Historical Background On March 8, 1844, fifty-five-year-old King Follett, an early convert to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, was killed in a well-digging accident. On April 7, as part of a general conference of the Church in Nauvoo, and in … Continued
On Sunday afternoon, 7 April 1844, the Prophet Joseph Smith delivered what has been called his greatest sermon, the King Follett Discourse. It has also been published more frequently than any other of Joseph’s discourses. In the speech, which lasted over two hours, the Prophet spoke concerning some twenty-seven doctrinal subjects, including the character of God, the origin and destiny of man, the unpardonable sin, the resurrection of children and the Prophet’s love for all men. Who was King Follett, and what were the historical circumstances surrounding this, the last conference address of Joseph Smith? What makes the King Follett Discourse the Prophet’s greatest sermon?
The King Follett Discourse of April 7, 1844, perhaps the most significant sermon delivered by the Prophet Joseph Smith, was preserved in manuscript form by Thomas Bullock, William Clayton, Willard Richards, and Wilford Woodruff. Though a version of this sermon was published only four months later in the Times and Seasons, the version in general use today is an “amalgamation” made in 1855 by Jonathan Grimshaw.
Since the Grimshaw amalgamation was made over eleven years after the discourse was given, there may be some concern about the questionable process of expanding or “fleshing out” the text, as well as the propriety of eliminating material from the original manuscript accounts. From a historical point of view, it is preferable to use primary sources and not reminiscences of over a decade later. This article presents a new amalgamation of the King Follett Discourse created by the following procedure. The account of Thomas Bullock was used as the basic running text. William Clayton’s version was then superimposed, adding a number of refinements such as extra clauses and clearer development of ideas.
Afterwards, the parts recorded by Willard Richards were compared with what had already been developed; generally the Richards account merely confirmed various parts, though it added a number of new elements also. Finally, the Wilford Woodruff account was considered, and its new material was added, with the understanding that his material may not be as likely to represent the words actually spoken by Joseph Smith, though the basic meaning would likely be preserved.
With his clerks to record his words and thousands of Saints, sinners, gentiles, and dissenters to hear, discuss, and react to his comments, Joseph took the stand at 3:15 P.M., Sunday, 7 April 1844, and delivered the most controversial sermon of his life, unparalleled in Mormonism in historic and doctrinal significance.
Mormonism could never be the same thereafter. The dispersing congregation would alter Joseph’s life and significantly change the course of the Church. As the calendars in Nauvoo were changing from March to April in 1844, Saints from up and down the Mississippi began gathering for the fourteenth anniversary of the organization of the Church. Congregations estimated variously from 8,000 to 25,000 assembled during the five-day conference. Perhaps the prospect of some sort of confrontation was a factor in drawing many to conference. Not only was tension building rapidly between Mormons and non-Mormons, but dissension within the inner circle of Church leaders was escalating toward a climax. Whatever Joseph Smith did seemed only to fan the flames of discord and dissension on both fronts. A large segment of non-Mormons had become alarmed at the rapid growth and influence of the Mormons at Nauvoo. Their major concern was the extent of Joseph Smith’s religious and civil power. Convinced that he was a “knave,” “despot,” “tyrant,” “false prophet,” “fraud,” and “a dangerous and powerful man whose actions should be watched, and closely scrutinized,” they had organized a group calling themselves the “Anti-Mormons” whose purpose was to expose “Smith’s blasphemy, hypocrisy, and political proceedings,” and give “him to understand that his career of usurpation and aggression must be stayed, or otherwise the consequence to himself will be fearful.” The Warsaw Signal alone printed fourteen articles on the Mormons the month preceding this conference criticizing Joseph’s teachings, political views, writings, and actions as mayor and Church leader.
Revelation often results after wrestling with ideas, and Joseph’s struggle with the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1 seems to have yielded six concepts, which he expressed either in the King Follett Discourse or in a parallel discourse he gave on June 16, 1844.
When propounded in 1844, each of these six ideas was no doubt considered unusual or unorthodox by those of other religious traditions (as well as by certain Latter-day Saints and former Latter-day Saints), and some people would certainly consider these doctrines no less theologically heterodox today. Yet the first five concepts are widely acknowledged by current biblical scholars to be accurate expressions of religious belief among the Hebrews during the time of the patriarchs. The sixth concept, while still representing a minority view, has also received strong scholarly support in recent decades. This article reviews the writings of a wide array of Old Testament commentators with reference to each of these six points.
