Hello! Shalom! Aloha! Mabuhay!

If this is your first visit to Modern Apocrypha, I have only two recommendations for continuing on with minimal confusion:

1) Please begin with the first introductory post (found HERE) and work your way forward. Almost all the posts on this blog flow chronologically and will make more sense with the background and context of previous ones. Jumping in anywhere might be disorienting.

2) Please read along in the texts posted off to the right. I try not to summarize too much in the commentary and discussion, and being at least somewhat familiar with what we're discussing or I'm commenting on will be most beneficial and edifying for all involved. Plus, going along with the theme of this blog, any hidden truths to be brought to light will be found within the text itself and not necessarily within my ramblings.

Okay, fine, three recommendations:

3) Please read with an open heart, mind, and spirit. See what truths you can find in these works--ones which speak to you. Namaste : )

Sunday, November 9, 2014


There's been a good amount of discussion, online and elsewhere, of the Aklatan's place vis-à-vis the LDS Church. Elisha's answer to the "Mormon" question in his latest update triggered my memory that I wanted to post an experience recorded last year that gives an second perspective on this.

In a nutshell, Elisha claims no affiliation or connection with the LDS Church or the Book of Mormon. Rather, his mission and calling are specific to building Christ's island kingdom and restoring those people to their covenant relationship with Him through the Aklatan. This second witness is reported by someone who posts under the name captmoroni1981, and it gives an account of the LDS Church's take on the Aklatan--unofficially and off the record.

In spite of all the anonymity within the story, in the relating his experience, captmoroni definitely seems much more straightforward and declarative in his testimony and outwardly deferential than I am or probably would be in this situation. But I think it speaks to his sincerity or at least that which he'd like to portray.

Part 1 (HERE): meeting with his bishop
Part 2 (HERE): meeting with a seventy

We can get into the reasons behind this non-relationship between the Aklatan and the LDS Church in the comments, but I think there's an echo of Gamaliel and the Apostles (Acts 5) in all of this. As the great Pharisee defended Peter and the Apostles from execution by the Sanhedrin, he argued:
Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. (Acts 5: 38-39)
Joseph Smith also prophesied:
The Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done.
If the Aklatan is part of God's truth, and Elisha's calling is part of God's work, these previous statements represent good counsel.


  1. Gamaliel's counsel definitely works here. I can see the difficulty in trying to balance between what the Spirit whispers to our hearts, and the counsel of our leaders. I hope that ultimately, "if it be the work of God" that we as a Church do not fight against it.

    1. There are a lot of thoughts and reasons that come to mind as to why we should seek truth wherever we can find it, but I like Joseph Smith's simple suggestion from Article of Faith 13:

      "If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."

  2. From what I've found in the LDS forums, the popular stance concerning the Aklatan seems to be "if it doesn't come from the prophet, it's not scripture."
    I don't know about that. Ironically enough, I could find no scriptural evidence to support this thought pattern. If the Aklatan is truly scripture and we reject it because it doesn't come from the source we insist it must come from, we are no better than the Gentiles Nephi and the Lord condemn for crying "A bible! We have got a bible and there can be no more bible!"

    1. I (well Nephi) went off on that here:
      I'll be talking about the Times of the Gentiles later, but the Lord taught that as the Gentiles reject His Gospel in the last days, it will be taken from them and given back to Israel. We cry "All is well in Zion" as we are blinded by pride in our chosen-ness. That didn't work out too well for Jerusalem.