The Lord declares at the beginning

[sushi_chef]

sushi_ kinda remembers read something like joseph said by himself, after sometime of that transgression/chastisement of being persuaded, he was now forgiven and allowed to use his seer stones instead of urim and thummim.

so, at that time he kinda rejoiced his born gift of seership was approved by the lord ..that may indicate the lord allowed his born seership related other gifts continued on with him for the lord's works..

[Shawn Henry]

It always depends on the context. But consider the following two concepts in relation to each other:

The course of the Lord is one eternal round. (D&C 3:2)
From eternity to eternity he is the same, and his years never fail. (D&C 76:4)

Where would a beginning point exist in one eternal round? And where one eternal round concludes, does another begin?

That's a good question. In the context of the 1828 revelation, I was thinking more about that being the beginning point of this dispensation, or the point at which the Lord might declare what would happen in this dispensation.

[Shawn Henry]

All you people obsessed with apostasy and "going", or, "went off the rails" back in the 1800's.
We are all "off the rails" and have been for a century or more, so, what makes you think you can discern the times of Joseph and Brigham when your all blind as a bat.

If we don't learn where things went wrong, we are likely to repeat the same mistakes. We are blind as a people, but that doesn't mean we have to stay blind individually.

[Shawn Henry]

Are you though implying that this pertains to the entire church somehow?

No, it's only about Joseph, but it does pertain to us in the sense that we need to know if he failed to heed the Lord's warning. If he did, the Lord said, "he must fall". The idea that he fell is something we all must deal with intellectually.

[Shawn Henry]

It seems to me that the apostasy took place before 1832 when D&C 84:54-58 was received. Actually it seems to have been anticipated by the Lord in section 3 from 1828 in these words:

4 For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him.
5 Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them.
6 And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.

The 1833 wording:

Behold thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall, but remember God is merciful: Therefore, repent of that which thou hast done, and he will only cause thee to be afflicted for a season, and thou art still chosen, and wilt again be called to the work; and except thou do this, thou shalt be delivered up and become as other men, and have no more gift.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... ts-1833/12

The meaning is completely changed, which makes the Lord look incompetent as a giver of revelations.

Or, the first revelation was spot on and the second is the fruits of the first being fulfilled.

[Alexander]

Yeah... Joseph again taking a scripture out of context - on the surface it looks like he is following Paul's example, and unless a close reading is done one would believe he is doing right, but Paul is speaking in a way to show what he has suffered for the kingdoms sake, to bring them to the Lord

Of course, how did I not see it before. See it’s totally completely different for the adored and just Paul; but heaven forbid Joseph glory in the sufferings, the vast amount of imprisonments, slander, and pushback he has endured. Shame on Joseph.

“I should be like a fish out of water if I were out of persecution; and it requires all this to keep me humble— the Lord has constituted me so curiously that I glory in persecution;— I am not near so humble as if I was not persecuted.
…
I can go to the cross, I can lay down my life, but don’t forsake me. I want the friendship of my brethren— let us teach the things of Jesus Christ
…
I have set your minds at liberty by letting you know the things of Jesus Christ”

and saying to compare what he has suffered with those who claim to be minsters and new apostles of Christ. Joseph is basically taking a piss and saying "look at me" I"m better than all these guys. He isn't boasting in his infirmities at all or rather very little, instead he is saying "look I am better than these people because I have done greater things". Paul didn't talk about how he "converted more gentiles the gospel than Jesus ever did while living" or some other cockamamie claim. Paul is calling out the people for beginning to follow people who do not suffer for the gospel, but claim to be "true" ministers- Paul is trying to show that because he has suffered and still preaches it shows that it wasn't to be exalted that he abased himself, it is because he loves God and teh people. That he looks like a fool because he has not lifted himself up like those who claim to be true apostles and ministers of Christ- who claim to have authority and power and share their great deads.

Joseph looked “like a fool” for not standing up and now when he stands up for himself you call him a fool.

Unlike Joseph, Paul did not want to receive payment fro mthe people, he tried to not make himself a burden

“When I love the poor— I ask no favors of the rich
…
Have I asked you for your money? No, you know better. I appeal to the poor. I say cursed be that man or woman who says that I have taken of your money “

and for some reason the poeple thought because he didn't exalt himself that he wasn't teaching the truth, because he wasn't a burden to them and demanding great things, but instead humbled himself and suffered for the gospel receiving beatings and having to flee, that his suffering for the kingdom and for them is how they can know he truly loves them and seeks their well-being.

Ah of course because Joseph didn’t suffer beatings and sufferings, being pushed out, losing children, endure defamation and the like for the kingdom at all. No no, Joseph didn’t have the slightest love for the people or seek their well-being in any regard. Cuz joseph was a selfish arrogant bastard too full of himself.

Paul also throws in the fact as an after thought to make them think "oh also the signs and wonders of an apostle also occurred when I was with you" (by their fruits you will know them).

And so it did with Joseph

[Shawn Henry]

I know this was discussed already in a different thread. However if Joseph made everything up after the Book of Mormon, or it was from Satan, then what about the Kirtland temple?
Many witnesses of divine encounters or manifestations?

I think it is likely that God wanted Joseph to focus on the Book of Mormon, but I don't think he was limited to it. It is very likely, according to the scriptures, to return and continue the work.

I don't think he made everything up after the BoM, it is truth mixed with error. That's how we learn. The Lord warned the saints that if they were disobedient, they would be turned over to Satan. Joseph's only continued work was to help the Lord turn them over to Satan.

[Alexander]

“Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing; the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature like other men. No man lives without fault. Do you think that even Jesus, if he were here would be without fault in your eyes? His enemies said all manner of evil against him— they all watched for iniquity in him“
-The Prophet Joseph Smith

[Shawn Henry]

The problem with hte no other gift theory (and I have no dog in this fight- I'm agnostic towards Joseph, largely leaning towards he was either really deceived, or he chose to deceive others) but anyways - the problem with the "no other gift theory" is that The Lord declares in others scriptures to seek other gifts and that He will grant them if you ask. Gifts are of the Spirit- it would be odd to me if GOd was like "nah" you have the HOly Spirit in you, but i"m not giving you any other gift- so you can't demonstrate any other fruits of the Spriit. That seems extremely ungospel like. So I don't believe the "no other gift" thing is a correct understanding of that- Which brings us to another question- Was that revelation he received, if he received it, really from God- because God doesn't lie- nor does He contradict himself. Thus again leading me to believe that there was deception in the beginning, but I could be wrong.

I don't get the impression that we are talking about spiritual gifts. It can't mean spiritual gifts or else the Lord wouldn't have said "one gift".

This is almost perfectly mirrored in the BoM, where the Joseph the Seer prophecy states that Joseph will do "a work" (singular like gift) and that the Lord would command him to do "no other work", just like he commanded him to "pretend to no other gift".

[Shawn Henry]

If this is true then this changes almost everything. We can't trust anything at all.

That's why the Lord gave us the Law of Witnesses. If that law has been met and the spirit confirms the work, we can trust it. We can trust the BoM.

[Shawn Henry]

“Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing; the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature like other men. No man lives without fault. Do you think that even Jesus, if he were here would be without fault in your eyes? His enemies said all manner of evil against him— they all watched for iniquity in him“
-The Prophet Joseph Smith

And did he do the wrongs the Lord charged him with?

Did he boast in his own strength? Did he set at naught the counsels of God? Did he follow his carnal desires?

History shows he did. So, is the Lord wrong when he says he "must fall"?

It's very interesting how you stretch to defend Joseph in his boasting, yet you show no propensity to defend the Lord in his 1828 revelation.

[Alexander]

“Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing; the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature like other men. No man lives without fault. Do you think that even Jesus, if he were here would be without fault in your eyes? His enemies said all manner of evil against him— they all watched for iniquity in him“
-The Prophet Joseph Smith

And did he do the wrongs the Lord charged him with?

Did he boast in his own strength? Did he set at naught the counsels of God? Did he follow his carnal desires?

History shows he did. So, is the Lord wrong when he says he "must fall"?

It's very interesting how you stretch to defend Joseph in his boasting, yet you show no propensity to defend the Lord in his 1828 revelation.

I don’t have the propensity to take contrived conceptions of Joseph from ilk like you.

[CaptainM]

As I've pondered all the hurt and robbery the churches who blasphemy the name of the Lord have caused the truth, a few SCRIPTURES come to mind. Those that are adorning the sepulchers of false prophets are in many ways more guilty of heinous crimes against God by perpetuating and defending evil when it should be exposed and repented of. Personally I believe the damage done to my family is a sin which is nearly unpardonable. As the church of the devil continues its inevitable decline and destruction, those who condone its evil will be held accountable before God some day.

42)But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
43)Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets.
44)Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them...
52)Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.... (Luke 11)

11)For mine own sake, yea, for mine own sake will I do this, for I will not suffer my name to be polluted, and I will not give my glory unto another.(1 Nephi 20)

36)And I know that ye do walk in the pride of your hearts; and there are none save a few only who do not lift themselves up in the pride of their hearts, unto the wearing of very fine apparel, unto envying, and strifes, and malice, and persecutions, and all manner of iniquities; and your churches, yea, even every one, have become polluted because of the pride of your hearts.
37)For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.
38)O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies-because of the praise of the world?
39)Why do ye adorn yourselves with that which hath no life, and yet suffer the hungry, and the needy, and the naked, and the sick and the afflicted to pass by you, and notice them not?
40)Yea, why do ye build up your secret abominations to get gain, and cause that widows should mourn before the Lord, and also orphans to mourn before the Lord, and also the blood of their fathers and their husbands to cry unto the Lord from the ground, for vengeance upon your heads?
41)Behold, the sword of vengeance hangeth over you; and the time soon cometh that he avengeth the blood of the saints upon you, for he will not suffer their cries any longer. (Mormon 8)


Has anyone else noticed that their are those on this forum who usually never post anything of substance, but instead lurk in the dark and wait to pounce on others who expose their evil institutions?

[John Tavner]

Yeah... Joseph again taking a scripture out of context - on the surface it looks like he is following Paul's example, and unless a close reading is done one would believe he is doing right, but Paul is speaking in a way to show what he has suffered for the kingdoms sake, to bring them to the Lord

Of course, how did I not see it before. See it’s totally completely different for the adored and just Paul; but heaven forbid Joseph glory in the sufferings, the vast amount of imprisonments, slander, and pushback he has endured. Shame on Joseph.

“I should be like a fish out of water if I were out of persecution; and it requires all this to keep me humble— the Lord has constituted me so curiously that I glory in persecution;— I am not near so humble as if I was not persecuted.
…
I can go to the cross, I can lay down my life, but don’t forsake me. I want the friendship of my brethren— let us teach the things of Jesus Christ
…
I have set your minds at liberty by letting you know the things of Jesus Christ”

and saying to compare what he has suffered with those who claim to be minsters and new apostles of Christ. Joseph is basically taking a piss and saying "look at me" I"m better than all these guys. He isn't boasting in his infirmities at all or rather very little, instead he is saying "look I am better than these people because I have done greater things". Paul didn't talk about how he "converted more gentiles the gospel than Jesus ever did while living" or some other cockamamie claim. Paul is calling out the people for beginning to follow people who do not suffer for the gospel, but claim to be "true" ministers- Paul is trying to show that because he has suffered and still preaches it shows that it wasn't to be exalted that he abased himself, it is because he loves God and teh people. That he looks like a fool because he has not lifted himself up like those who claim to be true apostles and ministers of Christ- who claim to have authority and power and share their great deads.

Joseph looked “like a fool” for not standing up and now when he stands up for himself you call him a fool.

Unlike Joseph, Paul did not want to receive payment fro mthe people, he tried to not make himself a burden

“When I love the poor— I ask no favors of the rich
…
Have I asked you for your money? No, you know better. I appeal to the poor. I say cursed be that man or woman who says that I have taken of your money “

and for some reason the poeple thought because he didn't exalt himself that he wasn't teaching the truth, because he wasn't a burden to them and demanding great things, but instead humbled himself and suffered for the gospel receiving beatings and having to flee, that his suffering for the kingdom and for them is how they can know he truly loves them and seeks their well-being.

Ah of course because Joseph didn’t suffer beatings and sufferings, being pushed out, losing children, endure defamation and the like for the kingdom at all. No no, Joseph didn’t have the slightest love for the people or seek their well-being in any regard. Cuz joseph was a selfish arrogant bastard too full of himself.

Paul also throws in the fact as an after thought to make them think "oh also the signs and wonders of an apostle also occurred when I was with you" (by their fruits you will know them).

And so it did with Joseph

No I never called him a fool.

History records Joseph got money from the poor/ was paid from the church. SO regardless of what you say, Joseph was paid- did he seek out the "poor" probably not, but did he do the same thing the church talks about "Hey guys we need to be paid, please take care of my needs" yes, he did.. I mean I think the cost of Patriarchal blessings was like $5 dollars per blessing or something like that- it wasn't an isolated incident.

I didin't say Joseph never suffered, but he didn't get beat in every town he went to.

He also seemingly idolized friendship above God.

Joseph literally was claiming he did more than Paul and Jesus Christ and Peter.... do you not see the arrogance in that statement? That isn't boasting in sufferings that is boasting in accomplishments.

I hold no ire towards Joseph, but also don't idolize him. What he said often did not match up with what he did. He had made a few false prophecies as well, which are recorded in history- as much as he cliamed his prophecies were true...

[John Tavner]

The problem with hte no other gift theory (and I have no dog in this fight- I'm agnostic towards Joseph, largely leaning towards he was either really deceived, or he chose to deceive others) but anyways - the problem with the "no other gift theory" is that The Lord declares in others scriptures to seek other gifts and that He will grant them if you ask. Gifts are of the Spirit- it would be odd to me if GOd was like "nah" you have the HOly Spirit in you, but i"m not giving you any other gift- so you can't demonstrate any other fruits of the Spriit. That seems extremely ungospel like. So I don't believe the "no other gift" thing is a correct understanding of that- Which brings us to another question- Was that revelation he received, if he received it, really from God- because God doesn't lie- nor does He contradict himself. Thus again leading me to believe that there was deception in the beginning, but I could be wrong.

I don't get the impression that we are talking about spiritual gifts. It can't mean spiritual gifts or else the Lord wouldn't have said "one gift".

This is almost perfectly mirrored in the BoM, where the Joseph the Seer prophecy states that Joseph will do "a work" (singular like gift) and that the Lord would command him to do "no other work", just like he commanded him to "pretend to no other gift".

How could we not be talking about those gifts? Are not all gifts from the Spirit?

Maybe you have a different definition that I do of Spiritual gifts (I'm not saying that sarcastically) I have just come to understand that all gifts are spiritual gifts and it would be odd for God to say "pretend to no other gift like Prophecy or Seership- whien both are gifts of the SPirit.

What do you mean by no other gift? Or do you believe I am painting with too broad a brush and there are Speical gifts that shouldn't be considered gifts of the Spriit? (again not being sarcastic, or confrontational - sincere questions).

[Ymarsakar]

Joseph is a channeler. That means he can be channeling the wrong/bad/deceptive spirits. Always keep that in mind when reading what are supposed to be his words. This is true of the old prophets and seers as well.

[Teancum1]

The problem with hte no other gift theory (and I have no dog in this fight- I'm agnostic towards Joseph, largely leaning towards he was either really deceived, or he chose to deceive others) but anyways - the problem with the "no other gift theory" is that The Lord declares in others scriptures to seek other gifts and that He will grant them if you ask. Gifts are of the Spirit- it would be odd to me if GOd was like "nah" you have the HOly Spirit in you, but i"m not giving you any other gift- so you can't demonstrate any other fruits of the Spriit. That seems extremely ungospel like. So I don't believe the "no other gift" thing is a correct understanding of that- Which brings us to another question- Was that revelation he received, if he received it, really from God- because God doesn't lie- nor does He contradict himself. Thus again leading me to believe that there was deception in the beginning, but I could be wrong.

A couple of problems. First, I have seen changes in the revelations- revisions/ deletions/ additions- that cast doubt on what is written in the D&C. Some from Rob Fotheringham and several others. I have had to basically reject church history and then rebuild my knowledge based on what did not have revisions, etc. If the original revelations (including the Book of Mormon) were received through a seer stone, which I believe is demonstrably true, then why are there changes?

Second. The implication of Joseph losing the plates and interpreters due to his ignoring God will and the Lord calling him out as having a tendency to be persuaded by men says a lot about Joseph. He has had angels and Jesus Christ, the Eternal God appear to him and he rejects his counsel! I’m not condemning him but it does mean that he can do that again right? Was he influenced in other instances by persuasions of men? Very likely. All of the three witnesses left the church in part due to Joseph’s changing role and my guess is persuasions we’re a part of his changing role.

2 Nephi 28:14 says- they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.

What is the difference between precepts and persuasions? Could the humble followers of Christ err because of the above reasons?

I am trying not to err but feel that until the truth is revealed in its entirety then I am going to err while listening to men.

Oh for sure- very difficult ot trust D&C. I don't blame anyone for casting off mormonism- honestly my heart goes out to most ex-mos who become agnostic or atheistic if they've really done their research because the brainwashing and mental gymnastics that occurs- it poisons the well and makes it difficult to believe in God (because the way our tradition teaches it, you can't trust anything else but the "restored" church) So if the church is really corrupt, then all of a sudden you're confronted with its all corrupt and everything is a lie- even God- espeically since LDS teach to not trust inte Bible. Heck you see that quite a bit in quite a few people on the forum recently - they now think everything is a lie and many don't even believe in the divinity of Christ.

I believe in God and Jesus because of hte fruits in my own life and I know when I gave my life to God and released all I had to Him, He chagned my life- I was one way, and then I was another- in the blink of an eye. THere is no denying that. I could love and care about people- while beforehand it was like an act and though I did "good" things, it was for reward, not because I cared. I was miserable and didn't even know it and HE gave me life more abundantly.

So the seer stone theory is partly why I wonder if Joseph was really deceived or if he was a deceiver himself. He very may well have seen things that claimed to be God and Jesus- whether or not they were in actuality God and JEsus is another question (not trying to convince you one way or another, just explaining my point of view) The Book of Mormon has really good points in some areas (mostly because I believe it has hundreds a paraphrased verses from the Bible), but in others it slightly distorts the view of God, at least in my opinion, which contradicts teh New Testament and even take some typology to a different level that doesn't fit the old testament. I think I wouldn't have as much a problem with teh BoM if it was actually treated like old testament scripture (which it is mostly) rather than New Testament, but the way it is talked about in the church is very New Testamenty, but lacks certain information that is necessary. I don't really read the BoM anymore because I have been reading hte Bible for the past 2-3 years mostly and last time I picked up the BoM just a month or two ago I could see the hundreds of New Testament and old Testametn verses dispersed through out the Book of Mormon, but with slightly different variations- and usually it is changed to have an old testametn undersatnding of God rather than through seeing God through Jesus Christ (if you see the Son you see the Father/ if you know the Son you know the Father and no man had known the Father (his entirety) until Jesus Christ)- so I take issue with the "most correct book" theory- but that doesn't mean the BoM can't help lead you to God in some way shape or form. BUT the best lies use truth- but again that is the direction I am leaning- I don't have the hate towards Joseph at all- in fact I rarely think about him, which is sort of interesting considering 2 years ago I was an incredibly staunch defender of Joseph, but I believe God is merciful regardless what happens even if it was deception Joseph may ahve repented in the end, only God knows and Judgment is His.

That said, arguendo that Joseph was truly given gifts by God - absolutely, you're right he could mess up and be persuaded by men again. I think the difference between precepts and persuasions can overlap, but hte difference is that precepts are kind of traditional views- so perhaps he was persuaded to follow the precepts of men. I do believe that there is truth in that scripture - it matches Mark 7 which talks about how following hte traditions of men, they neglect the commandments of God. So in otherwords we often follow these precepts we think are of God, but forget teh commandments of GOd which are to love our neighbor- we get so caught up in going ot church that we don't help the person we see on the side of the road on the way to church (ive been guilty of that)

Yeah, we all err in someway- my only advice is to hope and ask that God Father you, believe He will correct your errors- because HE loves you - you may have some, but we ought not let the corruption become our status, rather let the blood and life of Jesus become or status - or in other words trust that God will leads us from error because HE loves us- and believing we can be like Him- as 1 John 3 says who ever has that hope is pure even as He is- if we lose that hope, then we uninentionally place unbelief in our lives and can prevent or resist God guiding us (that verse - the one about everyone erring and books being corrupt is another one of those small deviations that makes us lack trust for God and to fear- which is not of God- it is a microcosm of many slight deviations I believe long term can prevent faith from growing). (I"m not saying you are doing this, just something I"ve learned for myself) I think it is good to ask questions and I really believe if you love truth (and I believe you do) Then God will guide you right, and He will lead you because you are Son- Why would He not, it is in His nature- all we can do is yield and submit and believe, trusting in Him to guide us as the Shepherd- for what good is a shepherd if they don't lead us to green pastures- they are worthless and not worthy of being called a shepherd- so we must remember that Jesus is the Good shepherd and He will lead us as we let Him. I believe He has moved upon man and that ther eis truth in the Bible and especially in the NEw Testament- and if read with the intent to know God, we will know Him more and ought not fear, because in the New Testametn it shows us who Jesus is- the Way the Truth, and the Life- it shows us those who knew Him and what He taught- He and the revelation of Him is the rock of our salvation. Anyways that's my two cents.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. So much good in it. I grew up on the Old and New Testament and have a deep love for the New Testament. Those who seek the words of Jesus , not just to know them but to do them will know Him. I believe that I am responsible for myself to search for truth, to sift it, weigh it and seek His will in living it.

I’ve been blessed by the Book of Mormon but it isn’t the only scripture that I read. I have a feeling that there will be more scripture to come and I am eagerly seeking to find all of Jesus’s words. This forum, and your answers in particular (along with several others here) have helped me tremendously in organizing my thoughts, prioritizing searches, seeing other possibilities, finding my errors, etc.

I am constantly aware of my shortcomings ( at least some of them). But feel that the Lord has been guiding me, giving me opportunities to understand Him if I’m willing to reject everything and accept Jesus’s words.

Where to go from here? Continue to search and pray that He will lead me. Testing and trying the Spirits-
I John 4: 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

It has been eye opening considering who the “many false prophets are gone out into the world” really may be.

[Shawn Henry]

How could we not be talking about those gifts? Are not all gifts from the Spirit?

Maybe you have a different definition that I do of Spiritual gifts (I'm not saying that sarcastically) I have just come to understand that all gifts are spiritual gifts and it would be odd for God to say "pretend to no other gift like Prophecy or Seership- whien both are gifts of the SPirit.

What do you mean by no other gift? Or do you believe I am painting with too broad a brush and there are Speical gifts that shouldn't be considered gifts of the Spriit? (again not being sarcastic, or confrontational - sincere questions).

Yeah, I agree. The phrase "no other gift" doesn't come with a definition, but we can see that it is singular. We can only use our best judgment.

[Ymarsakar]

"I am constantly aware of my shortcomings ( at least some of them). But feel that the Lord has been guiding me, giving me opportunities to understand Him if I’m willing to reject everything and accept Jesus’s words."

This is a good methodology.

[Shawn Henry]

I John 4: 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God

Love the scripture. If only we had done that with Joseph. We gave him a free pass for every utterance.

[Shawn Henry]

I don’t have the propensity to take contrived conceptions of Joseph from ilk like you.

I can see your emotions are high. The point of this thread was not to trigger anyone. My apologies to you if you took offense. May the Lord bless you.

[Telavian]

I don't think he made everything up after the BoM, it is truth mixed with error. That's how we learn. The Lord warned the saints that if they were disobedient, they would be turned over to Satan. Joseph's only continued work was to help the Lord turn them over to Satan.

I certainly think Joseph either knowingly or accidently turned the members over to Satan during the Nauvoo era. It might have been earlier, but certainly during the Nauvoo era.

[Mindfields]

You want changes? I've got changes...

[sushi_chef]

"The Miraculous Translation of the Book of Mormon

1828
apr 12 ~~ june 14 116 pages translated

jun 15 Martin Harris loses the 116 pages

Sep 22 Joseph again obtains interpreters

1829
Feb Joseph receives Doctrine and Covnants 4
The Lord first appears to Oliver Cowdery

Mar A few pages are translated

Apr 7 ~~ late June The Book of Mormon is translated.

Aug E. B. Grandin agrees to print. Martin Harris mortgages his farm for the printing.
Typesetting commenced

February 1829. Joseph’s parents came from New York and visited him in Harmony.49 Joseph received Doctrine and Covenants 4 for his father. Joseph Sr. and Lucy return to Manchester. Oliver, who was
90Opening the Heavensboarding with Joseph Sr. and Lucy at this time, began to “importune Mr. Smith” for information concerning the plates and after “a consid-erable length of time” succeeded in receiving information.50 About this time, Joseph Smith wrote in 1832, “[the] Lord appeared unto a young man by the name of Oliver Cowdry and shewed unto him the plates in a vision and also the truth of the work and what the Lord was about to do through me his unworthy servant therefore he was
desirous to come and write for me to translate”51 (document 12).March 1829. A few pages were translated. Emma acted “some” ..
"
https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org ... ook-mormon

"As several historians and scholars have discussed, Joseph used both the Nephite Interpreters (later called the “Urim and Thummim”) that were discovered with the plates and his individual seer stone in the translation of the Book of Mormon [4].
..
4. Richard Lloyd Anderson, “‘By the Gift and Power of God’,” Ensign, September 1977, 78–85; Richard Van Wagoner and Steve Walker, “Joseph Smith: ‘The Gift of Seeing’,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 15, no. 2 (Summer 1982): 49–68; Stephen D. Ricks, “Notes and Communications—Translation of the Book of Mormon: Interpreting the Evidence,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2, no. 2 (1993): 201–206; Royal Skousen, “Translating the Book of Mormon: Evidence from the Original Manuscript,” in Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited: The Evidence for Ancient Origins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1997), 61–93; Matthew B. Brown, Plates of Gold: The Book of Mormon Comes Forth (American Fork, UT: Covenant Communications, 2003); John W. Welch, “The Miraculous Translation of the Book of Mormon,” in Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestation, 1820–1844 (Provo and Salt Lake City, UT: BYU Press and Deseret Book, 2005), 77–213; Don Bradley, “Written by the Finger of God? Claims and Controversies of Book of Mormon Translation,” Sunstone, December 2010, 20–29; Brant A. Gardner, The Gift and Power: Translating the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City, UT: Greg Kofford, 2011); Roger Nicholson, “The Spectacles, the Stone, the Hat, and the Book: A Twenty-first Century Believer’s View of the Book of Mormon Translation,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 5 (2013): 121–190; Michael Hubbard MacKay and Gerrit J. Dirkmaat, “Firsthand Witness Accounts of the Translation Process,” in The Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon: A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, ed. Dennis L. Largey et al. (Provo, UT and Salt Lake City, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, and Deseret Book, 2015), 61–79; From Darkness Unto Light: Joseph Smith’s Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT and Salt Lake City, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, and Deseret Book, 2015); Stanford Carmack, “Joseph Smith Read the Words,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 18 (2016): 41–64.
"
https://www.ldsliving.com/why-was-a-sto ... on/s/87142

"The JST was recorded in ink on the common writing paper of the Prophet’s day, “foolscap” paper. The name applies to a size of sheets approximately sixteen by thirteen inches in dimension. [5] They were folded in the middle and stitched at the fold, making writing booklets with pages about eight inches wide and thirteen inches tall. The original dictated text of Joseph Smith’s Genesis translation is on a manuscript titled Old Testament Manuscript 1 (OT1). [6] The Book of Moses is found on the first twenty-one pages, in the handwriting of four different scribes:

Pages 1–10 Oliver Cowdery Moses 1:1–5:43 June 1830–?

Pages 10–11 John Whitmer Moses 5:43–6:18 Oct. 21, 1830; Nov. 30, 1830

Pages 11–14 Emma Smith Moses 6:19–52 Dec. 1, 1830

Pages 14–15 John Whitmer Moses 6:52–7:1 Dec. 1830

Pages 15–21 Sidney Rigdon Moses 7:2–8:30 Dec. 1830; Feb. 1831

The work of the JST began either in Harmony, Pennsylvania; Colesville, New York; or Fayette, New York. It continued in Fayette and then in Kirtland, Ohio. The starting month, June 1830, is written on OT1, page 1. Oliver Cowdery, taking dictation from Joseph Smith, wrote the first ten pages. In October he left on the Lamanite Mission that introduced the restored gospel in Ohio and Missouri. [7] He was replaced as scribe by John Whitmer, who wrote the date October 21, 1830, on page 10 and started his first brief service as scribe. Farther down the same page, Whitmer inserted the date November 30, 1830, and wrote more. Emma Smith then wrote slightly more than two pages. She began by writing “Dec 1rst” at the bottom of page 11 and wrote to the top of page 14. The previous July, she had been called in a revelation to write for the Prophet when his regular scribe (at that time Oliver Cowdery) was unavailable (see D&C 25:6). Her work on the JST manuscript was in fulfilment of that calling. John Whitmer resumed scribing again and wrote on two more pages, after which Sidney Rigdon’s handwriting first appears. Rigdon had arrived in Fayette on December 10, 1830, and soon thereafter was appointed by revelation to be Joseph Smith’s scribe (see D&C 35:20). The translation was interrupted when the Prophet prepared to move from New York to Ohio in January 1831. He arrived in Kirtland, Ohio, on about the first of February and soon began anew his work on the New Translation, again with Sidney Rigdon as scribe. It was there that the Book of Moses was finished in February 1831. Rigdon continued as scribe for the rest of OT1, which ends in Genesis 24. He also wrote large portions of the other JST manuscripts, and more than half of the pages of the entire New Translation are in his handwriting.
"
https://rsc.byu.edu/book-moses-joseph-s ... book-moses

"Book of Comn1andments
and
Book of
Doctrine and Covenants
REVIEWED
By
THE LATE PRESIDENT JOSEPH SMITH

(The Late President Joseph Smith
President of the Reorganized Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints
1860- 1914)

Oliver Cowdery was one of the committee appointed in May, 1832, whose duty was to "review and
prepare" the revelations, etc.; he was one of the
clerks at the meeting of September 24th, 1834, and
was one of the committee then appointed to "arrange the items of doctrine," etc., from the Bible,
Book of Mormon, and the revelations then given,
and those that might be given during the time that
the committee were doing their work. See M essenger and Advocate, vol. 1, no. 11 ; also Ti-mes and
Seasons, vol. 5, no. 16, p. 625.

Those who are disturbing themselves and others
treat of the Book of Commandments of 1833, as if
it were of a more sacred and infallible character
than the Doctrine and Covenants of 1835. That the
men engaged in the work of preparing the matter
and publishing both books did not think so is clear.
In the eighth number of the Messenger and Advocate, for May, 1835, Oliver Cowdery himself being
the editor, there appears the following edito:dal in
regard to the then forthcoming book:
These lectures [Lectures on Faith-Editor] are being
compiled and arranged with other documents of instruction
and regulation for the church, titled "Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Latter Day Saints," etc. It may be
well, for the information of the churches abroad, to say,
that this book will contain the important revelations on doctrine and church government now extant, and will, we trust,
give them a perfect understanding of the doctrine believed
by this society. Such a work has long been called for, and if
we are prospered a few weeks, shall have this. volume ready
for distribution. A full detail of its contents will be given
hereafter.
In the reprint of the Evening and Morning Star,
published at Kirtland, Ohio, and of which Oliver
Cowdery was editor, in the first number of volume
6
www.LatterDayTruth.org
two, page 196, prefacing an extract from the Book
of Mormon, the editor says:
We have again inserted the articles and covenants according to our promise in a previous number, for the benefit
of our brethren abroad who have not the first number of the
first volume. As there were some errors which got into them
by transcribing, we have since obtained the original copy and
made the· necessary corrections.
No one could know whether there were errors in
the first publication of the Commandments better
than Oliver Cowdery who was a member of both the
first and the second committees on their preparation and compilation.
In the prospectus for the second volume of the
Evening and Morning Star it is stated in reference
to the revelations and commandments as given in
the Star before:
It is also proper for us to say, that in the first fourteen
numbers, in the revelations, are many errors, typographical,
and others, occasioned by transcribing manuscript, but as we
shall have access to originals, we shall endeavor to make
proper corrections.
On August 17th, 1835, two years after the destruction of the press, at Independence, and one after the
appointment of the compiling committee of which
we have given the names, the church met at Kirtland, to hear and act upon the report of the committee.
John Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and W. W. Phelps,
all of the members of the first committee were present, Oliver Cowdery and Sidney Rigdon presiding,
W. W. Phelps and John Whitmer, acting as presidents of the High Council.
After the assembly was organized and had met
after the noon recess, the committee, through Oliver
7
www.LatterDayTruth.org
Cowdery made their report, and the compilation of
Articles of Faith, revelations and commandments,
under the title of the "Book of Doctrine and Covenants" was introduced for consideration, acceptance
or rejection.
Joseph Smith and F. G. Williams were absent, and
Sidney Rigdon for the committee stated the manner
in which it was proposed to "obtain the voice of the
assembly for or against said book."
W. W. Phelps, the man who printed the Book of
Commandments in 1833, at Independence was the
first one to testify that the book was true; John
Whitmer, one of the first committee, was the second
one that testified that the book was true; thus verifying the action of the last appointed committee in
making the corrections, which so much has been said
about. The book as an entirety, and as presented
to the assembly by Oliver Cowdery, on the part of
the committee, was then properly voted upon and
unanimously adopted and ordered printed. The
articles on marriage and governments, were then
presented and also adopted by the unanimous vote
of the assembly, and also ordered to be printed in
the· Book of Covenants.
It will be noticed that Joseph Smith and F. G.
Williams, two of the last committee on preparation
and compilation, were not present, but all. of the
first committee were; and all had a first and prominent part in setting the completed compilation, with
the corrections made in the unfinished Book of Commandments of 1833 in it, before the people; Oliver
Cowdery presenting it, W. W. Phelps and John
Whitmer both testifying that it was true.
With this in view, it must either be supposed that
8
www.LatterDayTruth.org
these three men were quite satisfied that there were
imperfections in their work of two years before
which should be corrected as the last committee did
correct them, and to the truth of which they testified; or they were great moral cowards, and did not
dare to call attention to the impropriety of such
corrections before the committee, nor oppose them
when the book was brought up for final action. 'I'he
latter is an improper and unsafe proposition; for
the reason that if the moral courage and integrity of
those men are attacked, little, or no value can properly attach to their testimony in regard to the work
in any of its phases. It was an easy matter for mistakes to be made, and errors to occur, in transcribing for the printer, and in proof reading; as it is
even now an easy thing. Such mistakes and errors
would not in any sense affect the integrity of either
of the men; but to charge them with being moral
cowards, and parties to a deliberate changing of the
revelations by Joseph Smith, or Sidney Rigdon,
would seriously damage them in the estimation of
right thinking people.
In an address to the patrons of the Messenger a ..
"
http://www.latterdaytruth.org/pdf/100487.pdf

[Being There]

He is boasting in his struggles and persecutions.

After 1838 he got so arrogant. From church history it seems there were 2 Joseph's at least. One in the Kirtland era and one in the Nauvoo one.
There may even have been a distinct one before Kirtland.

People change over time however his change was very drastic. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

"We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men,
as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose,
they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion"
Joseph Smith Jr.

I think JS should have taken some of his own advice.

viewtopic.php?p=1361822#p1361822