Gonna stop you here. Dude did not "separate himself." Dude was excommunicated.
"Dude" is thick in the middle of Church leadership, has some disagreements with Joseph Smith, moves a little ways away to be with his family and friends that feel the same way he does, and is vocal about saying he does not agree with the founder of the Church and the Prophet. Then moves even farther away from there again, and continues to talk against the Prophet. Then, after all of that he is excommunicated along with some of those that were with him.
Notes from meeting where excommunication took place:
Voted unanimously that John Murdock be a President of the High Council, whose duty it shall be to receive charges and gie notice to the defendant, also, to call the Council together and organize them &c.
Edward Partridge gives the opening prayer, opening remarks, and reads the charges brought by Seymour Brunson:
1st, For stirring up the enemy to persecute the brethren by urging on vexatious lawsuits and thus distressing the inocent.
2nd, For seeking to destroying the character of President Joseph Smith jr by falsly insinuating that he was guilty of adultry &c.
3rd For treating the Church with contempt by not attending meetings.
4th For virtually denying the faith by declaring that he would not be governed by any ecclesiastical authority nor Revelation whatever in his temporal affairs.
5th For selling his lands in Jackson County contrary to the Revelations.
6th For writing and sending an insulting letter to President T. B. Marsh while on the High Council, attending to the duties of his office, as President of the Council and by insulting the whole Council with the contents of said letter.
7th, For leaving the calling, in which God had appointed him, by Revelation, for the sake of filthy lucre, and turning to the practice of Law.
8th, For disgracing the Church by Lieing being connected in the 'Bogus' buisness as common report says.
9th For dishonestly Retaining notes after they had been paid and finally for leaving or forsaking the cause of God, and betaking himself to the beggerly elements of the world and neglecting his high and Holy Calling contrary to his profession.
He didn't care, and didn't attend. You think that's a guy that did not separate himself before his excommunication? If you actually read the rest of my post you will see that the excommunication comes after the separation.
This is something of a disputed issue. Prior to 1830, Joseph Smith allowed Cowdery and Hiram Page to participate in the process of revelation. You see fingerprints of this all over early portions of the D&C and culminated in D&C 28, where Joseph takes sole control over revelation. There is some evidence (although documentation on the early church is not easy to come by) that events prior to 1830 were used to justify later excommunication.
Oliver was actually even given an opportunity to translate the Book of Mormon, but that didn't work out and the gift was taken away. What do you have in the way of evidence? Sock it to me brother. I don't think you understand Doctrine and Covenants 28, if you ask me. Oliver and Sidney and others were there for some amazing things, but never was anyone other than Joseph Smith to receive commandments and revelations for the Church as a whole, but many could teach those revelations by the Spirit after they had been given. Not sure what you are getting at as to the reasons prior to 1830 for the excommunication, but the meeting notes give a few reasons.
Those issues being Joseph's willingness to blend church/state and at least one alleged Joseph Smith affair. In all honesty, it appears that he and Joseph and a personal falling out and he was excommunicated for it. In fact, that was a pattern and practice of the early church. Certainly the way the church talks about it is reflected in this general conference talk from 2001:
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/print/2001/10/some-great-thing?lang=eng.
There, Pres. Faust writes "But when the Prophet Joseph fell upon hard times, Oliver was critical of him and became estranged from him. Despite the efforts of the Prophet to reach out the hand of fellowship to him, he became hostile to the Prophet and the Church and was excommunicated 12 April 1838."
I believe that is a dishonestly incomplete account of what happened.
It sounds to me like the NT account of the rich young ruler that tells the Lord he has done all these things since his youth, but what does he yet lack.
When told to sell all he has and to come and follow him, he walks away sorrowing. For some people money is just too hard of a thing to let go of.
I think your "dishonestly incomplete" comment is biased and partially informed.
If you can produce any evidence that this is the case you will have made a LOT of money. These are exactly the kinds of documents that Mark Hofmann liked to forge because they don't exist.
Ok, first of all, don't care about money like that. Secondly for months sometime before he was killed, he would teach the 12 Apostles and pass on the needed information and they hurried to build the Temple to pass on the needed keys and ordinances. When he was done with that he said he could die now, and that they would have the weight on their shoulders. If you actually take an intellectually honest look at things you should see the correlation between the events, things said, and where the leadership should be.
Brigham Young being one of those people that chose to make efforts to grab power.
Is it the Vice President that is on a power grab when the President dies, or would the Speaker of the House be on a power grab when the President dies and the Vice President is still alive?
Please give me your legal advice on this.
Please cite any evidence prior to 1844 that it was established that the President of the 12 should ascend to leadership of the church. I suspect you can't because it doesn't exist.
In fact there is ample evidence as early at 1835, contained in minutes of the leadership of the church, that the 12 were not supposed to be a high body with authority to regulate local stakes and wards at all.
If anything, this is where the church membership is woefully misinformed and the exact nature of the succession struggle is papered over. You've stated verbatim what followers believe, most of which just isn't true. There was no set succession plan when Joseph died. That's a fact. Young's eventual ascendance to leadership was long contested and involved a lot of parliamentary tactics. The issue was unsettled enough that Young didn't even claim the presidency until 1847.
John Taylor:
Joseph Smith was what he professed to be, a prophet of God, a seer and revelator. He laid the foundation of this Church and kingdom, and lived long enough to deliver the keys of the kingdom to the Elders of Israel, unto the Twelve Apostles. He spent the last winter of his life, some three or four months, with the Quorum of the Twelve, teaching them. It was not merely a few hours ministering to them the ordinances of the Gospel; but he spent day after day, week after week and month after month, teaching them and a few others the things of the kingdom of God. Said he, during that period, “I now rejoice. I have lived until I have seen this burden, which has rested on my shoulders, rolled on to the shoulders of other men; now the keys of the kingdom are planted on the earth to be taken away no more forever.” But until he had done this, they remained with him; and had he been taken away they would have had to be restored by messengers out of heaven. But he lived until every key, power and principle of the holy Priesthood was sealed on the Twelve and on President Young, as their President. He told us that he was going away to leave us, going away to rest. Said he, “You have to round up your shoulders to bear up the kingdom. No matter what becomes of me. I have desired to see that Temple built, but I shall not live to see it. You will; you are called upon to bear off this kingdom.” This language was plain enough, but we did not understand it any more than the disciples of Jesus when he told them he was going away, and that if he went not the Comforter would not come. It was just so with Joseph. He said this time after time to the Twelve
They were taught, and it was set up. They just didn't get it. He compares it to the 12 Apostles of the Lamb not really getting what he had told them over and over again about him and his mission and what would happen to him. Hindsight is 20/20 eh?
