Keepapitchinin, the Mormon History blog » I Have Even More Questions, 1890
 


I Have Even More Questions, 1890

By: Ardis E. Parshall - August 31, 2011

Questions answered in the Juvenile Instructor by, or under the direction of, George Q. Cannon –

Where feelings arise between officers or members of a Sunday School should the parties absent themselves from the school until matters are made right, no matter how long it takes?

When members of the Church have difficulties one with another the duty of each is to seek reconciliation at the earliest possible moment. This is the law of God. If the angry feelings are bitter, those harboring them should certainly not partake of the Sacrament either at Sunday School or at meeting, but it is their manifest duty to themselves, to their brethren and to the Church to seek to overcome these feelings by prayer and strong endeavor, and to adopt those means to bring about a reconciliation advised by the discipline of the Church and the revelations of God.

Did Abel the martyr hold the Priesthood?

Yes; he was ordained thereunto by his father Adam. The book of Doctrine and Covenants says, “Abel, who was slain by the conspiracy of his brother, who received the Priesthood by the commandments of God, by the hand of his father Adam, who was the first man.” (Sec. 84, verse 16.)

What is the destiny of children that are born before their parents are married?

They can obtain the great blessing in the House of the Lord of being sealed to their parents, which ordinance makes their birth legitimate in the sight of heaven, and places them in the same position as those “born in the covenant.”

It is the general idea, derived from the details given of the size of the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, that they were quite heavy. This being so, how did the Prophet Joseph Smith manage to carry them so easily to his home in Palmyra, a distance of several miles from the Hill Cumorah, on the night he received them from the angel Moroni?

Joseph did not walk home from the Hill Cumorah to Palmyra carrying the plates in his arms. Mr. (afterwards Brother) Joseph Knight was visiting Joseph’s father at that time, and Joseph took Mr. Knight’s horse and wagon when he went to get the plates on the night of September 21st. Joseph’s wife Emma (apparently by direction of the angel) accompanied him to Cumorah. They left home shortly after midnight and returned about breakfast time (Saturday, September 22nd, 1827). Joseph borrowed the horse and wagon without asking the owner’s permission, and Mr. Knight was somewhat disturbed when he discovered in the morning that his team had disappeared; but all was made right by Joseph and Emma’s early return.

Did any of the general authorities of the Church enlist in the Mormon Battalion?

Elder Levi W. Hancock, one of the First Seven Presidents of the Seventy, joined and served in the Mormon Battalion. He was the only one of the general authorities of the Church who did so.

Are we to believe that other brethren holding the Priesthood besides the leaders of the Church were foreordained before coming to this earth to occupy the positions they now fill?

Yes. The Prophet Joseph Smith says, “Every man who has a calling to administer to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grande council of heaven before the world was.”

Does not the Bible say that God tempers the wind to the shorn lamb?

No. It is a quotation from the English novelist, Laurence Sterne, in his “Sentimental Journey through France and Italy,” published in 1768.

Is drinking cocoa a violation of the Word of Wisdom?

The drinking of any very hot drink, even hot soup, is an infringement of the Word of Wisdom, without that drink, as in the case of hot water, is taken in certain diseases and bodily ailments as a medicine. The too frequent indulgence in cocoa as a beverage is regarded by many physicians as injurious from a medical standpoint, as it is said to increase nervous disorders in those inclined to those troubles. But cocoa, so far as we are aware, does not contain those injurious stimulants to be found in tea and coffee. It is well to drink cocoa, if drank at all, in great moderation and certainly not scalding hot.

Where did the Nephites, the Mulekites and the Jaredites respectively land on this continent?

The Prophet Joseph Smith informs us that Lehi and his colony landed on the west coast of South America, in the land called by us Chile, not far from where the city of Valparaiso now stands.

The Mulekites and Jaredites both landed on the southern portions of the northern continent, but we have no information as to the exact vicinity. The Book of Mormon states (Helaman 5:10), “Now the land south was called Lehi, and the land north was called Mulek, which was after the sons of Zedekiah; for the Lord did bring Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south.”

Alma tells us (22:30,3 1) that the people of Zarahemla, originally the people of Mulek, first landed in America in the region known to the Nephites as the land Desolation whence they journeyed into the south wilderness. Desolation had its southern boundary at the Isthmus of Panama and extended northward for a considerable distance; exactly how far, the Book of Mormon does not inform us.

Elder Orson Pratt in a foot note to chapter 6, Book of Ether, (p. 582) says the Jaredites landed “on the western coast, and probably south of the Gulf of California, and north of the land of Desolation.” The land where they formed their first settlement was called the land of Moron; it is said to have been immediately north of the land Desolation.

If a man is not ordained a High Priest while in this life, is it necessary that this ordinance be performed in his behalf after his death to enable him to obtain a fullness of salvation?

No, there is nothing in the word of God or in the ordinances of His house that conveys such an idea. A man must receive and hold the Melchizedek Priesthood to enter into and abide in the presence of the Almighty Father, but no particular office in that Priesthood is required. When that which is perfect is come that which is in part will be done away.



15 Comments »

  1. I’ve never liked hot drinks or hot soups. (I always burn my mouth.) But I’ve never considered drinking cocoa or eating hot soups as a breaking of WOW as is indicated in the answer here (and also by GQC in JoD 12:223).

    Comment by Niklas — August 31, 2011 @ 7:05 am

  2. I admire a man who is so certain about his Book of Mormon archaeology! I’m curious about his attribution to Joseph Smith – I could totally see JS weighing in on where Lehi landed, but I’ve never heard an authoritative Valparaiso statement.

    Comment by E. Wallace — August 31, 2011 @ 7:48 am

  3. “When that which is perfect is come that which is in part will be done away.” And, we won’t have to worry about how hot our soup is or how much cocoa we drink. . . or where Lehi’s family landed.

    Comment by Grant — August 31, 2011 @ 8:27 am

  4. I’m impressed by the colloquial “without that drink . . . is taken . . . as a medicine” and the hopelessly wrong conjugation of drink–”if drank at all”–in one paragraph.

    After that, can we take any of Bro. Cannon’s opinions seriously?

    Comment by Mark B. — August 31, 2011 @ 8:31 am

  5. These are so much fun. And the comments so far have weighed in on the same things I was focused on.

    To some of GQC’s answers, I nod in agreement; to others, I respectfully apply the Bruce R. McConkie maxim [forget what President George Q. Cannon said that might be contrary to present light and knowledge], and move on.

    Comment by David Y. — August 31, 2011 @ 8:40 am

  6. Every once in a while I worry about these Questions and other things I post here — what if someone lands here as the result of a Google search, or otherwise misses the point of many Keepa postings? I’d hate to be responsible for misleading someone as to LDS doctrine or practice. These comments by you regulars, though, leave no doubt that YOU, at least, understand why I post them, that they’re curious artifacts of another age of Mormonism, but that details may not be current practice, or may never have represented more than one person’s idiosyncratic view. That’s reassuring, anyway.

    I’ve read the Valparaiso bit a lot in late 19th and early 20th century writings. It had to have been almost universally taught then. This chapter from an old FARMS publication explains where that idea came from and how it came to be linked to Joseph Smith.

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — August 31, 2011 @ 9:12 am

  7. It sounds like warm cocoa is okay to the Juvenile Instructor editor, just not “very hot” or “scalding hot”.

    Comment by ji — August 31, 2011 @ 9:15 am

  8. Oh WOW, I did not know that I was breaking it while serving on my mission where HOT water was served as a sign that it was purified for consumption in a land where many diseases were transmitted through the regular pipes!

    Comment by Cliff — August 31, 2011 @ 9:44 am

  9. Some of these answers are so straightforward, and others go so far out on a limb!

    To amplify Ardis’ response on Joseph Smith and geography, I’m surprised the FARMS brochure didn’t include the reference from “Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith” (p. 267) which includes this phrase “and that Lehi went down by the Red Sea to the great Southern Ocean, and crossed over to this land, and landed a little south of the Isthmus of Darien [Panama]…” OTOH, he also claimed that Zion’s Camp marched across “the plains of the Nephites” and even gave the history of one Zelph to skeleton they found. In short, Joseph Smith can be used to back just about any pet geography theory you have.

    Comment by The Other Clark — August 31, 2011 @ 10:25 am

  10. Or, perhaps more pointedly, what people said Joseph said (including the often questionable TOPJS) can be used to back just about any theory…

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — August 31, 2011 @ 10:45 am

  11. Weeeeeelllllll, believe it or not, when I was investigating (1977) and we were doing the Word Of Wisdom discussion, the sisters taught me that drinking ANY very hot drink was a violation of the WOW. They had recently had a fireside with Johnny Miller’s wife and she too had advanced this theory with them. So they explained to me that not only should I henceforth stop drinking tea (which I loved) and coffee (so-so), I should also make sure that my hot drinks/soups in future were not scalding hot. One sister helpfully added that she always added some cold water to her cup/bowl before tucking in. So of course, that’s what I did too. And still do, with hot choc,but soup I just leave a while.

    One sister said that Sister Miller explained to them that scalding drinks burned the little hairs in the throat which left the body less resistant to disease, and that is why the WOW should be observed in this stringent fashion. ‘There is scientific proof behind it’, she said. Or maybe that’s one of those things we don’t talk about….. :-)

    Comment by Anne (UK) — August 31, 2011 @ 11:33 am

  12. I don’t know about Sister Miller’s anatomy lesson, but her husband was a heckuva golfer for a couple of years back then.

    On the other hand, maybe she should give Johnny some counsel on the heat of the comments that come out of his mouth when he’s on TV during golf tournaments. Isn’t there something in holy writ, vaguely recalled in my old age, about things (even really hot things) that come out of a man being more dangerous to the soul than things that go in? :)

    Comment by Mark B. — August 31, 2011 @ 12:12 pm

  13. ooooh Mark, what’s he been saying? Sounds intriguing!

    Comment by Anne (UK) — August 31, 2011 @ 12:36 pm

  14. Unlike all the other commentators on golf broadcasts, who are reverential in their descriptions of the players and the game, and who “mourn with those that mourn” when a shot goes astray, Johnny is famous for saying that players hit a bad shot or had bad judgment or just plain blew it–I don’t know if he’s ever said someone “choked” but it must have come close to his lips on occasion.

    Here’s a typical piece about Miller from the NY Times, describing his commentary on Phil Mickelson’s disastrous finish at the 2006 U.S. Open–”the Simon Cowell of golf criticism” indeed!

    Comment by Mark B. — August 31, 2011 @ 1:19 pm

  15. Mark, thanks for that link. I gurgled a lot whilst reading it!

    Comment by Anne (UK) — September 1, 2011 @ 12:37 pm

Leave a comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI