The Kirtland Era = The Pauline Era

[David T]

As I finished reading the first part of Mark Staker's fantastic Hearken, O Ye People - The Historical Setting of Joseph Smith's Ohio Revelations, and also read up a bit more on the tradition and understanding of the Gift of Tongues as it progressed in the Restored Church, I came to a bit of a realization:

The Kirtland Era of the Church was pretty much where the New Testament Church was at where our Bible ends. The New Testament Church was a work in progress that was temporarily halted, and overcome by heresy, dissidents, and murders of its leaders. Many of the expressions of the Gifts given were as, for all intents and purposes, 'Shotgun Approach' gifts to immediately and quickly boost the adherents in such a way that would keep the essential traditions alive, recorded, and passed down in written form. Time, technology, and political forces at the times were major obstacles.

In the Kirtland Era, the Pentecostal Movement had not yet emerged. Glossalalia as a form of religious expression had not yet become mainstream in the US. While Alexander Campbell dismissed it and other ecstatic expressions as being confined solely to the New Testament Church, Rigdon and others sought for it as a sign of the Restored Church. I don't think it a coincidence that the first vital establishment of the Restored Church picked up, in many ways, essentially where the Pauline Church (sometimes referred to as the 'Primitive Church' )left off - and then was able to progress, line upon line, to a point of doctrine, cohesiveness, and understanding not obtained by the NT-era Saints.

The terminology and structure used in the earliest Kirtland Era (very much the 'primitive' state of the Restoration Church) is more similar to the very basic structure we find in the NT.

I think for this reason, if we're comparing the Restored Church as a restoration of the New Testament Church, we often miss the point if we compare today's highly structured, and solid Global Church to the in-danger-of-being-wiped-out-at-any-moment NT Church. If we look at Kirtland, however, I think we find it. We've since moved beyond. I think those who try to find exact NT equivalents to the offices and structures as they exist in the Global Church today miss the point. While they were at that point in Kirtland, The Church has grown stronger and more doctrinally rich than ever in its history. Its expansion should be a sign of that, and I feel that it is.

Any thoughts on this premise?

[Uncle Dale]

As I finished reading the first part of Mark Staker's fantastic Hearken, O Ye People - The Historical Setting of Joseph Smith's Ohio Revelations, and also read up a bit more on the tradition and understanding of the Gift of Tongues as it progressed in the Restored Church, I came to a bit of a realization:

The Kirtland Era of the Church was pretty much where the New Testament Church was at where our Bible ends. The New Testament Church was a work in progress that was temporarily halted, and overcome by heresy, dissidents, and murders of its leaders. Many of the expressions of the Gifts given were as, for all intents and purposes, 'Shotgun Approach' gifts to immediately and quickly boost the adherents in such a way that would keep the essential traditions alive, recorded, and passed down in written form. Time, technology, and political forces at the times were major obstacles.

In the Kirtland Era, the Pentecostal Movement had not yet emerged. Glossalalia as a form of religious expression had not yet become mainstream. While Alexander Campbell dismissed it and other ecstatic expressions as being confined solely to the New Testament Church, Rigdon and others sought for it as a sign of the Restored Church. I don't think it a coincidence that the first vital establishment of the Restored Church picked up, in many ways, exactly where the Pauline Church left off - and then was able to progress, line upon line, to a point of doctrine, cohesiveness, and understanding not obtained by the NT-era Saints.

The terminology and structure used in the earliest Kirtland Era is more similar to the very basic structure we find in the NT.

I think for this reason, if we're comparing the Restored Church as a restoration of the New Testament Church, we often miss the point if we compare today's highly structured, and solid Global Church to the in-danger-of-being-wiped-out-at-any-moment NT Church. If we look at Kirtland, however, I think we find it. We've since moved beyond. I think those who try to find exact NT equivalents to the offices and structures as they exist in the Global Church today miss the point. While they were there in Kirtland, The Church has grown stronger and more doctrinally rich than ever in its history. Its expansion should be a sign of that, and I feel that it is.

There are some historical parallels, of course -- but there are also differences.

I would not try and force too close a comparison.

One precept that comes to mind is that of having all things common. Sidney Rigdon

was evidently a proponent of this Book of Acts phenomenon for years before he was

baptized a Mormon in 1830. Staker points out that there were other communitarian

groups (Christian and non-Christian) in the area, and that members of the Morley

"family" were obviously acquainted with this precept, outside of their own group.

Alexander Campbell would have pointed out that Book of Acts communism was short-lived --

that it did not work out well and was eventually abandoned. Possibly Sidney Rigdon

would have pointed out that the flaw was in the original implementation and not in the

precept itself. Whatever the fine points of Rigdon's communal notions, they appear to

have taken a downturn with the arrival of Joseph Smith on the scene in Kirtland.

It is the presence of Smith in the midst of the Kirtland/Hiram congregation which makes

its experience rather different than the Book of Acts narrative. In the New Testament

we see no movement to any "Land of Promise" -- though the Jerusalem Jesus followers

probably eventually sought refuge in the Transjordan. We see no movement to the

promulgation of new scriptures -- though the apostolic epistles would one day take

on the status of scripture. We see no rhetoric aimed at the re-establishment of a temple --

though there is a correspondence between Ezekiel's temple vision and John's vision

of the New Jerusalem.

Rather than your "equals sign," I'd opt for an asymptotic comparison symbol:

Apostolic Era >> Kirtland Era (in which ">>" stands for, "greater order of comparison than")

UD

[David T]

Rather than your "equals sign," I'd opt for an asymptotic comparison symbol:

Apostolic Era >> Kirtland Era (in which ">>" stands for, "greater order of comparison than")

I think that's a very valid observation, and I'd say I agree.

I think in addition is the note that just as the New Testament Church had some problems and questions concerning the validity of certain contemporary Rabbinic Judaistic practices of the communities from whence they came, we see also in the Kirtland Era problems and questions concerning the validity of certain Protestant Christianity practices founded in the communities from whence they came. In both eras, these old practices remained and mingled as part of the new organization until further authoritative declarations ended them. And in some cases, some continued to be perpetuated in both as well.