Wilford Woodruff - Prophecy Or Commentary Of Destruction?

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I was reminded of a quote in the past wherein Wilford Woodruff at a Temple Worker's Excursion in 1894 said that the angels of destruction, held in reserve for so long, had finally been released. He mentioned that within 20 years, mighty changes will be seen among the nations of the earth (World War 1 started roughly 19 years and 11 months from that time).

I have much respect for President Woodruff. He was a great man of faith, love, and actually an overall cheery message of peace and comfort in hard times. He made many prophecies, and from what I've seen, they all came true (or are spiritual in nature so cannot be determined by objective analysis). Today however, while looking for a specific and obscure bit a few months after the aforementioned Temple Worker's Excursion wherein he says essentially "see, it's already happening", I found a possible prophecy of his that obviously did not occur:

"Now, my young friends, I wish you to remember these scenes you are witnessing during the visit of President Young and his brethren. Yea, my young friends, treasure up the teachings and sayings of these prophets and apostles as precious treasure while they are living men, and do not wait until they are dead. A few days and President Young and his brethren, the prophets and apostles and Brothers Benson and Maughn, will be in the spirit world. You should never forget this visitation. You are to become men and women, fathers and mothers; yea, the day will come, after your fathers, and these prophets and apostles are dead, you will have the privilege of going into the towers of a glorious Temple built unto the name of the Most High (pointing in the direction of the bench), east of us upon the Logan bench; and while you stand in the towers of the Temple and your eyes survey this glorious valley filled with cities and villages, occupied by tens of thousands of Latter-day Saints, you will then call to mind this visitation of President Young and his company. You will say: That was in the days when Presidents Benson and Maughn presided over us; that was before New York was destroyed by an earthquake; it was before Boston was swept into the sea, by the sea heaving itself beyond its bounds; it was before Albany was destroyed by fire; yea, at that time you will remember the scenes of this day. Treasure them up and forget them not."

President Young followed and said: "What Brother Woodruff has said is revelation and will be fulfilled." (In Lundwall, Temples of the Most High, pp. 97-98.)

Now here's the deal: Elder Woodruff was making a commentary based on D&C 88:114:

Nevertheless, let the bishop go unto the city of New York, also to the city of Albany, and also to the city of Boston, and warn the people of those cities with the sound of the gospel, with a loud voice, of the desolation and utter abolishment which await them if they do reject these things.

The specific mention of the exact disasters can be either prophetic or symbolic, myself leaning towards generalization of destruction. The time frame is not. Regardless, those cities are obviously quite well and thriving (in their own special filthy ways.;-) ). None were destroyed in the time frame mentioned, especially Boston being swept in to the sea, which would certainly be the most noticeable of them.

Now, I am prone to simply say that, based on multiple other references I won't track down right now but am aware of, that he was simply repeating and adding to the original narrative, and not prophetically, from D&C 88:114 and some subsequent conversations that were had in regards to it and at least two of the named cities (Boston and New York). But then Brigham comes in and complicates it. He gets up and says it was a revelation and will be fulfilled. *sigh*

So there are four options:

1) Wilford was commenting non-prophetically and generally, and Brigham was wrong when he said it was revelation (which Wilford did not claim nor ever again refer to).

2) Wilford believed he was speaking prophetically, and Brigham was right to assert so. Disaster never happened.

3) Wilford spoke prophetically or with some foreknowledge, but failed to take into account that most prophecies of destruction depend on repentance, as evidenced in the original scripture reference when it concludes "... which await them if they do reject these things." The people repented. I have reservations in saying those three cities repented... no offense to residents there.;-) I suppose a few righteous could spare the place, but it was certainly not a Nineveh based aversion.

4) They were all wrong and deluded. Had to throw that one in for the non-believers. ;-)

So what are your thoughts? I haven't been able to find much serious commentary on this anywhere. Anyone else ever seen this referenced?

[Sevenbak]

As he continues after mentioning them by name... "Treasure them up and forget them not."

It's going to get ugly. I for one wouldn't want to live on the Eastern seaboard when tshtf. I have no reason to think WW was wrong about this, anymore than the prophecies of others will be fulfilled, every jot and tittle.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I have no reason to think WW was wrong about this, anymore than the prophecies of others will be fulfilled, every jot and tittle

That doesn't work considering a specific time frame was given. The kids alive at that time would look over the Logan valley from the temple and remember the events. That's a part of the prophecy and/or commentary.

[Sevenbak]

There were a lot of timeframes given in the early days of the church that were not as soon as expected. They thought the 2nd coming was right around the corner, and it is really, but not in our limited understanding. I still think it's going to happen. Like Brigham said after WW spoke... "What Brother Woodruff has said is revelation and will be fulfilled".

[Freedom]

This prophesy has long been published in the institute manual. There is some hyperbole in this quote, similar to saying 'this generation', nevertheless it is not accepted as doctrine by the church so I do not know what to make of it.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

This prophesy has long been published in the institute manual.

I don't believe it has been published in the institute manual. The one I mentioned at the beginning (but did not in extent) is in the manual:

Sixty-one years after the revelation in section 86 of the Doctrine and Covenants was given, President Wilford Woodruff declared that the Lord had released those destroying angels and they were then upon the earth separating the tares from the wheat in preparation for the burning that would soon take place: “God has held the angels of destruction for many years, lest they should reap down the wheat with the tares. But I want to tell you now, that those angels have left the portals of heaven, and they stand over this people and this nation now, and are hovering over the earth waiting to pour out the judgments. And from this very day they shall be poured out. Calamities and troubles are increasing in the earth, and there is a meaning to these things. Remember this, and reflect upon these matters. If you do your duty, and I do my duty, we’ll have protection, and shall pass through the afflictions in peace and in safety.” (“The Temple Workers’ Excursion,” Young Woman’s Journal, Aug. 1894, pp. 512–13; emphasis added.)

President Joseph Fielding Smith said:

“Now I want to make some comments in regard to the statement by President Woodruff and this parable [the parable of the wheat and tares in D&C 86 ].

“The Lord said that the sending forth of these angels was to be at the end of the harvest, and the harvest is the end of the world. Now, that ought to cause us some very serious reflections. And the angels have been pleading, as I have read it to you, before the Lord to be sent on their mission. Until 1893 the Lord said to them no, and then He set them loose. According to the revelation of President Woodruff, the Lord sent them out on that mission.

“What do we gather out of that? That we are at the time of the end. This is the time of the harvest. This is the time spoken of which is called the end of the world.” ( The Signs of the Times, pp. 11–21.)

The one addressing the destruction of Boston, New York, and Albany do not seem to be mentioned, though I admit I could have missed it. I did an electronic search however, so could be wrong.

I agree it's not accepted as doctrine of the church.

[Stargazer]

Boston being slagged by a tsunami is not outside the bounds of reasonableness, and for one reason: Cumbre Vieja.

This is a volcano located on the island of Las Palmas in the Canary Islands. It is so situated that a massive landslide on its flank would generate a mega-tsunami, and this would fan out, hitting coastlines all up and down the western north Atlantic. An interesting article on the subject can be found HERE.

An eruption of this volcano in 1949 apparently almost triggered such a tsunami. A fissure about a meter wide opened up along much of the western part of the ridge, and it slid about two meters down the slope before halting.

From the article:

Day et al. (1999) and Ward and Day (2001) hypothesise that during an eruption at some unascertained future time, the western half of the Cumbre Vieja — approximately 500 km³ (5 x 1011 m³) with an estimated mass of 1.5 x 10¹⁵ kg — will catastrophically fail in a massive gravitational landslide and enter the Atlantic Ocean, generating a so called 'mega-tsunami'. The debris will continue to travel along the ocean floor as a debris flow. Computer modelling indicates that the resulting initial wave may attain a local amplitude (height) in excess of 600 metres (1,969 ft) and an initial peak to peak height that approximates to 2 kilometres (1 mi), and travel at about 1,000 kilometres per hour (621 mph) (approximately the speed of a jet aircraft), inundating the African coast in about 1 hour, the southern coast of England in about 3.5 hours, and the eastern seaboard of North America in about 6 hours, by which time the initial wave will have subsided into a succession of smaller ones each about 30 metres (98 ft) to 60 metres (197 ft) high. These may surge to several hundred metres in height and be several kilometres apart while retaining their original speed. The models of Day et al. and Ward and Day suggest that the event could inundate up to 25 kilometres (16 mi) inland. This would greatly damage or destroy cities along the entire North American eastern seaboard, and tens of millions would be killed as Boston, New York City, Miami, and many other cities located near the Atlantic coast are leveled.

Now, that would fulfill Wilford Woodruff's prophecy quite nicely, as it were. Not sure about the NYC earthquake.

Edited December 18, 2011 by Stargazer

[Freedom]

I don't believe it has been published in the institute manual. The one I mentioned at the beginning (but did not in extent) is in the manual:

The one addressing the destruction of Boston, New York, and Albany do not seem to be mentioned, though I admit I could have missed it. I did an electronic search however, so could be wrong.

I agree it's not accepted as doctrine of the church.

The quote form Temple of the Most High is in my edition. Page 185. Of course, my edition was printed in 1981.

[Sevenbak]

It's in the current manual... Last thing on the page for section 84.

http://institute.lds.org/manuals/Doctrine-and-Covenants-institute-student-Manual/dc-in-081-84.asp

D&C 84:114 . New York, Albany, and Boston

These cities were the subject of another prophet’s testimony. Elder Wilford Woodruff addressed a conference in Logan, Utah, on 22 August 1863. Speaking directly to the youth in attendance, he declared: “‘Now, my young friends, I wish you to remember these scenes you are witnessing during the visit of President Young and his brethren. Yea, my young friends, treasure up the teachings and sayings of these prophets and apostles as precious treasure while they are living men, and do not wait until they are dead. A few days and President Young and his brethren, the prophets and apostles and Brothers Benson and Maughan, will be in the spirit world. You should never forget this visitation. You are to become men and women, fathers and mothers; yea, the day will come, after your fathers, and these prophets and apostles are dead, you will have the privilege of going into the towers of a glorious Temple built unto the name of the Most High (pointing in the direction of the bench), east of us upon the Logan bench; and while you stand in the towers of the Temple and your eyes survey this glorious valley filled with cities and villages, occupied by tens of thousands of Latter-day Saints, you will then call to mind this visitation of President Young and his company. You will say: That was in the days when Presidents Benson and Maughan presided over us; that was before New York was destroyed by an earthquake; it was before Boston was swept into the sea, by the sea heaving itself beyond its bounds; it was before Albany was destroyed by fire; yea, at that time you will remember the scenes of this day. Treasure them up and forget them not.’ President Young followed and said: ‘What Brother Woodruff has said is revelation and will be fulfilled.’” (In Lundwall, Temples of the Most High, pp. 97–98.)

Wilford Woodruff spoke of the future destruction of New York, Albany, and Boston.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Sevenbak,

Thanks for finding that. I went to the section for that in the manual and for some reason didn't see it. My search abilities seem to be regressing lately... ;-)

However, this still brings up the original problem: It didn't happen within the time frame mentioned. It was pretty specific.

On a side note, Wilford Woodruff is one awesome looking fellow!

[Deborah]

Now, that would fulfill Wilford Woodruff's prophecy quite nicely, as it were. Not sure about the NYC earthquake.

Well, they did make a movie about an earthquake in NYC: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0186804/

On a serious note Pres. Woodruff also said "and warn the people of those cities with the sound of the gospel, with a loud voice, of the desolation and utter abolishment which await them if they do reject these things." Perhaps enough people accepted that the disasters were averted, though I have no idea of what the numbers were who may have joined the church. Abraham got the Lord to agree to avert disaster on Sodom and Gomorrah if they could find 10 righteous men. What is interesting is that there is now a temple in New York so it appears enough people have accepted the gospel to avert disaster at least for awhile.

[Stargazer]

Well, they did make a movie about an earthquake in NYC: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0186804/

On a serious note Pres. Woodruff also said "and warn the people of those cities with the sound of the gospel, with a loud voice, of the desolation and utter abolishment which await them if they do reject these things." Perhaps enough people accepted that the disasters were averted, though I have no idea of what the numbers were who may have joined the church. Abraham got the Lord to agree to avert disaster on Sodom and Gomorrah if they could find 10 righteous men. What is interesting is that there is now a temple in New York so it appears enough people have accepted the gospel to avert disaster at least for awhile.

Who was that prophet that was so scared to preach repentance in Nineveh that he had to get "special delivery" via a whale before he would actually go there? Oh, yes, Jonah. It seemed that he told the Ninevehites that if they didn't repent they would be destroyed, and when finished went up on a hill to watch the ensuring spectacle. He was rather disappointed that it didn't happen, having apparently discounted the possibility that they would actually repent.

Nevermind, Cumbre Vieja's eventually cutting loose with a tsunami-generating eruption is pretty much a "when it happens" rather than a "if it happens".

[frankenstein]

Scientists predict that if a certain island collaspes into the Atlantic a tidal wave will hit the north east coast which will ne taller than the empire state building

Edited December 18, 2011 by frankenstein

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Stargazer,

Cumbre Vieja's is actually prominent in a thriller I am nearing completion on writing. While I use it and it plays a central role. the entire theory has been discounted every which way to Sunday. I have I think every paper written about it. My version uses a nuclear blast to speed things along, but it's still highly improbable. I'm glad someone else knows about it though.:-) Be careful looking up the combination via google though... I have a feeling I am on the CIA watchlist! :-D

My personal feeling is that he was generalizing widespread destruction and not actually prophesying of those specific problems at those specific cities. Even then, I hearken back to whichever apostle or prophet it was (maybe someone can find the quote...) wherein they say that in the early days during blessings and meetings, people so wanted to hasten the coming of the Lord that they got a little loose on their timeframes. I feel that is the case. I see no other way around it (other than false prophecy or false announcement of prophecy). Will destruction come? Yes, that's everywhere in the scriptures. But the timing is the part that seems off and poses the problem.

[CV75]

So there are four options:

1) Wilford was commenting non-prophetically and generally, and Brigham was wrong when he said it was revelation (which Wilford did not claim nor ever again refer to).

2) Wilford believed he was speaking prophetically, and Brigham was right to assert so. Disaster never happened.

3) Wilford spoke prophetically or with some foreknowledge, but failed to take into account that most prophecies of destruction depend on repentance, as evidenced in the original scripture reference when it concludes "... which await them if they do reject these things." The people repented. I have reservations in saying those three cities repented... no offense to residents there.;-) I suppose a few righteous could spare the place, but it was certainly not a Nineveh based aversion.

4) They were all wrong and deluded. Had to throw that one in for the non-believers. ;-)

So what are your thoughts? I haven't been able to find much serious commentary on this anywhere. Anyone else ever seen this referenced?

Spring-boarding off 2 & 3:

Perhaps the “scenes of this day” somehow prevented later destruction in New York, Albany and Boston, and in this way the righteous commitments made by some or all of the youth that were present on that day led to good works being done in those cities. The righteous youth became instruments in the Lord’s hands and so were “before” (or stood in the way of) these prophesied destructions.

Or perhaps they would look back on the “scenes of this day” as spirit or resurrected beings (and the leaders didn’t want to scare the kids by saying it would occur after they were dead).

Edited December 19, 2011 by CV75

[webbles]

That doesn't work considering a specific time frame was given. The kids alive at that time would look over the Logan valley from the temple and remember the events. That's a part of the prophecy and/or commentary.

I'm not sure if that specific timeframe is part of the prophecy. The prophecy part could easily be just about the destruction of the cities.

[Nominee]

Or perhaps they would look back on the “scenes of this day” as spirit or resurrected beings (and the leaders didn’t want to scare the kids by saying it would occur after they were dead).

I don't know that it would have even need been that the leaders made a conscious effort to avoid the time frame leading to this conclusion. I believe this possibility (to be as spirit or resurrected beings) to be likely and maybe even meant to be thought as a given by W.W. when speaking and B.Y. when confirming. It makes perfect sense to me. The amount of time the righteous will have post-resurrection alone is considerable.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I believe this possibility (to be as spirit or resurrected beings) to be likely and maybe even meant to be thought as a given by W.W. when speaking and B.Y. when confirming. It makes perfect sense to me. The amount of time the righteous will have post-resurrection alone is considerable.

INteresting view.

Okay, that is now possibility 5:

5) The youth being spoken too could be resurrected or spiritual beings at the point they are in the temple towers and remembering.

I suppose it is legitimate and reasonable.

Sadly, no way to know until after we pass on.:-)

[Senator]

Well, I'm "alright" with accepting it as a simple unfulfilled prophecy.

Examples like this is probably why the more contemporary prophets don't prophesy using the same venacular as was once used.

[inquiringmind]

How long did BY, Benson and Maughn live after this?

What valley was WW talking about, and how many Latter Day Saints live there today?

P.S. I just checked Wikipedia, and it says Brigham died in 1877.

The OP says

I was reminded of a quote in the past wherein Wilford Woodruff at a Temple Worker's Excursion in 1894 said that the angels of destruction, held in reserve for so long, had finally been released. He mentioned that within 20 years, mighty changes will be seen among the nations of the earth (World War 1 started roughly 19 years and 11 months from that time).

I have much respect for President Woodruff. He was a great man of faith, love, and actually an overall cheery message of peace and comfort in hard times. He made many prophecies, and from what I've seen, they all came true (or are spiritual in nature so cannot be determined by objective analysis). Today however, while looking for a specific and obscure bit a few months after the aforementioned Temple Worker's Excursion wherein he says essentially "see, it's already happening", I found a possible prophecy of his that obviously did not occur...President Young followed and said: "What Brother Woodruff has said is revelation and will be fulfilled." (In Lundwall, Temples of the Most High, pp. 97-98.)

How could President Young have followed WW's 1894 remarks with such a statement if he died in 1877?

Edited December 21, 2011 by inquiringmind

[Calm]

My (1952 ed) Lundwall has 97-8 being a 1884 dedicatory prayer by Pres. Taylor. Am looking for the actual quote.

Edited December 22, 2011 by calmoriah

[Calm]

How long did BY, ]Benson and Maughn live after this? B

What valley was WW talking about, and how many Latter Day Saints live there today?.....

The OP says.....

How could President Young have followed WW's 1894 remarks with such a statement if he died in 1877?

Found it on page 105-6

Remarks were originally made on 22nd of August, 1863, in the town of Logan. (see an earlier post showing this date) Printed in Deseret News 33:678 They were repeated on August 1st, 1880 and printed in the JoD 21:299

Logan is in Cache Valley: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan,_Utah

Edited December 22, 2011 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Ezra T. Benson died 1869, Peter Maughan died 1871

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Maughan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_T._Benson

[Calm]

Just to clarify for im, the quote about Pres. Young, etc. was not given during the 1894 Temple Excursion originally referenced by the opening poster. If you reread his post, you will see he found the quote/unfulfilled prophecy while researching the TE quote he remembered.

[inquiringmind]

Thank you.

Does anyone know if any local wards were established in New York City, Albany, or Boston in the 19th century?