, so why should they need the missing ones? Some LDS have never read the Book of Mormon, but they really concern themselves with a dream. The Savior said: Matt. 6:34
34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

I also know for a fact that in our church is a certain catagory of members that I have heard referred to as "The Goose Bump Gang". These people thrive on taking topics and sensationalizing them, striving to cause blood stiring statements and spreading rumors of no real significants.

And you're right, we must: 1 Thes. 5: 21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good". In other words, do not believe every wind of doctrine, it may not be true or factual. That which is good (or true), hold fast to it.

I await the day I hear of two prophets in Jerusalem, but I cannot let the rest of my life go by worrying about it. There are way to many problems with government right now that have to be addressed and rectified.

By the way, I have a right to be nit picky, Wilford Woodruff is my Great, Great Grandfather. Again, I don't stress over how many signers appeared to him. All I did was present numbers.

My experience with dreams is different than Bob's. If my dream is from the Lord, upon awaking I immediately know the meaning of the dream. If it isn't from him I have no such experience upon awaking. And since I dream every night, I am glad that God has given me a way to know the difference. The dreams from him do not happen often and usually are warnings to me about things I need to change or learn. I also record them when I have them.

I wonder if this dream was spiritually symbolic if the mother's drinking the blood couldn't also be abortion.

freedomfighter wrote:I have a right to be nit picky,

"Nit Picky" is not the correct term. The correct term is: "Accurate". Accuracy is crucial even in understanding the meaning of scripture. We should be accurate with information given in talks in Sacrament. Likewise, do we want to be "Nit Picky" about the Constitution, or do we want to be accurate in what it says and how it should be embraced by members of the church as well as others?

freedomfighter wrote:"Nit Picky" is not the correct term. The correct term is: "Accurate". Accuracy is crucial even in understanding the meaning of scripture. We should be accurate with information given in talks in Sacrament. Likewise, do we want to be "Nit Picky" about the Constitution, or do we want to be accurate in what it says and how it should be embraced by members of the church as well as others?

looking beyond the mark, missing the point, etc. The POINT of the recounting was to explain a principle, not give a history lesson.

Mahonri wrote:

Fiannan wrote:(perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple).

so if we don't obey something by acting or not acting upon it (whatever the case may be) but can still go to the Temple, what we did is not bad enough to go to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom?

It seems like you are saying if you pass the Temple questions, you are good to go. Is that what you are saying?

Well, the Word of Wisdom says clearly that obedience to the WofW will open you more up to the Spirit as well as being able to run and not be weary, walk and not faint.

Are you saying that the many overweight and obese people in the Church are being obedient? I have to say that if my daughter asks for a navel piercing when she is older I would be far more willing to let her do it than I would allow her to sit around and eat junk food. A piercing or a blue shirt when blessing the sacrament is not being sinful.

Fiannan wrote:

Mahonri wrote:

Fiannan wrote:(perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple).

so if we don't obey something by acting or not acting upon it (whatever the case may be) but can still go to the Temple, what we did is not bad enough to go to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom?

It seems like you are saying if you pass the Temple questions, you are good to go. Is that what you are saying?

Well, the Word of Wisdom says clearly that obedience to the WofW will open you more up to the Spirit as well as being able to run and not be weary, walk and not faint.

Are you saying that the many overweight and obese people in the Church are being obedient? I have to say that if my daughter asks for a navel piercing when she is older I would be far more willing to let her do it than I would allow her to sit around and eat junk food. A piercing or a blue shirt when blessing the sacrament is not being sinful.

WOW. Sad, but at least I know where you are coming from.

Fiannan wrote:

Mahonri wrote:

Fiannan wrote:(perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple).

so if we don't obey something by acting or not acting upon it (whatever the case may be) but can still go to the Temple, what we did is not bad enough to go to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom?

It seems like you are saying if you pass the Temple questions, you are good to go. Is that what you are saying?

Well, the Word of Wisdom says clearly that obedience to the WofW will open you more up to the Spirit as well as being able to run and not be weary, walk and not faint.

Are you saying that the many overweight and obese people in the Church are being obedient? I have to say that if my daughter asks for a navel piercing when she is older I would be far more willing to let her do it than I would allow her to sit around and eat junk food. A piercing or a blue shirt when blessing the sacrament is not being sinful.

erm no...it simply isn't done. on that note i saw a girl in the temple with a nose piercing and i was floored. I can't say i was hateful about her, that's not it. I was just super surprised and disappointed.

you think the windows of heaven are going to be closed less if you choose a piercing over being fat? I believe that body piercings are latter day "counsel" which pretty much translates to "commandment" in my book.

Fiannan wrote:

Mahonri wrote:

Fiannan wrote:(perhaps inspired, but not scripture and not something that will keep you out of the temple).

so if we don't obey something by acting or not acting upon it (whatever the case may be) but can still go to the Temple, what we did is not bad enough to go to the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom?

It seems like you are saying if you pass the Temple questions, you are good to go. Is that what you are saying?

Well, the Word of Wisdom says clearly that obedience to the WofW will open you more up to the Spirit as well as being able to run and not be weary, walk and not faint.

Are you saying that the many overweight and obese people in the Church are being obedient? I have to say that if my daughter asks for a navel piercing when she is older I would be far more willing to let her do it than I would allow her to sit around and eat junk food. A piercing or a blue shirt when blessing the sacrament is not being sinful.

Help me to understand something. When did church authorities say we could catagorize sin at any degree? All it takes is one sin to keep any of us out of the presence of God. Is there any difference between someone being FAT as opposed to someone else cheating a business partner? In the eyes of God, which of these sinners have a better chance for the Celestial Kingdom, a pick-pocket or a rapist? Or the person that gets a tattoo as opposed to he who is a Meth head? How about a person that uses foul language on other motorists as opposed to someone that is addicted to pornography?

On a lighter side, I once saw a guy wearing a T-shirt that read: I'M FAT, But you are ugly, and I can go on a diet?

Fat people could wear a yellow T-shirt that reads: CAUTION!, WIDE LOAD. And if they're real heavy it would read: CAUTION! EXTRA WIDE LOAD. That way they're less likely to offend anyone.

FYI: Not all "fat" people outright disobey the WOW and sit around eating junk food. Some people struggle with it all their lives. Some because of what their parents fed them, others because of genetics. Of course there are other reasons. I feel one of the biggest reasons is because people really don't know what's in their food. I watched a documentation once on high fructose corn syrup. Since then I've steered clear of it. I've had some friends tell me about different foods they try to eat thinking they're healthy (ie yogurt, bread) but they're loaded with garbage. With a lot of patience and time you can find things that truly are healthy. I believe it's Danimals (sp?) yogurt that has no HFCS and I found bread at Walmart with no HFCS made with molasses and honey. Walmart (Great Value and I think Bryers comes pretty close) even carries an all natural ice cream that has no added preservatives, food coloring, etc. Anyway, point is we trust the claims and labels on the food instead of reading the ingredients list. There are a lot of skinny people out there who eat junk food. My mother being one of them. She would keep of stash of cookies/crackers/goodies in her closet for her lunches at work. She could eat whatever she wanted and it didn't even matter. I was the same way though until I had kids then I had to accept the fact that I couldn't eat the same way anymore. Just because people are skinny doesn't mean they eat healthy.

Quiet Cricket wrote:How do they say it's not his vision if he wrote in his journal, "I had a very strange vision" then records it? I found a PDF of gems from his journal online. Did WW know french? Or is that why they think it's John Taylor's, because he knew french.

First time I heard this vision was in a sacrament meeting as a youth. The bishop told the speaker to stop reading it to not frighten the children. This was after he read the part about parents drinking the children's blood to quench their thirst.

Missouri sounds pretty swept clean in this vision. (I state this because we've had questions as to whether or not it's already been swept clean by other events.)

Is this vision officially accepted as a vision of a prophet?

Because like a lot of our recorded church history it was Wilford Woodruff who recorded this vision in his Journal. People questioned whether it was actually him that saw the vision. What gives it away is the French connection. John Taylor was the only one that spoke French.