All three
witness fall away from the church but never deny their testimony regarding the
plates.
2) David Whitmer
David was in
good standing in the church in June of 1834 when he was made president over the
church in Missouri. At the time, he was the president, called with two other
presidents and a high council (similar to the pattern seen in a stake
organization). He functioned in this high and noble calling until the presidency
was released by a general assembly of the saints held at Far West, Missouri on
Feb. 4, 1838 (see Essentials in Church History by Joseph F. Smith, p.
206-7).
The
rebellion of David Whitmer was based, in part, on jealousy. He had bitter
feelings toward Sidney Rigdon and felt slighted that he had been passed over as
first assistant to the prophet. He also felt that Joseph Smith was a fallen
prophet. After he left the church, he moved to Richmond, Missouri where he
continued as a leader in the Church of Christ, an offshoot of the church. During
this time, David kept one of the original copies of the manuscript of the Book
of Mormon. He treasured it as a sacred work and never recanted his story as
recorded in ¡°The Testimony of the Three Witnesses.¡± Later in his life, when
asked about why he left, he responded as follows:
¡°He replied
that he had never left the Church, that he had continued with the branch of the
Church that was originally organized in Richmond and still presided over it. In
answer to my questions, he said, in an unqualified, emphatic way, that Joseph
Smith was a prophet of God, but had become a fallen prophet through the
influence which Sidney Rigdon exercised over him; that he accepted everything
that was revealed to the Prophet down to the year 1835, but rejected everything
thereafter because he did not know whether it came from the Lord or from Sidney
Rigdon¡¦.
¡°He
manifestly had become embittered against Sidney Rigdon due to his promotion to
second place in the Church over men like himself who had been with the Prophet
from the beginning and who had done so much for the Church. I then concluded, as
I now believe, that jealousy and disappointment had soured his soul, but nothing
could obliterate his testimony of the divinity of the Book of Mormon.¡± (Eldin
Ricks, The Case of the Book of Mormon Witnesses, p.
15)
Thomas B.
Marsh came across Oliver and David while traveling in the year 1838, the year
they were excommunicated. Thomas asked David about his
testimony:
¡°He replied
as sure as there is a God in heaven, he saw the angel according to his testimony
in that book. I asked him, if so, why he did not stand by Joseph? He answered,
in the days when Joseph received the Book of Mormon, and brought it forth, he
was a good man and filled with the Holy Ghost, but he considered he had now
fallen. I interrogated Oliver Cowdery in the same manner, who answered
similarly.¡± (Thomas B. Marsh, ¡°History of Thomas Baldwin Marsh,¡± Millenial
Star, 26 (1864):406 as taken from Preston Nibley¡¯s Testimony of the Book
of Mormon Witnesses)
The charges
procured against David Whitmer came two months after he was released from the
presidency in Missouri. He was excommunicated on April 13, 1838, the day after
Oliver was. The same high council at Far West charged him with the
following:
¡°First-For not observing the Word of Wisdom.
(He continued to use tobacco, tea and coffee)
"Second-For
unchristian-like conduct in neglecting to attend meetings, in uniting with and
possessing the same spirit as the dissenters.
"Third-In
writing letters to the dissenters in Kirtland unfavorable to the cause, and to
the character of Joseph Smith, Jun.
"Fourth-In
neglecting the duties of his calling, and separating himself from the Church,
while he had a name among us.
"Fifth-For
signing himself President of the Church of Christ in an insulting letter to the
High Council after he had been cut off from the Presidency." (History of the
Church, vol. 3, pp. 18-9)
David
received these charges on the 9th of April. His court was set for the
13th, but David did not acknowledge the authority or jurisdiction of
this high council court. He therefore refused to attend the court. Instead, he
sent the council the following letter:
¡°Far West, Mo., April 13, 1838.
¡°John
Murdock:
¡°Sir:--I received a line from you
bearing date the 9th inst. requesting me as a high priest to appear before the
high council and answer to five several charges on this day at 12
o'clock.
¡°You, sir,
with a majority of this church have decided that certain councils were legal by
which it is said I have been deprived of my office as one of the presidents of
this church. I have thought, and still
think, they were not agreeable [legal] to the revelations of God, which I
believe; and by now attending this council, and answering to charges, as a high
priest, would be acknowledging the correctness and legality of those former
assumed councils--which I shall not do.
¡°Believing
as I verily do, that you and the leaders of the councils have a determination to
pursue your unlawful course at all hazards, and to bring others to your standard
in violation of the revelations, to spare you any further trouble I hereby
withdraw from your fellow-humble, where the revelations of heaven will be
observed and the rights of men regarded.
(Signed.) ¡°DAVID WHITMER.¡±
(B.H.
Roberts, Comprehensive History of the Church, vol 1, p.
435)
In spite of
this bitter departure from the main body of the saints, David, like Oliver
Cowdery and Martin Harris, never denied the testimony contained in the Book of
Mormon. B.H. Roberts commented on how this fact supports the truth of their
testimonies:
¡°Had there
been any fraud or collusion entered into between Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery
and David Whitmer, I take it that it would have been a very natural thing for
men smarting under what they regarded as injustice, to have manifested that fact
in one way or another in these communications. Their silence at this critical
time of their experience, and in the experience of the Church, constitutes very
strong presumptive evidence of the reality of those facts which brought
Mormonism into existence.¡± (History of the Church, vol. 3, p.
20)
After
excommunication, David Whitmer was more critical of the church as a whole than
was Oliver Cowdery, even to the ¡°denouncing of the Latter-day Saints of Utah as
an abomination in the sight of the Lord.¡± (Preston Nibley, Testimony of the
Book of Mormon Witnesses, p. 157) Though he never returned to the main body
of the church, his testimony of the Book of Mormon was solid even until the day
he died:
¡°On Sunday
evening at 5:30, January 22, 1888, Mr. Whitmer called his family and some
friends to his bedside, and addressing himself to the attending physician, said:
¡®Dr. Buchanan I want you to say whether or not I am in my right mind, before I
give my dying testimony.¡¯
¡°The doctor
answered: ¡®Yes you are in your right mind for I have just had a conversation
with you.¡¯
¡°He then
addressed himself to all around his bedside in these words: ¡®Now you must all be
faithful in Christ. I want to say to you all the Bible and the record of the
Nephites (Book of Mormon) is true, so you can say that you have heard me bear my
testimony, on my death bed. All be faithful in Christ and your reward will be
according to your works. God bless you all. My trust is in Christ forever, world
without end.-Amen.¡¯¡± (Eldin Ricks, The Case of the Book of Mormon
Witnesses, p. 16)