Development of Apostles in Chuch History

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

As I see it...

- the whole time span from First Vision to Carthage Jail was only 24 years. From Church organization to Carthage was only 14 years. Those men called as the first batch of apostles may have had something special in them, maybe some spark that Joseph saw and of whom the Holy Ghost confirmed they should be called as apostles. By 1837, most of them and the Three Witnesses were out of the Church. Of the next batch - Parley P. Pratt, Orson Pratt, and Orson Hyde all left the Church temporarily. Even 2 of Joseph's brothers were extremely angry with him (Samuel repented, Don Carlos died outside the Church). Sidney Rigdon, Frederick G. Williams, and John C Bennett all apostatized.

All these men....considered worthy to have the holy apostleship, or had witnessed angels, the Gold Plates, even saw the Saviour....what happened?

A few were guilty of great sins like adultery, greed/fraud (in connection with the Kirtland Bank failure), or murderous intent. Most of them simply disagreed with Joseph Smith on how he was handling the affairs of the Church. They thought a prophet should be different somehow.

AS I SEE IT....a big part of the problem is that the principle of learning line upon line, precept by precept, was highly compressed into a very short timespan...No one really had an understanding of what an apostle should be, or of the stresses and challenges of restoring the Gospel & Lord's Church - especially in the midst of persecution.

Compare to today's apostles. these men grew up with the Priesthood. They have watched it function for decades. They have been trained, tutored, and mentored for anywhere from 20-50 years before they are called to be an 70 or an apostle - or a member of the First Presidency. They usually have served as Elders' Quorum Presidents, Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, etc., before they are called as a Seventy. This is not a promotion track (as the cynic might think), but a training in Church government by those whom the Lord has chosen himself.

Can they make mistakes like trusting Mark Hoffman? Sure...that is part of the growth process.
Will they be BIG mistakes of doctrine? Not likely - not anymore, anyway.
Can they fall? YES - George P Lee is proof of that, as also Francis Lyman of the 12 (ex'd 1942).

The question is will any/enough of them fall to the effect of producing grave damage to the Church? NO.

Thus the quote about following the majority of the Quorum of the Twelve, as well as why the Church will NOT act on major issues until the ENTIRE First presidency and the Twelve Apostles are completely UNANIMOUS.
The Lord had to wait until 1908 to have all 15 men sign the paper titled "The Father and the Son" which lays out our modern understanding taught about the Godhead, Adam & Eve, and conforming to what is in the Endowment.
Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B. Lee had to die before there were all 15 apostles ready and able to accept the Lord's will to give the Priesthood to Negroes in 1978.

Will they disagree amongst themselves? They can.
Will they argue and hold grudges? They have. Orson Pratt was frequently at odds with Brigham Young. in 1889, Heber J. Grant and others didn't want Wilford Woodruff to be the President - according to D. Michael Quinn, they wanted a younger man. About half of the Quorum and at least one Counselor apparently didn't believe the Manifesto was revelation, or didn't want it published. Several apostles disagreed about the League of Nations, and later about repealing prohibition. Others had issues with the Word of Wisdom being made a commandment (J. Golden Kimball was notorious for that). Others post World War 2 allegedly disagreed with Pres. McKay & Elder Benson in opposing Communism.

Yet, Dr. Skousen told his son in law, Glen Kimber, who told my brother in law (my family have been friends with them for 20+ years) - and remember that Dr. Skousen interacted frequently with the apostles starting with David O. McKay - he said that the present make up of the apostles & First Presidency from the time that Gordon B Hinckley was named prophet until Elders Haight, Maxwell, Withlin and Pres. Faust died (1995-2007 - not sure which apostle died first) THAT roster was the most united the 15 have ever been, the most harmonious. I believe that harmony has continued with the more recent additions to the apostleship (starting mid-2000's).

So when they give the Proclamation on the Family (1995)....they are totally unified...
When they release the video/text "The Testimony of the Apostles" (2000)...they testify with power...
When the Church issues policy instructing members to fight for California Prop 22 (1999-2000), or Prop 8 (2008)...they are united, and gravely concerned about the direction of society...
And when they speak in General Conference - the Holy Ghost makes manifest the truth of their words to those who will receive them...
And most recently, they are pleading with us men to discover and internalize what it means to hold the Priesthood, and to gain the power to actually use it worthily, and to magnify our callings (along with the always needed repentance)...

[vaquerocaptain of 100]

Interesting thoughts. I'd not thought of the seasoning aspect of the 70 and 12 during early Church history.

In thinking about it, BH Roberts, one of my favorites, is an illustration of this as well, though a bit later in Church History. His battle with Joseph Fielding Smith over "The Truth, The Way, The Life" and also the Political Manifesto, which BH Roberts finally capitulated on and Moses Thatcher did not, resulting in the expulsion of the latter from the 12, make more sense when viewed through the lens of "seasoning."

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

The men who were called at the beginning of this dispensation had no prior experience or training - they were thrust straight into roles which required a spiritual maturity and discipline which few of them actually had. There were no surprises when some of them turned out to be out and out apostates and even the best of them stumbled and faltered.

Joseph Smith said that only two men never turned the heel against him and that was Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball.
It was no coincidence that Brigham Young was the Senior Apostle when Joseph was martyred and the man destined to become the second President of the Church.

[awakecaptain of 100]

The men who were called at the beginning of this dispensation had no prior experience or training - they were thrust straight into roles which required a spiritual maturity and discipline which few of them actually had. There were no surprises when some of them turned out to be out and out apostates and even the best of them stumbled and faltered.

Joseph Smith said that only two men never turned the heel against him and that was Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball.
It was no coincidence that Brigham Young was the Senior Apostle when Joseph was martyred and the man destined to become the second President of the Church.

Luke, do you by chance know of the reference for where Joseph said that Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball never turned against him, for Emma said different. I'm curious of what is the truth.

[coachmarcMy own worst enemy]

Neither Lehi nor Nephi had any experience or training either.

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

Neither Lehi nor Nephi had any experience or training either.

That's strange because Nephi tells us the exact opposite in his introduction in 1 Nephi 1:1?

[coachmarcMy own worst enemy]

Neither Lehi nor Nephi had any experience or training either.

That's strange because Nephi tells us the exact opposite in his introduction in 1 Nephi 1:1?

That's an interesting point. He did write that verse and what followed decades afterward. I should have emphasized prior to leaving Jerusalem. Do you feel his upbringing was sufficient for all the coming trials and responsibilities of leadership? Or did he receive more training for each task given?

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

Neither Lehi nor Nephi had any experience or training either.

That's strange because Nephi tells us the exact opposite in his introduction in 1 Nephi 1:1?

That's an interesting point. He did write that verse and what followed decades afterward. I should have emphasized prior to leaving Jerusalem. Do you feel his upbringing was sufficient for all the coming trials and responsibilities of leadership? Or did he receive more training for each task given?

I think, as he himself confirms, that he was taught and prepared by goodly parents but ultimately he had to choose to follow the path that was laid out before him - in contrast to his elder brothers who no doubt had the same schooling and training but chose a very different path.

[coachmarcMy own worst enemy]

Indeed. The way is always prepared for those who choose the correct path, and the means to accomplish the tasks along the way. If we make a study of Nephi's life, we will also see that each task given was accompanied by lessons, training and revelations from the Lord. This is how we grow. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young understood this.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

Lehi & Nephi were called only to testify to the people of their wickedness (Lehi), or to family members. Neither were called to publicly recognized official positions as God's representatives - nor did they have to follow a senior prophet/apostle as the head...all the while NONE of them really had spiritual maturity or training (Joseph Smith having a bit more).

That's why I included the the fact that these LDS leaders apostatized primarily to differences of opinion on how Joseph should lead. Their pride, egos, vanity got in the way (William McClellin, D&C 67 is a good example). Compare to Nephi simply honoring and following his father, and then being worthy of greater blessings & visions from the Lord.

[coachmarcMy own worst enemy]

Lehi was the patriarch, though through his twilight years to a certain extent I agree, though he still held office and officiated in it (sealing power, etc). While this is not boldly stated, it is evident as we study his life, revelations and admonitions of the Lord. There are clues throughout the first books of Nephi and also in the book of Enos. As for Nephi, he was called to be a ruler and a teacher over his brethren as made clear not only by Lehi, but by an angel and also by the Lord. That's official in my book. I will concede that neither were apostles as Peter, James and John, etc.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

Lehi was the patriarch, though through his twilight years to a certain extent I agree, though he still held office and officiated in it (sealing power, etc). While this is not boldly stated, it is evident as we study his life, revelations and admonitions of the Lord. There are clues throughout the first books of Nephi and also in the book of Enos. As for Nephi, he was called to be a ruler and a teacher over his brethren as made clear not only by Lehi, but by an angel and also by the Lord. That's official in my book. I will concede that neither were apostles as Peter, James and John, etc.

Exactly.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

Indeed. The way is always prepared for those who choose the correct path, and the means to accomplish the tasks along the way. If we make a study of Nephi's life, we will also see that each task given was accompanied by lessons, training and revelations from the Lord. This is how we grow. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young understood this.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

The men who were called at the beginning of this dispensation had no prior experience or training - they were thrust straight into roles which required a spiritual maturity and discipline which few of them actually had. There were no surprises when some of them turned out to be out and out apostates and even the best of them stumbled and faltered.

You did that so much better than I.... Being succinct is not my strong point.

[JohnnyLcaptain of 1,000]

Nice thoughts, interesting discussion.
I think in some ways it had to do with a different level of patience (like with the theology arguments).
But in other cases, well, simple pride and sin did it, and I don't know if there's any "seasoning" against that, other than leading to greater condemnation.

[iamse7encaptain of 1,000]

Luke, do you by chance know of the reference for where Joseph said that Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball never turned against him, for Emma said different. I'm curious of what is the truth.

From History of the Church:

Of the Twelve Apostles chosen in Kirtland, and ordained under the hands of Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and myself, there have been but two but what have lifted their heel against me—namely Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball. (May 28, 1843.) (DHC 5:412)

Sounds like people who were stalwart in their faith and would be great people to put in the 1st Presidency after Joseph's death.

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

Luke, do you by chance know of the reference for where Joseph said that Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball never turned against him, for Emma said different. I'm curious of what is the truth.

From History of the Church:

Of the Twelve Apostles chosen in Kirtland, and ordained under the hands of Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and myself, there have been but two but what have lifted their heel against me—namely Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball. (May 28, 1843.) (DHC 5:412)

Sounds like people who were stalwart in their faith and would be great people to put in the 1st Presidency after Joseph's death.

Thanks 7. Truth will prevail. I didn't actually have the reference but heard Truman Madsen quote it so I knew it was true.

[awakecaptain of 100]

Luke, do you by chance know of the reference for where Joseph said that Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball never turned against him, for Emma said different. I'm curious of what is the truth.

From History of the Church:

Of the Twelve Apostles chosen in Kirtland, and ordained under the hands of Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and myself, there have been but two but what have lifted their heel against me—namely Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball. (May 28, 1843.) (DHC 5:412)

Sounds like people who were stalwart in their faith and would be great people to put in the 1st Presidency after Joseph's death.

Thanks 7. Truth will prevail. I didn't actually have the reference but heard Truman Madsen quote it so I knew it was true.

I appreciate 7 finding the reference. But while the quote could be true, it does not appear to be from a proven source, for it doesn't look like it was '1st person' and published by Joseph while he was still alive. Like so many other quotes, and even journal entries, attributed to Joseph, they are really just 'second hand quotes', thus it leaves us wondering if it's really true.

For example, see my last post on the 'wild man' thread today about a journal entry about Joseph that the leaders of the church changed after Joseph died.

The reason I am most suspect of the quote is because Emma Smith said just the opposite and I don't believe she would lie about her husband. Emma proved herself a very righteous woman, so it is hard to believe that quote is true. I feel to believe Emma in this case.

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

I appreciate 7 finding the reference. But while the quote could be true, it does not appear to be from a proven source, for it doesn't look like it was '1st person' and published by Joseph while he was still alive. Like so many other quotes, and even journal entries, attributed to Joseph, they are really just 'second hand quotes', thus it leaves us wondering if it's really true.

For example, see my last post on the 'wild man' thread today about a journal entry about Joseph that the leaders of the church changed after Joseph died.

The reason I am most suspect of the quote is because Emma Smith said just the opposite and I don't believe she would lie about her husband. Emma proved herself a very righteous woman, so it is hard to believe that quote is true. I feel to believe Emma in this case.

You're free to accept Emma's statement.

This is Emma Smith you're talking about isn't it? The lady who left the Church, who believed that she and her family should inherit all Church property, and that her offspring should always preside over the Church.

What did you expect her to say?

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

The men who were called at the beginning of this dispensation had no prior experience or training - they were thrust straight into roles which required a spiritual maturity and discipline which few of them actually had. There were no surprises when some of them turned out to be out and out apostates and even the best of them stumbled and faltered.

You did that so much better than I.... Being succinct is not my strong point.

Thanks H.

[awakecaptain of 100]

This is Emma Smith you're talking about isn't it? The lady who left the Church, who believed that she and her family should inherit all Church property, and that her offspring should always preside over the Church.

What did you expect her to say?

I understand why you might think that way, but if you do a more in depth study about her and Joseph and polygamy, you may come to believe differently. I believe many false things have been said about her through the years.

[Tony63captain of 100]

This had been an interesting thread thanks

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

This had been an interesting thread thanks

You are welcome.

I am actually trying to be more thoughtful/respectful in what I post, and less belligerent/combative...

[DWhitmercaptain of 10]

...maybe some spark that Joseph saw and of whom the Holy Ghost confirmed they should be called as apostles.

Actually the Three Witnesses picked the twelve and ordained them. One exception was that J.Smith demanded his brother William be one of the twelve - he got his wish.

All these men....considered worthy to have the holy apostleship, or had witnessed angels, the Gold Plates, even saw the Saviour....what happened?

The common factor was polygamy in the end. Those who went along with it were kept in the inner circle (apostles) while those who disagreed with it had their character assassinated. William Law was a prime example. He was highly praised until he exposed their affairs/marriages.

They thought a prophet should be different somehow.

Polygamy was never associated with salvation/exaltation. Why was a "prophet" pursuing temporal glory? Running for Mayor, President of the United States, running a hotel, a bank, real estate, etc. and in the end filing for bankruptcy with all that donated money? People had right to be alarmed.

AS I SEE IT....a big part of the problem is that the principle of learning line upon line, precept by precept, was highly compressed into a very short timespan...No one really had an understanding of what an apostle should be, or of the stresses and challenges of restoring the Gospel & Lord's Church - especially in the midst of persecution.

Except none of those were required of God! In D&C 10:67 (Summer of 1828) Jesus said his church was already on earth for one. Secondly, everyone was already baptized before J.Smith started a church. Third, he was commanded to do no other work than preach the Holy Book of Mormon. The complete gospel was restored - in that record.

There were no apostles in the Book of Mormon. Church was simple: Elders, Priests, and Teachers. No man called prophets, first presidency, apostles, seventy, or general authorities.

...THAT roster was the most united the 15 have ever been, the most harmonious. I believe that harmony has continued with the more recent additions to the apostleship (starting mid-2000's).

Or, there were fewer outspoken members who weren't afraid to speak their mind.

And when they speak in General Conference - the Holy Ghost makes manifest the truth of their words to those who will receive them...
And most recently, they are pleading with us men to discover and internalize what it means to hold the Priesthood, and to gain the power to actually use it worthily, and to magnify our callings (along with the always needed repentance)...

If they quote verse, the Holy Spirit will confirm it. Just like most converts to the Mormon Church come by way of receiving a testimony of the Holy Book of Mormon - it is full of truth. Since the Mormon Church is not founded on the Nephite record, it stands to reason that missionaries should be handing out the D&C instead and asking investigators to pray about it.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

There were no apostles in the Book of Mormon. Church was simple: Elders, Priests, and Teachers. No man called prophets, first presidency, apostles, seventy, or general authorities.

I'll only deal with this one since I have to go work on installing my vegetable garden...

The twelve Nephite disciples that Christ called functioned in the same role as the Twelve Apostles Christ ordained in Jerusalem... and the disciples are answerable to the Apostles...

[DWhitmercaptain of 10]

There were no apostles in the Book of Mormon. Church was simple: Elders, Priests, and Teachers. No man called prophets, first presidency, apostles, seventy, or general authorities.

The twelve Nephite disciples that Christ called functioned in the same role as the Twelve Apostles Christ ordained in Jerusalem... and the disciples are answerable to the Apostles...

Whatever argument you have must be applicable to the Mormon Church also. Both churches are on the American continent, what's good for one, i.e. the Book of Mormon New Covenant church must be reflected in the modern one.

Whatever you think the "role" of an apostle was, it does not equate with what the BoM disciples did, or what current Mormon 'apostles' do.

The big difference of course is the resurrection! Nephites knew first hand that Jesus was resurrected, therefore the calling of an apostle was not needed. We have their testimonies, therefore apostles are not needed in modern time.