Book of Mormon Christian/Reformed Mormon/Whitmerite

[DWhitmer]

When confronted with the difference you are talking about, most people are either going to scrap the whole thing or find a way to harmonize it, but at least a few people are going to run their true belief in the BOM out to its logical conclusion.

Good assessment. Too often members become confronted with the historical inconsistencies before discovering the inconsistencies with the holy record. And too often the baby is tossed out with the bath water.

If they could first discover the inconsistencies with the record, before the inconsistencies of church history, they often will keep the record and just toss the church - which is what God would prefer.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think his view is an inevitable permutation resulting from what you are saying here. When confronted with the difference you are talking about, most people are either going to scrap the whole thing or find a way to harmonize it, but at least a few people are going to run their true belief in the BOM out to its logical conclusion. Most people have far more loyalty to the organization than they do to the book, which given the idea of modern prophets makes sense. Someone who was not around to see the sausage get made concluding that they can swallow everything one needs to to believe in the historicity of the BOM but not in the authority of the church is just a very interesting oddity. (No offense, DW, I think you are an interesting cat now that I have heard everything you have to say).

Extremely bizarre. First time I have heard of such a thing.

[Solon]

Extremely bizarre. First time I have heard of such a thing.

Thanks for sharing so much in here, DWhitmer. I'm glad to understand more about what you believe, and I think you highlight in places very well the differences between LDS policy/doctrine, practice, and scripture.

It's all very interesting.

[UtahDan]

Extremely bizarre. First time I have heard of such a thing.

Other than the numerous non-Brighamite churches of course. But it's not like lots of those are getting newly minted.

[DWhitmer]

Thanks for sharing so much in here, DWhitmer. I'm glad to understand more about what you believe, and I think you highlight in places very well the differences between LDS policy/doctrine, practice, and scripture.

It's all very interesting.

I appreciate the kindness. This thread would not have made it through on other forums, nor some of my other posts. As can be seen, I'm not out to sway anyone from truth, only to truth.

[Tone Loc]

I appreciate the kindness. This thread would not have made it through on other forums, nor some of my other posts. As can be seen, I'm not out to sway anyone from truth, only to truth.

Mission accomplished.

[clackamascoug]

Follow the money.

I think Whitmer here is looking for some discontented mormons who might end up pay their tithing to him. If so, you're on the wrong board. You need to go to MLM boards and introduce your philosophy of men, with tithing as a MLM twist where you get paid 10 levels deep on the conversion chart. If you throw in polygamy as a bonus of reaching a certain level of conversion proficiency, you could be a billionaire in about 10 years.

You could call in Nu-Mormomism.

[jay santos]

I agree strongly with some of the points in the OP and follow up comments in this thread related to BOM doctrine being very similar to standard Christian doctrine and very different from Nauvoo Mormonism.

I can kind of see where someone like DW could come from. If you have a very literal, fundamental type view of religion, and you came to believe strongly that the Bible was true and the BOM was true and that the incremental doctrines (theosis, polygamy, celestial kingdom, etc) are blasphemous because they are extra-Biblical, then I could see you going that direction.

I think it's WAY over the top for DW to claim the modern church completely rejects the BOM. The extra/Nauvoo doctrines are not incompatible with BOM doctrine. And every step the church has made the last thirty years has been away from the Nauvoo doctrines and towards a more mainstream/BOM style doctrine.

Most people (especially those on this board) that reject aspects of Mormonism, do it from the context of moving from a fundamental/literal view to a progressive view of things. So I doubt many here relate to DW. In fact I doubt more than a dozen people out of 6B in the world relate to DW, but it's an interesting view!

[Sleeping in EQ]

DWhitmer, your views seem a bit similar to the views of my distant cousins. My cousins are "Remnant" RLDS who didn't make the jump to the Community of Christ.

[DWhitmer]

DWhitmer, your views seem a bit similar to the views of my distant cousins. My cousins are "Remnant" RLDS who didn't make the jump to the Community of Christ.

There was Ebenezer Robinson (died 1891) who left the RLDS Church and aligned himself with David and produced his own newspaper called The Return for 3 years. [If you know church history, Robinson was church clerk to the Missouri high council, editor of Times & Seasons, member of the Nauvoo Mason Lodge, etc.]

Most people know who Jerald and Sandra Tanner are, but what they don't know is, the Tanners initially did not toss out the baby with the bathwater, but were staunch supporters of the Holy Book of Mormon. They are a fine example of what Jesus said:

19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. (Matthew 13)

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Corinthians 11)

[Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz]

Very interesting. I have several questions running through my head relating to your explanation of your faith, and I guess the first one is this - do you believe that if Joseph Smith had not established a church himself, the Book of Mormon would someday have become accepted as scripture (either generally or in specific denominations/geographical areas) by mainstream Christianity? If so, how do you envision that occurring?

[DWhitmer]

do you believe that if Joseph Smith had not established a church himself, the Book of Mormon would someday have become accepted as scripture (either generally or in specific denominations/geographical areas) by mainstream Christianity? If so, how do you envision that occurring?

Many early converts were ministers and they would have simply returned to their congregations and applied the truths there. I envision a non-denominational version being in every church soon.

Because it does not replace the Bible or have weird doctrine; and most of all, because it is the only book of scripture that confirms the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, it will go well next to hymnals, prayer books, and the Bible.

When Islam and/or the antichrist arrives and threatens the Judeo-Christian framework, it will then be embraced, if not before then.

[Uncle Ted]

It seems your faith has a very dim view of Joseph Smith but a very positive view of the (Holy) Book of Mormon which I find interesting. Do you believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet at some point but then fell? Or do you believe that Joseph Smith only calling was to bury his face into a hat and read the words that appeared on a stone he found in a well? If the latter why didn't God just hit up David Whitmer to do the work? What exactly was Joseph Smith's role in all of this in your opinion?

[DWhitmer]

It seems your faith has a very dim view of Joseph Smith but a very positive view of the (Holy) Book of Mormon which I find interesting. Do you believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet at some point but then fell?

Some background may help:

1. Jesus said his church was already on the earth in the Summer of 1828:

54 Now I do not say this to destroy my church, but I say this to build up my church; (D&C 10, Summer 1828)

2. It was Oliver who was called to start a new church:

“A commandment from God unto Oliver how he should build up his church and the manner thereof.”

“And now if I have not authority to write these things judge ye behold ye shall know that I have authority when you and I shall be brought to stand before the judgment seat of Christ…Behold I am Oliver I am an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ Behold I have written the things which he hath commanded me for behold his word was unto me as a burning fire shut up in my bones and I was weary with forbearing and I could forbear no longer Amen

"Written in the year of our Lord 1829” ("Articles of the Church of Christ," BYU Studies 43 no. 4 (2004):76-79.)

J.Smith was not satisfied and took the Articles of the Church of Christ from Oliver, added to it and placed himself as the founder (Now D&C 20; read articles here)


3. The definition of Church:

67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church. (D&C 10)

21 He that will hear my voice shall be my sheep and him shall ye receive into the church and him will I also receive for behold this is my church. (Mosiah 26)

4. Can't claim to be the "only true church":

3 For it shall come to pass in that day that the churches which are built up, and not unto the Lord, when the one shall say unto the other: Behold, I, I am the Lord's; and the others shall say: I, I am the Lord's; and thus shall every one say that hath built up churches, and not unto the Lord. (2 Nephi 28)

5. The commission for J.Smith

a. Seer not a prophet. Seers are not greater than prophets (See Mosiah 8:15-16).

b. Limited calling:

8 And I shall give unto him a commandment that he shall do none other work, save the work which I shall command him. (2 Nephi 3)

2 And you have a gift to translate the plates; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift for I will grant unto you no other gift. (Book of Commandments IV)

c. Convince also.

11 But a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins—and not to the bringing forth my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have already gone forth among them. (2 Nephi 3)

Conclusion

Whitmer said that when the dictation was complete, J.Smith gave up his seer stone and said he was now called to preach. If he had embraced the 2nd half of his commission, J.Smith would have been a traveling preacher not different from Billy Graham.

And Oliver would have gone on to start a church centered on the Holy Book of Mormon and it would have looked similar to other Protestant churches.

Salvation is in Jesus, not a church. No church controls God's authority; it is inherent in the name of Jesus itself:

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (Mark 16)

When his disciples saw a man who was not part of their group doing just that, they asked Jesus to stop him, since he wasn't with them. Jesus replied:

38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part. (Mark 9)

Moroni exclaimed, if miracles stop, its due to a lack of faith in the name of Jesus, not priesthood:

27 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, have miracles ceased because Christ hath ascended into heaven, and hath sat down on the right hand of God,
37 Behold I say unto you, Nay; for it is by faith that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men; (Moroni 7)

It Is Serious

If we are to rely solely on the name of Jesus, how offensive is it to claim "The name of Jesus is not sufficient, you need our priesthood"?

[Sullyute]

It Is Serious

If we are to rely solely on the name of Jesus, how offensive is it to claim "The name of Jesus is not sufficient, you need our priesthood"?

I also find your views very novel and intriguing . So I have a couple questions for you:

1. Does your wife bless you or your children when they are sick? Do women have any authority role in your "church" or beliefs?

2. What about Joseph's claim of receiving the aaronic and melchizedeK priesthoods during the same period as the Book of Mormon was being translated? Do you believe any priesthood is required to baptise and how do you receive said priesthood? Do you have any problems with Alma the Sr. baptizing himself in the waters of Mormon?

3. Do you believe/practice tithing or communal living?

4. You have brought up the verse in the D&C about the church being cursed for not using the Book of Mormon, but this was given after Joseph Smith started the Church and when in your estimation he wasn't in good standing to do so. So do you just quote this to play cat-n-mouse games with LDS believers or do you think this was actually the word of God to Joseph?

I appreciate your time and willingness to answer these and previous questions in this thread.