▼

Thursday, October 22, 2026

Embodied "Rabbinic" Mormonism (Part 1)

According to Britanica.com, "Rabbinic Judaism, the normative form of Judaism that developed after the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem (ad 70). ... it set up a mode of worship and a life discipline that were to be practiced by Jews worldwide down to modern times."


According to the article  here,  after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. Judaism shifted from a system of animal sacrifices and priests to one centered on study, prayer, and community— Rabbinic Judaism (historically succeeding Second Temple Judaism). So a "rabbinic" Mormonism is simply a similar development after the desecration of the temple by the US government in 1890 leading to a shift in the  system of plural  marriages (as sacrifices per D&C 132) and Mormon priests to one centered on study of Mormon Scripture, embodied joy, and community.


Here is a summary of my formulation for Embodied Rabbinic Mormonism, in bullet points:

Core Foundations of Embodied Rabbinic Mormonism

  • 1. The "Full Circle" Restitution Theory
    • Joseph Smith’s vision of the "Restitution of All Things" (Acts 3:21) re-enacted the entire trajectory of biblical history.
    • Just as ancient Israel progressed from Monarchy/Kings to Temple Sacrifices/High Priesthood, early Mormonism mirrored these exact phases through Nauvoo kingship, temple endowments, and plural marriage as an altar of sacrifice.
    • Consequently, the 1890 Manifesto and federal confiscation of Church property acted as Mormonism’s "70 CE Moment" (the destruction of the Temple). Rabbinic Mormonism completes the historical circle by embracing the necessary, final evolution into a home-centered, text-focused, post-temple faith.

  • 2. Primary Source Textual Autonomy ("Scripturalism")
    • Bypasses modern corporate correlation and institutional authority ("Nelsonite" Church) in favor of direct engagement with 19th-century primary texts—such as the 1876 Doctrine and Covenants (containing the Lectures on Faith), the Joseph Smith Papers, and secular, critical LDS history.
    • Mirrors the Rabbinic tradition where deep, critical study of foundational texts replaces physical temple sacrifices as the central act of worship.

  • 3. Lineage, Covenant, and Birthright (The Non-Universalist Framework)
    • Rather than Pauline Christian universalism (seeded by Christ), maintains early Mormonism’s literal tribal identity—specifically the Northern European Ephraimite bloodline.
    • Recognizes that Rabbinic Judaism is fundamentally an ethnic, lineage-based family identity. In the same way, a Rabbinic-Mormonism framework honors my Mormon Pioneer ancestral descent (e.g. Oliver Cowdery and Apostle Orson Hyde as relatives), establishing a personal, inherited claim to the Restoration that requires no institutional gatekeeping.

  • 4. Radical Affirmation of the Body ("Embodied")
    • Rejects Augustinian Original Sin, modern corporate purity culture, and body-shaming based on Joseph Smith's teaching that Adam’s Fall was necessary and glorious.
    • Honors the physical body, human mastery, financial success, talent development, and bodily/relational joy as sacred pursuits toward self-deification ("learning how to be gods").
    • Reclaims the 19th-century LDS critique of mandatory Roman monogamy, affirming personal relational autonomy and alternative sexual lifestyles without needing state marriage contracts or corporate ecclesiastical sanction.

  • 5. Domestic Table Fellowship over Institutional Hierarchy
    • Replaces central church buildings and rigid hierarchies with home-centered table fellowships, open text discussions, and Socratic study among fellow descendants of pioneer stock, independent Mormons, and cultural Ephraimites; meeting up as friends outside the rigid mask of piety-performing or the Corporate Church's institutional control. In other words, anyone who has a claim to Mormon ancestry, simply meeting together as friends in homes or coffee shops, etc., to discuss Mormonism and bond over their shared Mormon stories.
    • Centers on Joseph Smith’s declaration that "friendship is one of the grand fundamental principles of Mormonism," turning table fellowships and friendships into the modern sanctuary.

Why "Embodied Rabbinic Mormonism" as the best term for me:

  • "Embodied" highlights the material theology, physical progression, and radical bodily/relational freedom.
  • "Rabbinic" captures the exact structural transition from Kings/Temples to Home/Table/Sages, while honoring the non-universalist, tribal nature of the Ephraimite lineage.
  • "Mormonism" grounds the practice in the rich history, texts, and ancestry of the 19th century Restoration.



Wednesday, October 21, 2026

Pauline Scripture vs. Mormon Scripture: Celibacy, Martyrdom and Ethno-Erasure vs. Ethno-Familial Theosis

Mormon Scripture (especially post-1836) is based on familial salvation, a biological-exaltation, seeding a people, with a focus on being species-preservimg, species-empowering theology. 


Pauline Scripture (based on the authentic Pauline writings) is based on individual salvation through biological repression and being ideally celibate man-brides (1 Cor. 7; Mathew 19:12) and "slaves of messiah": the ideal of slavish, celibate, martyrs, and having your genes swapped out for another ethnicity. In contrast, Mormonism is an Anglo-American ethnotheology, and is pro-biology, pro-family. 


You are not a slave but a friend of Christ (D&C 93:45) and Jesus is your Elder Brother, the Son of Adam; and just as Jesus was exalted to power and godhood, you too as a Mormon are growing toward attaining your own power in the ptressthood-lineage and advance to exaltation among the Gods with your own divine enthronement Asa God-King or God-Queen (see Abraham 4; Lectures on Faith #5 & #7; D&C 132). 


Instead of salvation by life-denial, attacking the body as cursed and sinful, and the Anglo-Norse as idolatrous and sinful, Mormon Scripture is about Anglo-Ephraimites as the elect tribe of Israel as Northern European peoples who are God's chosed people in the Doctrine & Covenants (e.g. D&C 133:4): who God speaks to as his favored ethnos ("chosen seed" [D&C 107: 16, 40]). As God’s people, the elect, they are to lead as kings and thrive in wealth and power. 

Sunday, October 11, 2026

From Priesthood "Office" to Priesthood Bloodline: Ephraim, Abraham, and Eternal Increase in Joseph Smith's Theology: The Case for a Non-Office Priesthood and Priesthood as Lineage-based Birthright



Joseph Smith's developing theology did not simply replace priesthood ordination with biological lineage. Rather, priesthood authority increasingly acquired a hereditary, patriarchal, and reproductive dimension alongside its ecclesiastical dimension. There is substantial scriptural support for my theory, particularly when you connect Abraham 2:9–11, D&C 68:15–21, D&C 84:6–16, D&C 86:8–11, D&C 110:12, and D&C 132:19–37.


Some Mormon scriptures explicitly connect priesthood to ancestry, while others maintain that priesthood authority requires ordination, divine appointment, or the transmission of keys.


My theory distinguishes three concepts:


  • Ecclesiastical priesthood: Authority to preach, baptize, ordain, and administer the church.

  • Lineage-based priesthood: Authority, privileges, or divine promises associated with descent from Abraham, Levi, Aaron, Joseph, and Ephraim.

  • Dynastic or reproductive priesthood: Eternal plural marriage, and the continuation of posterity as dimensions of exaltation.


These concepts overlap in Joseph Smith's later 1840s theology, but they are not identical.


The strongest scriptural evidence:


| Scripture | Lineage | Supportive Evidence:                          

| Abraham 2:9–11 | Abraham's literal seed and priesthood blessings  | Very strong |              

             

| D&C 68:15–21 | Literal descendants of Aaron have a hereditary right to the bishopric | Very strong|

| D&C 84:6–16 | Priesthood transmitted through a named patriarchal lineage | Very strong |

| D&C 86:8–11    | Priesthood remaining through the lineage of the fathers| Very strong |

|D&C 107:40–57| Patriarchal priesthood descending from Adam through his descendants | Very strong |

|D&C 110:12  | Abrahamic blessings promised to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and their seed | Strong  |

|D&C 113:5–6  | A descendant of Jesse and Joseph who holds priesthood keys   = Joseph Smith. LDS commentators, including Sidney B. Sperry, have identified Joseph Smith as a plausible fulfillment of the passage. The LDS Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual reproduces Sperry's argument that Joseph Smith fits the description because of his priesthood keys and role in gathering Israel | Strong |

|D&C 132:19–37  | Eternal marriage, continuation of seed, Abraham's posterity, and plural wives | Very strong for reproductive exaltation |

| D&C 133:26–34  | Tribes from the north and Ephraim's birthright | Strong for Ephraimite identity |

|D&C 124:91–96  | Patriarchal office and inherited blessings in Hyrum Smith's family | Strong |


Note that several of these passages were written before the 1836 Kirtland Temple vision on the dispensation of. Tje gospel of Abraham. So lineage theology was already developing in the early 1830s; the later Nauvoo teachings connected it more explicitly to eternal marriage and increase.


D&C 86:8–10: Priesthood inherited through the flesh: This passage, dated December 6, 1832, is one of the most compelling sources for my position. D&C 86:8–10 states:


 "With whom the priesthood hath continued through the lineage of your fathers—"


And then:


"For ye are lawful heirs, according to the flesh"


Verse 10 continues by stating that priesthood must remain through the recipients and their lineage until the restoration of all things.


This is not simply a description of a religious office. It makes a claim about ancestral inheritance and legitimate priesthood heirs.


The LDS Church's own scripture commentary interprets the passage as describing an inherited right to receive and use priesthood power, although it distinguishes this from a priesthood line of ordination.


Full sources:


[Doctrine and Covenants 86](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/86?lang=eng)


[Church commentary on D&C 86](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-86-the-parable-of-the-wheat-and-the-tares?lang=eng)


D&C 113: Joseph Smith, Jesse, Ephraim, and priesthood by lineage:


D&C 113:4 describes a servant who is partly descended from Jesse and Ephraim, or the house of Joseph, which was Joseph Smith. Verse 6 describes a descendant of Jesse and Joseph to whom priesthood and kingdom keys rightfully belong. But verse 8 is then particularly striking: "Zion, has a right to by lineage." Here the revelation explicitly identifies priesthood authority as something Zion possesses a hereditary right to reclaim. 

As an Independent-Mormon I interpret this as my priesthood is less an office and more a lineal inheritance from my Mormon Ephraimite Great-grandfathers who were designated "pure blooded Ephraimites," and called to build Zion through their seed as polygamists.


Full sources:


[Doctrine and Covenants 113](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/113?lang=eng)


[Church commentary on D&C 113](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng)


D&C 68:15–21 identifies a hereditary claim to the bishopric for a literal descendant of Aaron, specifically the firstborn who meets the prescribed conditions. This is a clear example of a priesthood office associated with biological descent. However, the revelation does not establish that every descendant of Aaron automatically becomes a bishop. The individual must have his lineage established and receive the necessary authorization and ordination. But the point is, there is a strong emphasis on lineage. 


Full source:


[Doctrine and Covenants 68](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/68?lang=eng)


This establishes a crucial distinction for my theory: lineage could confer a hereditary claim to priesthood authority without eliminating the requirement for ecclesiastical appointment during the 1800s. So that hereditary was primary, and priesthood offices were organize the practice of plural marriage with according to one historians I was listening to made up as much as around 40% of Mormons in the 1850s. 


Abraham 2:11: The seed of the body and priesthood:


This is the theological centerpiece of my interpretation. Abraham 2:9 promises that Abraham's descendants will carry the ministry and priesthood to the nations. Verse 10 adds an important qualification: people who receive the gospel can also be accounted Abraham's seed. Then verse 11 explicitly associates Abraham's priesthood with his seed, including his literal bodily descendants. The passage states:

"In thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood)"


And clarifies:


"The literal seed, or the seed of the body"


This is unusually explicit language connecting hereditary descent and priesthood. This means Abraham's priesthood was in part his reproductive capacity. The text explicitly teaches that Abraham's biological descendants inherit a priesthood-related promise and that his posterity will transmit religious blessings to future generations. Abraham 2 establishes hereditary priesthood promises; D&C 132 subsequently connects Abraham's posterity to eternal marriage, plural marriage, and continuing increase. The texts basically teache that priesthood is identical to sperm, sexual capacity, or biological reproduction, especially when we keep in mind that the person who dictated the words come from Joseph smith, who said that basically the priesthood is the power of reproducing eternal lives. 


Sons of Levi, Holding Keys of the First Principles of the Gospel, Are Heirs to Aaronic Priesthood by Lineage — Martha Jane Knowlton Coray (March 21, 1841):

Joseph Read the 2 & 3d Chapters of Malichi & stated that there was a preistHood Confered upon the sons of Levi throughout the Jenerations of the Jews, & he also said they was born heirs to that prestHood By Linage or Decent & held the Keys of the first principles of the Gospel — for this — he quoted concerning Jesus coming to John to be Baptized of Jhon that he (Jesus) Might Enter into the Kingdom as Jhon held the Keys, suffer it to be so now  &c he also Brought up Zacharias pleading with the Lord in the temple that he might have seed so that the preistHood might be preserved


Discourse, circa 21 March 1841, as Reported by William P. McIntire, p. 17, The Joseph Smith Papers.

 

3 Grand Orders of Priesthood Related to Calling & Election, Temple, Patriarchal Authority, and Levitical Priesthood — Willard Richards (August 27, 1843) [[ephasis added]]:

told an anecdote of the Episcopali[a]n pri[e]st— who said he had the pr[i]esthood of A[a]ron— but not of Melichsedch [Melchizedek]— and bore this testimony that I never have found the man who claimed the pri[e]sthood of Melchisideck.


The law was given under Aaron for the purpose of pouring out Jud[g]ments— and destructi[o]ns. ...


3 grand orders of pri[e]sthood referred to there


1st. King of Shiloam.— power & authority over that of Abraham holding the key of the power of endless life.—— ...


by the offering of Isaac.— if a man would attain— he must sacrific[e] all to attain. to the keys of the kingdom of an endless life


what was the power of Melchisedick twas not. P[riesthood] of Aaron— &c— a king and a pri[e]st to the most high Good [God]. a perfect law of Theocracy—holding keys of powe[r] & bless[in]gs​ stood as God to give laws to the people. administer[i]ng endless lives to the sons and daughte[r]s of Adam, kingly powe[r]s. of ano[i]nting.— Abram says Melchsidek.—away I have a pr[i]esthood.— ...

Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by Willard Richards, pp. 71-74, The Joseph Smith Papers.

 

Melchizedek Priesthood the Power of an Endless Life — William Clayton (August 27, 1843):

He spoke concerning the priesthood of Melchisedek shewing that the sectarians never propossed to have it consequently never could save any one and would all be damned together. He showed that the power of the Melchisek P’d was to have the power of an “endless lives.”

Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by William Clayton, pp. 102-103, The Joseph Smith Papers

(Source)


So when Abraham 2 is read alongside these quotes and D&C 132, we can see how the priesthood was the power to create endless lives, that is reproduce your seed. As the chosen lineage, the early Mormons were not bound by sectarian moral concepts like monogamy; and the priesthood was basically a theocracy, as Joseph  says above; and so from a modern perspective as an independent Mormon this means that this concept of theocracy from a now individualized American point of view means to me that I am a free agent, a sovereign individual, and not bound by any institutional dogmatic Mormon Leadership or Community claiming to speak for God unless they can prove it by showing a legitimate Revelation and having it canonized by being voted on by me.


Additional evidence: D&C 107 and Abraham 1:


D&C 107:40–41 describes a priesthood order handed down from father to son and belonging to the literal descendants of a chosen lineage. It then traces that order from Adam through Seth and subsequent patriarchs.

The surrounding verses also describe Adam presiding over his posterity and receiving promises about the nations that would descend from him.

This presents priesthood as more than church administration. It places priesthood within a family hierarchy extending from the first patriarch through successive generations.

[Doctrine and Covenants 107](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/107?lang=eng)

Abraham 1:2–4, 26–27 is equally revealing. Abraham seeks the priesthood blessings of his fathers and describes a right transmitted through ancestral generations. The text then contrasts Abraham with Pharaoh, who is described as a righteous ruler but belonging to a lineage without the right to priesthood. This is perhaps the clearest example of priesthood eligibility being associated with ancestry rather than simply personal righteousness.


[Abraham 1](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/pgp/abr/1?lang=eng)


Ephraim and the tribes from the north:


D&C 133:26–34 describes the return of the northern tribes and the special place of Ephraim. Verse 34 declares that Ephraim's servants will crown the returning tribes with glory. This fits the broader Mormon interpretation of Ephraim as the birthright tribe with a special responsibility in gathering Israel. Ephraim has the birthright for leadership in gathering Israel and Ephraimites were entitled to practice plural marriage.

[D&C 133](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/133?lang=eng)


D&C 132: The convergence of lineage, priesthood, marriage, and eternal increase:


D&C 132:19 connects eternal marriage with priesthood keys, exaltation, and the continuation of seed.


D&C 132:30 identifies Joseph Smith as a descendant of Abraham and promises that Abraham's posterity will continue beyond mortality.


D&C 132:31 extends Abraham's promise to Joseph Smith.


D&C 132:34–37 then connects Abraham's plural marriages and children to the fulfillment of divine promises.


Finally, D&C 132:61–63 describes plural marriage under the law of the priesthood and associates it with multiplying, replenishing the earth, and bearing souls in the eternal worlds.


Taken together, these passages support the interpretation in which priesthood was about continuing posterity to obtain the highest form of exaltation among the Gods.


D&C 113:8, Abraham 2:11, and D&C 132:30–37 form a particularly revealing three-part textual sequence:


* D&C 113: Priesthood rights associated with lineage.


* Abraham 2: Priesthood promises associated with Abraham's literal seed.


* D&C 132: Abraham's posterity and priesthood-authorized marriage associated with eternal increase.


I interpret D&C 132 as a way to institute plural marriage through a system that depends on divinely authorized covenants and particular sealing key given to Joseph Smith and passed on to Brigham Young and others who practiced polygamy in order to grow the tribe of Ephraimin the 1800s. When that was accomplished by about 1918 when most Mormon groups abandoned polygamy, the need for priesthood offices and administrators became obsolete. 


My ancestors' patriarchal blessings and the meaning of Ephraimite identity:


A nineteenth-century patriarchal blessings identifying my ancestors as a pure-blooded Ephraimites, is evidence of how that ancestor's religious community understood lineage and covenant identity. Such blessings demonstrate that these concepts were not confined to scriptural texts. They were applied to actual converts and their descendants.

My family-history research revealed:

* My family patriarchs were identified as a literal biological descendant of Ephraim, rather than someone adopted into Israel through the gospel.


* The patriarchal blessings often promise priesthood, posterity, multiple wives, and an inheritance in Zion.


* The recipient of these patriarchal blessings went on to practice plural marriage and understood it as fulfilling those promises.


In a nutshell:


  • Mormon scripture increasingly developed priesthood as a hereditary and patriarchal institution, though hereditary concepts were present by 1831–1832.

  • Ephraimite ancestry was understood as a special birthright associated with gathering Israel and priesthood privileges. Eternal plural marriage became connected to Abrahamic posterity and priesthood sealing authority (D&C 132). 


So a more historically defensible position  is: Joseph Smith's developing priesthood theology incorporated the idea that certain sacred rights and promises were transmitted through ancestral lineages, especially those of Abraham, Joseph, and Ephraim. During the Nauvoo period, this hereditary and patriarchal conception of priesthood became closely associated with eternal plural marriage, and the continuation of posterity. Within this theological framework, plural marriage came to be understood as a restoration of the Abrahamic patriarchal order, through which priesthood-bearing families participated in the fulfillment of divine promises concerning eternal increase. 


Since the modern LDS church now rejects the means of this increase and or even downplaying priesthood lineages, I think it's fair to say that for me as an Independent Mormon I do not recognize the current LDS church as completely authoritative in all things but are at this point it's more of a business corporation and family-based fraternity/club; which can be beneficial and helpful for organizing fellow Mormons and I do not frown on anyone maintaining friendships and social unity through the LDS church or any Mormon group or Institution; but for me the high demand controlling nature of the current LDS institutional church and its abandonment of many of many of the core teachings of the original oracles such as Brigham Young, Orson Pratt and Orson Hyde, etc. For me, as an Independent Mormon I derive my identity as a Mormon more from my heredity descending from Mormon polygamist Pioneer ancestors; and I see the priesthood as the principal of biological assent and growing in power as a sovereign individual today. In other words, I do not recognize anyone's so-called priesthood authority as an office with the right to judge me or tell me if I can or can't enter a temple; as I simply choose not to try and enter a Mormon temple at all because in my view temples were designed to teach the Adam-God doctrine and learn that God has a body (including a phallus), and priesthood was about continuing your seed via wives you were sealed to on the altar (all of which is now rejected by the institutional LDS Church). So I think temples served their purpose by about 1900. So until a new Prophet, Seer and Revelator can prove to me they received an actual Revelation and have it voted on and canonized (which I do not see happening in my lifetime), therefore I see Joseph Smith as the true prophet of the restoration with Brigham Young, Orson Pratt and Orson Hyde and John Taylor and those prior to 1900 fulfilling legitimate authoritative callings because they aligned more closely with Joseph Smith's original vision and the original scriptures. But today, I do not see the institutional Utah-based LDS Church fully embracing the true restored gospel as taught in Mormon scripture and in the Journal of Discourses. 




From LDS Index to the Triple Combination on Seed & Lineage

From LDS Index to the Triple Combination:

Lineage (See also Descendant; Father; Forefathers; Genealogy; Patriarch; Seed):

 

descendants of Aaron may claim anointing to bishopric if they can prove lineage, D&C 68:21.

 

lineage of priesthood from Adam to Moses, D&C 84:6–17.


priesthood continues through lineage of fathers, D&C 86:8–10.


Zion has right to priesthood by lineage, D&C 113:8.


Pharaoh is of lineage by which he could not have right of priesthood, Abr. 1:27. 


Joseph1, Seed of—descendants of Joseph (

See also Israel; Joseph):

the Lord promised Joseph to preserve his seed forever, 2 Ne. 3:16 (25:21).


Nephites to be righteous branch from loins of Joseph, Jacob 2:25.


Nephites are remnant of seed of Joseph, Alma 46:23 (Ether 13:7).


part of remnant of Joseph shall be preserved, as remnant of coat of Joseph, remainder shall perish, Alma 46:24–27 (3 Ne. 10:17).


the Lord has been merciful unto seed of Joseph, 3 Ne. 5:21.


the Lord will bring remnant of seed of Joseph to knowledge of the Lord, 3 Ne. 5:23.


Nephites remnant of house of Joseph, 3 Ne. 15:12.


New Jerusalem to be built unto remnant of seed of Joseph, Ether 13:6–10.

house of Joseph to be convinced of gospel, D&C 90:10.


root of Jesse to be descendant of Joseph, D&C 113:6.

Chronological Development of the Priesthood in Sequence with Plural Marriage: How a Protestant-style LDS Church grew into a Theology of the Body in Imitation of the Gods

The Evolution of Mormon Priesthood: From Protestant Ministry to Abrahamic Patriarchal Authority (1829–1844)


The early Mormon priesthood (1830s) was an authority to preach, baptize, administer sacramental ordinances, and govern the church while the later Nauvoo priesthood was an authority to seal plural marriages, establish eternal families, and confer exaltation among the Gods.


The transformation from a Protestant style priesthood to a more lineal lineage based priesthood as the authority to practice plural marriage was not a sudden event in April 1836. It was a gradual development, with the years 1833–1836 serving as a bridge between early Mormon ecclesiastical authority and the later theology of Abrahamic priesthood, plural marriage, and eternal increase of male seed in imitation of the Gods (Abraham 4).


Three developments are key to understanding the development:


  • 1833–1835: Joseph Smith's reported relationship with Fanny Alger, traditionally regarded as his first plural marriage, precedes the 1836 Kirtland Temple visions.

  • April 3, 1836: Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery report receiving the keys of the gathering of Israel, the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, and Elijah's sealing authority.

  • 1841–1844: The Nauvoo revelations and ordinances connect priesthood authority to eternal marriage/plural wives, dynastic family relationships, exaltation, and the continuation of posterity eternally.


Chronology of The Development of Mormon Priesthood:

1829–1830: Reported restoration of authority to baptize and administer the gospel; organization of the church with elders, priests, teachers, and deacons. The earliest institutional priesthood was principally ecclesiastical and missionary. 


June 1831: Introduction of ordinations to the high priesthood at Kirtland. Priesthood hierarchy expands beyond the original organization. 


 1832: D&C 84 distinguishes greater and lesser priesthoods and traces Abraham's priesthood through Melchizedek. Abrahamic priesthood concepts already exist before 1836 but not fully developed.                         

1833: Joseph Smith's biblical revision and D&C 93 develop ideas about eternal intelligence, divine embodiment, and humanity's potential. This provides the metaphysical groundwork for later embodied-exaltation theology. 

1833–1836: Joseph Smith's relationship with Fanny Alger, generally dated to the mid-1830s was a possible early plural marriage before the full Nauvoo sealing theology was formalized. 

1835: D&C 107 systematizes the Melchizedek and Aaronic priesthoods; Twelve and Seventy organized. Administrative priesthood reaches a new level of sophistication.               

April 3, 1836: Kirtland Temple vision of Moses, Elias, and Elijah, now D&C 110: Explicit association of priesthood keys with Israel, Abraham's posterity, and polygamous sealing ("Gospel of polygamist Abraham).

1838–1839: Expulsion from Missouri and establishment of Nauvoo and a full transition toward a new religious and social order at odds with Nicene-Christianity as a an embodied theosis.                                    |

1840–1841: Baptism for the dead introduced; Nauvoo temple revelation, D&C 124; early marriage sealings    priesthood authority increasingly extends beyond mortality as the priesthood is a lineage and the seed of the male body (see Abraham 2:11).                              |

1842: Nauvoo endowment introduced; Book of Abraham published depicting God the Father with an erect phallus in Facsimile 2 Figure 7. Ritualized scriptural development of priestly kingship, creation, and eternal existence of men becoming God-Kimgs and the Gods as omce menon other worlds.

1843: D&C 131 and 132; eternal marriage, plural marriage, and eternal increase articulated. Wives and/or concubines and posterity become central to the highest exaltation amomg the Gods of fleshly parts and passions.                           

1843–1844: Anointings, sealing networks, and priestly kingship become more developed as priesthood extends into familial, dynastic, and royal dimensions.                         

1844: Council of Fifty organized; Joseph Smith delivers the King Follett discourse and eternal progression and earthly kingdom-building reach a new stage where it is clear at this point that priesthood is about embodiment: it is about a specific lineage like the tribe of Ephraim having the right to the priesthood to raise up seed and produce a peoplehood; and as Joseph Smith put it to paraphrase, you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves by progressing and succeeding up the ladders of becoming, as the Gods are expansive beings with bodies of flesh and have the same biological drives as God-Kings seeking to expand their Kingdoms; and so when we on Earth embrace our biological drives that were given to us as we are the literal offspring of the Gods, we are in alignment with the Gods, and can become like the Gods by imitating the Gods.


The Joseph Smith Papers editors confirm that the 1835 priesthood instruction incorporated earlier revelations while introducing further clarification. They also document how the endowment developed from early promises of spiritual power into the more elaborate Nauvoo ordinance of 1842.  See:





Fanny Alger: The significant development before Elijah's appearance.


Fanny Alger (1816–1889)


Alger is especially important because her relationship with Joseph Smith appears to precede the April 1836 Kirtland Temple vision, although its exact dates, nature, and contemporary justification remain disputed. The LDS Church recognizes Alger as Joseph Smith's first reported plural wife, generally dating the relationship or marriage to the mid-1830s. Historians have disagreed about whether it began around 1833, 1835, or somewhat later. There are two competing historical interpretations:

  • Interpretation A: An early plural marriage. Joseph Smith had already begun experimenting with an Abrahamic model of marriage before receiving the 1836 keys. Under this interpretation, the Kirtland vision became part of the subsequent theological justification for a practice already underway.


  • Interpretation B: A relationship later understood as plural marriage. The surviving contemporary evidence is too limited to establish that Joseph Smith and Alger entered a marriage under a developed priesthood sealing doctrine. Later witnesses interpreted the relationship differently, with some defending it as marriage and Oliver Cowdery describing it in strongly critical terms as a an elicit affair.


This distinction matters. We have retrospective accounts of the relationship, but not a surviving contemporary marriage certificate or an independently documented 1835 sealing ceremony. In my view, Joseph came to believe that as the choice seer from the lineage of Jesse and Ephraim, he was entitled to additional romantic partners as a member of the royal lineage of Israel, but that he had not fully developed the later sealing doctrines which came later. In other words, I do not personally think that Joseph Smith believed he was having an "extra marital affair" with Fanny Alger but that just as the Patriarchs of the Old Testament had wives and concubines / mistresses, as a member of the royal lineage he was entitled to those practices; and so in his mind I don't think he believed he was sinning by having a romantic relationship with any Fanny. For Joseph Smith was constantly incorporating the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible into his theology,  which is very clear in his dictation of the Book of Mormon in early 1829-1830: which is basically a synthesis of the Old and New Testament as a form of midrash; so it was inevitable that he would begin to reframe his sexual morality to align more with the sexual morality of the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So the way I see it, to criticize Joseph Smith is to basically criticize the morality of the Old Testament / Hebrew Bible. So the most historically defensible thesis is that Joseph Smith's early experimentation with plural marriage (or concubinage) with Fanny preceded, and was subsequently integrated into, a more elaborate Abrahamic and sealing-priesthood theology in the 1840s. My sources for this ananysus were:






April 3, 1836: The decisive scriptural turning point takes place here where it is explicitly stated that it is now the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, that is the gospel of polygamy and raising up seed, and imitating the Gods who as Joseph Smith put it in a letter to Nancy Rigdon are basically more liberal in their views.

D&C 110 contains three separate transmissions of authority.


| Heavenly messenger | Scripture| Keys or blessings|                                               

| ------------ | ------------- | ---------------------------------------|

| Moses    | D&C 110:11| Keys of gathering Israel|

| Elias   | D&C 110:12 | Dispensation of the gospel of Abraham|

| Elijah | D&C 110:13–16 | Keys associated with turning the hearts of fathers and children|


The distinction between Elias and Elijah is especially important for understanding the transition from a Protestant style in the early 1830s to a more lineage-based Abrahamic Mormon gospel post 1835.

Elias and the Abrahamic promise. D&C 110:12 declares:

"In us and our seed all generations after us should be blessed."

The verse explicitly connects the dispensation of Abraham to descendants and intergenerational blessing. Thus we can see that Mormonism had become a lineage-based religion of the royal seed of Israel having the rights and privileges of the priesthood, the priesthood as the seed of the body (Abraham 2:11), which royal lineage provided the right to receive the keys to unlock the privledge to practice plural marriage and concubineage. Later, D&C 132 develops this Abrahamic theme into a doctrine of eternal marriage, plural wives, posterity, and exaltation in the eternities: wherein is it is explained that exaltation is to be like the Gods in that you increase your lineage (an increase of lives) on Earth and into the eternities, just as the Gods themselves increase their seed and continue their lineage; and thus to be a God according to D&C 132 is to increase and continue while the lesser angels (as servants of the Gods) cannot increaase their seed and their lineage does not continue into the eternities.


Notice the relationship:


D&C 110:12 (1836): Abrahamic promises involving seed and future generations.


D&C 132:30–37 (1843): Abraham's posterity, marriage, plural wives, concubines, and the continuation of his promised increase.


D&C 132:19–20 (1843): Eternal marriage and exaltation, with the promise that spouses may become Gods.


Elijah and sealing authority:


D&C 110:13–16 describes Elijah's appearance in connection with Malachi's prophecy about fathers and children.


Later Nauvoo teachings expand the implications of this authority beyond ordinary church administration to include binding relationships across generations and beyond death. Note the strong connection to embodiment and lineage. Note the meaning of sealing expands between the Kirtland and Nauvoo periods. See:




There was thus a clear progression from Protestant-style ministry to Abrahamic priesthood lineage-making deification. In the earliest phase in the 1830s, priesthood principally authorizes religious ministry. By Nauvoo, Joseph Smith is teaching that priesthood authority can establish dynastic relationships that continue into eternity. This transformation becomes especially clear in three documents:

D&C 107 (1835): Church government and hierarchy that emphasizes presiding offices, priesthood orders, quorums, and administration. The document also contains material about patriarchal priesthood, so it is not purely Protestant in character. See:


  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/1

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/instruction-on-priesthood-between-circa-1-march-and-circa-4-may-1835-dc-107/1


  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/doctrine-and-covenants-1835/90

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/doctrine-and-covenants-1835/90


D&C 110 (1836): Abrahamic and sealing keys. This revelation introduces an explicit heavenly transmission of the dispensation of Abraham and Elijah's keys. The original 1836 record is preserved in the Joseph Smith Papers. See:


  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2


D&C 132 (1843): Eternal marriage and increase: this revelation gives the later doctrine its fullest expression. D&C 132:19–20 associates exaltation with eternal marriage, and verse 19 promises a continuation of the seeds forever. Verses 30–37 connect Abraham's promised posterity to his marriages and to Joseph Smith's restoration of the ancient order.

The historical introduction to the 1843 revelation confirms that plural unions preceded the written revelation by years. See:


  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelation-12-july-1843-dc-132/1

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/revelation-12-july-1843-dc-132/1


One particularly important piece of evidence of a progression from a Protestant-style priesthood to an Abrahamic priesthhod of increase-of-seed is that the LDS Church's own historical essay explicitly connects Elijah's 1836 appearance with later eternal marriage ordinances and the perpetuation of families beyond death. See:


  • https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng

  • https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng


Two additional pieces of evidence are that first, the 1835 marriage statement creates a revealing contrast. The original 1835 Doctrine & Covenants included a statement affirming monogamous marriage, even as later historical accounts place Joseph Smith's relationship with Alger around this period. The statement was publicly accepted, but its preparation and Joseph's personal involvement require careful examination. This suggests that public Mormon marriage teaching and Joseph's private religious experimentation did not necessarily develop together. See:

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/appendix-3-statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835/1

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/appendix-3-statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835/1


  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835-as-published-in-latter-day-saints-messenger-and-advocate/2

  • https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/statement-on-marriage-circa-august-1835-as-published-in-latter-day-saints-messenger-and-advocate/2


Second, the distinction between the Melchizedek priesthood and the later sealing keys becomes clearer in Joseph Smith's Nauvoo teachings. The Joseph Smith Papers editors note that Joseph subsequently associated Elijah with the fulness of Melchizedek priesthood authority and ceremonies sealing marriages and parent-child relationships for eternity. This supports my view of a developing priesthood theology, rather than a fully articulated system existing in 1830. See:

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/visions-3-april-1836-dc-110/2)

The priesthood already had Abrahamic associations in D&C 84 in 1832, and the 1835 priesthood instruction discussed patriarchal succession. Thus, 1836 is best understood as a major authorization point within an ongoing development, but not the first appearance of Abrahamic ideas.


My historical priesthood development theory in a nutshell:

  • Between 1829 and 1835, Mormon priesthood evolved from a predominantly ecclesiastical and missionary authority, sharing features with contemporary Protestant restorationist movements, into a more elaborate hierarchy grounded in ancient priesthood orders based on Old Testament concepts of royal Israelite lineage. Joseph Smith's reported relationship with Fanny Alger in the mid-1830s suggests that experimentation with biblical plural marriage and/or concubinage began before the mature theology of eternal sealing was articulated.The April 3, 1836 Kirtland Temple vision, in which Elias transmitted the dispensation of Abraham and Elijah conferred sealing keys, provided a scriptural framework subsequently connected to eternal marriage, patriarchal posterity, and intergenerational salvation as viacroyal linkages to Joseph's kingly royalty. During the Nauvoo period, especially from 1841 to 1844, Joseph Smith expanded these ideas into a theology of eternal marriage, plural sealings, exaltation, and continuing posterity. Priesthood authority was no longer concerned merely with governing a church and administering Christian ordinances; it also became the authority through which an eternal patriarchal family order could be established. In short, priesthood became synonymous with the seed of the male body and the capacity to increase one's genome on Earth and into the eternity as the very method the Gods use to expand their seed by creating worlds and building their ongoing kingdoms.


The Nauvoo priesthood was thus considerably more expansive than the priesthood of the early 1830s. The reason for this is obvious and supports my conclusion that Mormonism is the development away from a Protestant style form of church, as it grew into more of a literal tribe or peoplehood as a religion about imitating the Gods of Flesh and Bones; and Adam fell that he might have joy and we are punished for our own sins and not Adam's transgressions and as Joseph Smith put it,  Adam did not sin; and as Joseph told Nancy, God is more liberal in his views; and as Joseph Smith himself described himself as someone who was more cheerful and who often was criticized for being too embodied, too joyful, playful, and living life as a man (competing, wrestling, etc.) rather than seeking to be a Monkish nun or celibate priest. Mormonism is in essence the imitation of fleshly Gods of parts and passions and the Abrahamic priesthood is best understood from an independent Mormon perspective as the rights and privilege of a particular lineage from the north in the 1800s, as the elect tribe of Ephraim, who were called to embody and model the way of the Gods and grow into a People (Tribe). The way of the Gods is the way of Friendship, Tribe, and Increase, which is the way of joy and happiness through a life lived in the body, and the embracing of the masculine and feminine instincts which has been articulated by a non-mormon Dr Paul Dobransky throigh his use of Greek myths to explain our gender instincts. See: masculinepsychology.substack.com. 




Bullet Point Care for Mormon Scripturalism

 


  • D&C 34: Orson Pratt is to called to preach. For me, this means that Orson Pratt's formation of 1876 D&C was a form of preaching as part of his calling by revelation. So when Pratt added footnotes referencing his spirit-atoms theology I see his footnotes as close to scripture as part of his preaching he was called to in D&C 34.


  • D&C 35, revelation to Sidney Rigdon states: "... preach my gospel and use the words of the holy prophets to confirm his [Joseph Smith's] words as they are given to him" (D&C in Plain English, modernized by Ben Kucenski). In other words, if Joseph Smith's revelations are not confirmed by previous scripture then Sidney Rigdon was to call it out (correct him). Thus you can see that from the beginning there was a clear emphasis on Scripturalism (scripture as ultimately authoritative). This was not Sola Scriptura (scripture alone, or the Bible alone) because the Mormon scripture canon was open to expansion through new revelations, but new revelations were to align with previously canonized scripture. 

  • Brigham Young was chosen by Joseph Smith to be an Apostle and Benjamin Johnson was his best friend, and Orson Hyde allowed his wife to be Joseph Smith's plural wife. These men's names are in the revelations themselves in the D&C and so in my mind they are the most authoritative voices. For God directly gives revelations where they're to preach the true gospel. So why should I treat these men's teachings as false speculation and now say that they were all wrong for 100+ years? Why should I then listen to the alleged LDS Leaders after Heber J. Grant (who became the seventh President and prophet of the LDS Church 1918)?

Thursday, October 8, 2026

Case for Scriptural Mormonism

Here is my working theory based on what I know from history and the history of the Bible and theology and Christianity in general going back to the first century. As I see it, original Christianity was very clearly a monkish phenomenon producing effeminate seeded male-brides who were not to fight fight back and even Matthew 19:12 encouraging permanent celibacy as the ideal. You don't have freedom fighters but dying martyrs voluntarily seeking death rather than fighting back or seeking freedom from oppression. They are not seeking to topple the power hierarchy who is oppressing but instead are giving into their oppressors by dying a martyr: so that they can gain Supernatural connection with their messiah-husband in the afterlife and he will get revenge for them. This martyrdom theme is carried on all the way into the Book of Revelation where male virgins who die martyrs are rewarded with exaltation next to their husband Jesus. 


Based on books like The Germanization of Medieval Christianity we can see clearly that under the later Roman Church hierarchy that developed based on the pseudographic/disputed letters of Paul and later pagan converts to Christianity in the second century, that after the first Jewish Christians like Paul, Peter and John of Patmos died out and most of the Christians became non-jewish pagans, Roman ideals and pagan virtues from the Germanic tribes and the Scandinavians and Indo-European warrior culture was filtered into Christianity under the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. 

So basically up to about 1500 you had a pro-european Christian Church and while there were problems with the Inquisition and witch hunts and other issues, you had a generally positive theology about Europeans or Anglo-Saxons and other Indo-European peoples. 


All of this changed with the rise of protestantism, for the removal of a masculine hierarchy and the development of a more Leftist interpretive hermeneutic / interpretive method, you had the removal of the priest class, kings, and spiritual revelators of scripture and Prophets and Popes and Bishops as authority figures to interpret scripture; and so the removal of these guardrails would start out as a good and noble project of protest against Catholic Church hierarchical abuses and manipulation of the pew-sitter; unfortunately, this also gave too much power to the individual to interpret the Bible any way he wanted leading to thousands of denominations based on thousands of different individual interpretations. 

For the first 500 years of the Protestant Reformation this was not a problem because the standard cultural narrative was European excellence and respect for European culture; but slowly the phenomenon of deconstruction and anti-whiteism began to develop and you soon saw the rise of 4th wave Feminism and other far-leftist political ideologies infecting the Protestant churches (see The Rise of Cultural  Marxism in less than 5 minutes by Heydel Mankoo by John Anderson Media): leading to the phenomenon of "white guilt," anti-whiteism, and anti-masculinity; and this was possible because the doctrine of Sola Scriptura took precedence over the Church Authority and it's masculine hierarchy, which led to a return to the original authentic Pauline letters: where you had a more gender-bending, femininizing theology going on of seeded male brides, and so these far-leftist anti-man type Protestant churches had authoritative grounds in biblical Pauline scripture to push a far-leftist ideology, because they could even call the pseudographic/disputed letters of Paul that are more pro masculine, as not authentic scripture; and so by going to the core foundation of Christianity (the authentic letters of Paul) and the pro-martyrdom message and the celibacy encouragement, and overall leveling ideology, you had a heavy arsenal for attacking the masculine instincts (e.g. competing for resources, status-seeking and conquest toward dominion and procreation, etc.) and so most Protestant churches had lost the game; and so what you began to see in the 2020s is the rise of Eastern Orthodox "Ortho Bros" and an attempt by Protestants to produce a more pro-masculine theology with new books on "the masculine Jesus" in the title. 

The problem with all of this is you still have the problem of the New Testament being a foreign book and not a European book about European peoples and history, that's number one; and number two, postmodernism and deconstruction has already been established in Bible history departments and so every educated person who has read the scholarship of say Paul Middleton knows you can't put the "genie back in the bottle," in other words Sola Scriptura allows for anti-white feminized readings of the New Testament, and there is just no way of getting around it. This is evident in the Ortho Bros, whose behavior themselves is more Nietzchean than actually Pauline. 

Since Christians are so committed to sola scriptura and only the New Testament is "God's word," they are stuck in a bind as Europeans; they are stuck holding their Authority as a Book by foreign culture, a foreign people who spoke a foreign language with an original message that basically sought to feminize them and make them docile and weak as Nietzche rightly argues. The germanization process I mentioned earlier was a kind of internal psychological antibody where they basically ignored the authentic Pauline letters and focused on what's called the pastoral letters or disputed letters of Paul, but with the rise of deconstruction and feminism, you have a return of that original authentic Pauline layer coming to the surface. So the way I see it, the way forward for the promasculine, pro-European Christian is, they can turn to the foundational hierarchies and the germanization of medieval Christianity through the conservative branch of the Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church, or they can explore a third alternative. 

There is yet in my view a third alternative and that is continuing the Protestant Reformation but expanding it to replace the New Testament alone method with Mormon Scripture as the authority, so that instead of just the Apostle Paul writing in the Middle East from a Jewish perspective, you have Joseph Smith revealing new scripture revelation as an Anglo-Saxon man in North America. So you have an Anglo-American revealing new scriptural revelations and ideals that is more conducive to a healthy masculine mentality and more in line with American culture and values as scripture produced by someone speaking the English language from an Anglo-Saxon / European perspective. 

I call this Scriptural Mormonism where the current LDS leaders are not to be treated as Popes or Prophets but as managers of a Corporation. So Mormon scripture becomes the authority replacing the New Testament alone method, by understanding that Mormon scripture includes the New Testament but as well as The Joseph Smith Translation. So that with the 1876 Mormon scripture Cannon, canonized by Brigham Young through the work of Orson Pratt, you have that original spiritual vitality Anglo Nordic energy in the words filtered through each reader in their own way; so that you have a new energy being filtered through Northern Europeans that can revitalize them and counteract 4th wave feminism and anti-whitism and instill a new psyche, a revive sense of energy and vitality and self-esteem for Anglo-Americans.