Edspringer

Just one additional piece of info.  I forget the ancient Hebrew term that in the Old Testament is translated as Cherub or Cherubim but that the particular Hebrew word has never been translated in English.  In the New Testament references in the Greek manuscripts use the word Cherub directly.  In the ancient pagan culture of Greece a Cherub was a title of a level or kind-of g-d, not an angel.  The idea of a Cherub being a classification of angel comes from the early traditional Christian Orthodoxy without scriptural or other reliable divine revelation source.
 
The Traveler

Some insights – a scripture search for cherub will produce a lot of interesting results.  The only references I can find to what is meant by a cherub that “covers” is in reference to the cherubim that covers with wings at the Mercy Seat (Exodus 25:20).   Now I would reference the ancient Hebrew poetic structure of Ezekiel 28:11-19.  Because this is a poetic structure we know symbolism is involved.  I would point particularly to verse 14.  With the symbolism – I would suggest that one of the “anointed” “covering” cherub is Satan – that same that beguiled Eve in the Garden of Eden.  Note that the Hebrew term for “anointed” is translated in English as - Messiah.
Verse 19 of Exodus is where we see the two cherubim facing each other – the KJV of the Bible says, “and their faces shall look one to another”.  It was this reference that I was told by a Rabbi (not LDS) that a known and established variant translation of the text is, “and the two brother shall face each other.”
If we are to follow the symbols given in scripture in connection to the Cherubim we will find the following:
A sword (justice)
A flame (cleansing)
Keeper of the way (I am the way)
On the right hand of G-d.
I would submit that in Jesus and only Jesus do we find fulfillment of all the good symbolism concerning Cherubim and Satan as the fulfillment of all the bad symbolism.
I hope this helps in your personal study.  If anyone has any other possible prophetic fulfillment of the symbolism that surrounds the use of Cherubim in scripture - I would be most interested in what other two "Messiahs" will face off against each other at the final judgement.
 
The Traveler

Hi, there

I Will quote Elder Elder John H. Groberg, of the Seventy:

“If we desire to improve (which is to repent) and are not under priesthood restriction, then, in my opinion, we are worthy. If, however, we have no desire to improve, if we have no intention of following the guidance of the Spirit, we must ask: Are we worthy to partake, or are we making a mockery of the very purpose of the sacrament, which is to act as a catalyst for personal repentance and improvement?” (“The Beauty and Importance of the Sacrament,” Ensign, May 1989, 38)

1 year for your family from their baptism date.  For you, it would depend on your life and things you have done while you were "away".  Probably 1 year...
talk to your Bishop on this let him know exactly what is going on.

I left the Church i n 1989.....came back in 2015.  I had to have a church court, get rebaptized and then wait a year.  
All I can say is: going back to the Temple for the first time was amazing.

Longtime friend of Major Major.

Hi, there

I Will quote Elder Elder John H. Groberg, of the Seventy:

“If we desire to improve (which is to repent) and are not under priesthood restriction, then, in my opinion, we are worthy. If, however, we have no desire to improve, if we have no intention of following the guidance of the Spirit, we must ask: Are we worthy to partake, or are we making a mockery of the very purpose of the sacrament, which is to act as a catalyst for personal repentance and improvement?” (“The Beauty and Importance of the Sacrament,” Ensign, May 1989, 38)

Hi, there

I Will quote Elder Elder John H. Groberg, of the Seventy:

“If we desire to improve (which is to repent) and are not under priesthood restriction, then, in my opinion, we are worthy. If, however, we have no desire to improve, if we have no intention of following the guidance of the Spirit, we must ask: Are we worthy to partake, or are we making a mockery of the very purpose of the sacrament, which is to act as a catalyst for personal repentance and improvement?” (“The Beauty and Importance of the Sacrament,” Ensign, May 1989, 38)

I thought it might be interesting to review some of the symbolism concerning our passing to resurrection and eternal life.   The first symbolism comes to us from Genesis where we are told that Cherubim (plural) and a flaming sword “KEEP” the way to the Tree of Life.  We learn more of the symbolism of Cherubim from instructions for the ancient temple where the Judgment (Mercy) Seat of G-d is represented.  Two Cherubim are presented there – one on the right hand of G-d and one on the left hand.  It is interesting that the ancient Hebrew that describes these two Cherubim can be translated to say “And the two brothers shall face each other”.
I see and understand the final judgment to be an opportunity to present what we have learned and accomplished in our great quest to come to a knowledge of both Good and Evil in order that we can prove worthy to, with full knowledge and agency, choose to what extent we will partake of the Tree of Life and covenant to so live in eternity.  As I understand – some will want to endorse various levels and combinations of truths and lies for their covenant and some will have fully sought for and desire only what is true and right with much sacrifice and service.  I do not believe G-d will divide us but that we will divide ourselves.  That it is the hope, love and charity of G-d what we will all choose to serve and sacrifice for truth and right – but no one will be forced to choose what covenant by which they will enjoy eternity.
In my personal ongoing quest for truth and understanding – I find no other Church or system on this earth more qualified to assist mankind along the way that leads to the Tree of Life; than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
 
The Traveler

Ummm... the final judgement is not a time to be worried about being embarrassed.....   It's a time of honesty, of accountability, and about all of us-- beliefs, actions, mistakes, growth etc.  

Hi, @askandanswer
In the Church Handbook 2, item 12.2.2, we read:
Ward Sunday School Presidency
“Members of the ward Sunday School presidency are priesthood holders. Where possible, the president holds the Melchizedek Priesthood. They work under the direction of the bishopric. They receive orientation and ongoing support from the stake Sunday School presidency”.
 
There are four auxiliary organizations in a ward or branch:  Sunday School, Relief Society, Young Women and Primary. Only Sunday School presidency is composed by priesthood holders. Why?
We need some historic background to try to understand why only men can preside Sunday School. The first formal Sunday school in the LDS Church was held on December 9, 1849, Salt Lake City in the Salt Lake City Fourteenth Ward Other Church congregations followed the Fourteenth Ward's example and adopted Sunday school programs based on the Richard Ballantyne’s (a former Sunday school teacher from Scotland) model. At this stage, each Sunday school was completely autonomous and under the sole direction of the local bishop.
Anxious to bring a standard structure and organization to the over 200 independent Sunday schools that had been created, president Brigham Young ordered that a union of the Sunday schools be carried out. On November 11, 1867, President Young plus Daniel H. Wells, George A. Smith, Wilfoord Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Brigham Youn Jr organized the Parent Sunday School Union. President Young appointed Cannon as the first general superintendent of the Sunday School, a position he would hold until his death in 1901. In 1872, the Sunday School organization was renamed the Deseret Sunday School Union.
The organized Sunday School addressed lesson topics and source materials, grading, prizes and rewards, use of hymns and songs composed by members of the Church, recording and increasing the attendance, developing an elementary teaching system, and libraries. It also sponsored the publication of administrative guidelines and materials for classroom use, resulting in increased uniformity lesson content.
Until the turn of the century, only children were taught by the Sunday School. Eventually, classes were added for the youth of the church; in 1904, an adult Sunday School class was created.
The 1970s saw dramatic change within the Sunday School. In 1971, as part of the Church Priesthood Correlation Program, the name of the Deseret Sunday School Union was changed to simply Sunday School, and the Sunday School general “superintendent” was renamed the general Sunday School "president". Additionally, curriculum planning and writing became more centralized and coordinated; for the first time, the Sunday School stopped providing unique lesson manuals each year, and the Church began a four-year curriculum rotation pattern. In 1979, Hugh B. Pinnock became the general president of the Sunday School, the first general authority of the Church to hold the position.
Here is the Sunday School Board since its creation:
Time
 
President
 
1867–1901
George Q. Cannon
1901
Lorenzo Snow
1901–18
Joseph F. Smith
1918–34
Daid O. Mckay
1934–43
George D. Pyper
1943–49
Milton Bennion
1949–66
George R. Hill
1966–71
David Lawrence Mckay
1971–79
Russel M. Nelson
1979–86
Hugh B. Pinnock
1986–89
Robert L. Simpson
1989–92
Hugh B. Pinnock
1992–94
Merlyn G. Lybbert
1994–95
Charles A. Didier
1995–2000
Harold G. Hillam
2000–01
Marlin K. Jensen
2001–03
Cecil O. Samuelson
2003–04
Marril J. Bateman
2004–09
A. Roger Merrill
2009–14
Russell T. Osguthorpe
2014–
Tad R. Callister
 
 
So, since the beginning, only priesthood holders have been called to be part of the Sunday School  General Board, and this has also been a pattern in stakes, wards and branches.
I hope it was useful to you!
Best wishes!
 
 
 
 

As a teenager I had a personal relationship with the Apostle Hugh B. Brown.  We had many private conversations were we shared things from our personal lives that we both hold dear and sacred.  I know things of Apostle Brown that are, to this day, unpublished.  I will say this; there are things known by divine revelation that are not made known to the world (published) nor are they even pronounced openly among the congregations of the Saints.  With this background I will tell of a story and experience of my youth that involved Apostle Brown.  This story is not to prove or disprove NDE (which I do not hold in much regard).  But it is to give insight into revelation and who may have the spiritual gift of direct revelation.
There was a old guy in my ward.  I thought him rather eccentric and odd and perhaps a little spiritually exaggerated.  He did not hold any calling of which I was aware but often on Fast Sunday he would give testimony - usually about the divinity of Christ and always with great emotion and tears.  I seldom paid much attention - there were in my circle more dynamic and charismatic speakers.  Besides, there was in my youth, enough overly emotional (spiritual?) seemingly to me, unconnected members that often said strange and odd things in testimony  meeting.  The old guy died and it turned out that he was once somewhat of a friend and mentor of Apostle Brown; who came to speak at his funeral.  As a teenager I thought this to be a great opportunity to take a date and impress some young lady of my advanced spirituality for my age and time with an introduction of Apostle Brown afterwards.  Though I was optimistic about dating in my youth - I was a hopeless nerd and quite misguided in what young ladies were looking for in dates.  My point is that I was at the funeral for all the wrong reasons.  Never-the-less, this would become a pivotal experience of my life that still effects me to this day though I do not remember, for sure, the lady that was by my side - something else is remembered.
During the talk of Apostle Hugh B. Brown, he talked about the old guy in my ward and he gave witness that this old man had a personal relationship with the Savior.  At that moment the spirit touche me and gave a profound witness to me telling me that this man had talked face to face, as one man would speak to another with the very person of Jesus Christ and an additional witness and reprimand that I had lived in the shadow of this great man and had never listened to anything he had said.  This event was brought again to me when Apostle Uchtdorf gave a talk about standing where we are placed and lifting together with those by our side.  Many Saints miss opportunity to receive revelation because we are ourselves out of touch and do not recognize the divine hand in others.  The more directly divine revelation touches a person the less likely they are to speak much of it in public - but it will echo through the spiritual corridors of the halls they daily pass.
 
The Traveler

That problem has already been solved by those who decline to participate.  Personally, I'd be just fine if church were 3.5 hours:
0:00 - 1:10 = Sacrament Meeting (standard 1:10)
10 Minute break
1:20 - 2:20 = Sunday School (now they get the hour they've been trying to take all along)
10 minute break
2:30 - 3:30 = RS / Priesthood (hooray, 10 extra minutes!)
IMO, people who want less church already have all the options they need.  Those of us who want more church don't.

The primary are under the bishop's authority, directly.  Not Sunday School's.
Please note that nothing in what I'm about to say should be taken as meaning I personally think Sunday School presidencies should be (allowed to be) women or that priesthood authority is not needed by the Sunday School presidency.  I'm just making observations.
It is an interesting question.  The Sunday School president does not, as far as I can tell, perform ordinances as part of his calling (so that couldn't be the reason for the priesthood requirement).  It, RS, YW, and Primary are all auxiliaries who answer to the bishop and operate under his authority.  From a purely functional standpoint, I can't see why any more priesthood authority is necessary for that presidency than for any other auxiliary presidency (history notwithstanding, and the history can easily be explained the same way lots of historic things can be explained).
The difference, however, is somewhat obvious: RS deals only with the women (makes more than sense for it to be run by women), YW deals only with young women (ditto comment), Primary deals with children (see the family proclamation for who has "primary" responsibility here).  SS deals with adult men and adult women both (as well as mixed young men and young women).  Historically, when that happens, the church puts men in charge of it.  So, it is consistent, and I can think of at least one good reason for it to be and stay that way (which reason I decline to share).
FWIW.

Thanx,
I really needed a better word on that!

"advises" would be a better word than "hosts" - see the handbook 2 chapter on the Aaronic Priesthood.

Yep. Not worth fighting over, but YM is an auxiliary, not a part of the quorums. It even has its own presidency.

Young Men.
Nope. The Primary president reports directly to the bishop.
You and me both, sister, though I get the impression we're a minority.

Hi, @askandanswer
In the Church Handbook 2, item 12.2.2, we read:
Ward Sunday School Presidency
“Members of the ward Sunday School presidency are priesthood holders. Where possible, the president holds the Melchizedek Priesthood. They work under the direction of the bishopric. They receive orientation and ongoing support from the stake Sunday School presidency”.
 
There are four auxiliary organizations in a ward or branch:  Sunday School, Relief Society, Young Women and Primary. Only Sunday School presidency is composed by priesthood holders. Why?
We need some historic background to try to understand why only men can preside Sunday School. The first formal Sunday school in the LDS Church was held on December 9, 1849, Salt Lake City in the Salt Lake City Fourteenth Ward Other Church congregations followed the Fourteenth Ward's example and adopted Sunday school programs based on the Richard Ballantyne’s (a former Sunday school teacher from Scotland) model. At this stage, each Sunday school was completely autonomous and under the sole direction of the local bishop.
Anxious to bring a standard structure and organization to the over 200 independent Sunday schools that had been created, president Brigham Young ordered that a union of the Sunday schools be carried out. On November 11, 1867, President Young plus Daniel H. Wells, George A. Smith, Wilfoord Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Brigham Youn Jr organized the Parent Sunday School Union. President Young appointed Cannon as the first general superintendent of the Sunday School, a position he would hold until his death in 1901. In 1872, the Sunday School organization was renamed the Deseret Sunday School Union.
The organized Sunday School addressed lesson topics and source materials, grading, prizes and rewards, use of hymns and songs composed by members of the Church, recording and increasing the attendance, developing an elementary teaching system, and libraries. It also sponsored the publication of administrative guidelines and materials for classroom use, resulting in increased uniformity lesson content.
Until the turn of the century, only children were taught by the Sunday School. Eventually, classes were added for the youth of the church; in 1904, an adult Sunday School class was created.
The 1970s saw dramatic change within the Sunday School. In 1971, as part of the Church Priesthood Correlation Program, the name of the Deseret Sunday School Union was changed to simply Sunday School, and the Sunday School general “superintendent” was renamed the general Sunday School "president". Additionally, curriculum planning and writing became more centralized and coordinated; for the first time, the Sunday School stopped providing unique lesson manuals each year, and the Church began a four-year curriculum rotation pattern. In 1979, Hugh B. Pinnock became the general president of the Sunday School, the first general authority of the Church to hold the position.
Here is the Sunday School Board since its creation:
Time
 
President
 
1867–1901
George Q. Cannon
1901
Lorenzo Snow
1901–18
Joseph F. Smith
1918–34
Daid O. Mckay
1934–43
George D. Pyper
1943–49
Milton Bennion
1949–66
George R. Hill
1966–71
David Lawrence Mckay
1971–79
Russel M. Nelson
1979–86
Hugh B. Pinnock
1986–89
Robert L. Simpson
1989–92
Hugh B. Pinnock
1992–94
Merlyn G. Lybbert
1994–95
Charles A. Didier
1995–2000
Harold G. Hillam
2000–01
Marlin K. Jensen
2001–03
Cecil O. Samuelson
2003–04
Marril J. Bateman
2004–09
A. Roger Merrill
2009–14
Russell T. Osguthorpe
2014–
Tad R. Callister
 
 
So, since the beginning, only priesthood holders have been called to be part of the Sunday School  General Board, and this has also been a pattern in stakes, wards and branches.
I hope it was useful to you!
Best wishes!
 
 
 
 

Hi, @askandanswer
In the Church Handbook 2, item 12.2.2, we read:
Ward Sunday School Presidency
“Members of the ward Sunday School presidency are priesthood holders. Where possible, the president holds the Melchizedek Priesthood. They work under the direction of the bishopric. They receive orientation and ongoing support from the stake Sunday School presidency”.
 
There are four auxiliary organizations in a ward or branch:  Sunday School, Relief Society, Young Women and Primary. Only Sunday School presidency is composed by priesthood holders. Why?
We need some historic background to try to understand why only men can preside Sunday School. The first formal Sunday school in the LDS Church was held on December 9, 1849, Salt Lake City in the Salt Lake City Fourteenth Ward Other Church congregations followed the Fourteenth Ward's example and adopted Sunday school programs based on the Richard Ballantyne’s (a former Sunday school teacher from Scotland) model. At this stage, each Sunday school was completely autonomous and under the sole direction of the local bishop.
Anxious to bring a standard structure and organization to the over 200 independent Sunday schools that had been created, president Brigham Young ordered that a union of the Sunday schools be carried out. On November 11, 1867, President Young plus Daniel H. Wells, George A. Smith, Wilfoord Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Brigham Youn Jr organized the Parent Sunday School Union. President Young appointed Cannon as the first general superintendent of the Sunday School, a position he would hold until his death in 1901. In 1872, the Sunday School organization was renamed the Deseret Sunday School Union.
The organized Sunday School addressed lesson topics and source materials, grading, prizes and rewards, use of hymns and songs composed by members of the Church, recording and increasing the attendance, developing an elementary teaching system, and libraries. It also sponsored the publication of administrative guidelines and materials for classroom use, resulting in increased uniformity lesson content.
Until the turn of the century, only children were taught by the Sunday School. Eventually, classes were added for the youth of the church; in 1904, an adult Sunday School class was created.
The 1970s saw dramatic change within the Sunday School. In 1971, as part of the Church Priesthood Correlation Program, the name of the Deseret Sunday School Union was changed to simply Sunday School, and the Sunday School general “superintendent” was renamed the general Sunday School "president". Additionally, curriculum planning and writing became more centralized and coordinated; for the first time, the Sunday School stopped providing unique lesson manuals each year, and the Church began a four-year curriculum rotation pattern. In 1979, Hugh B. Pinnock became the general president of the Sunday School, the first general authority of the Church to hold the position.
Here is the Sunday School Board since its creation:
Time
 
President
 
1867–1901
George Q. Cannon
1901
Lorenzo Snow
1901–18
Joseph F. Smith
1918–34
Daid O. Mckay
1934–43
George D. Pyper
1943–49
Milton Bennion
1949–66
George R. Hill
1966–71
David Lawrence Mckay
1971–79
Russel M. Nelson
1979–86
Hugh B. Pinnock
1986–89
Robert L. Simpson
1989–92
Hugh B. Pinnock
1992–94
Merlyn G. Lybbert
1994–95
Charles A. Didier
1995–2000
Harold G. Hillam
2000–01
Marlin K. Jensen
2001–03
Cecil O. Samuelson
2003–04
Marril J. Bateman
2004–09
A. Roger Merrill
2009–14
Russell T. Osguthorpe
2014–
Tad R. Callister
 
 
So, since the beginning, only priesthood holders have been called to be part of the Sunday School  General Board, and this has also been a pattern in stakes, wards and branches.
I hope it was useful to you!
Best wishes!
 
 
 
 

Hi, @askandanswer
In the Church Handbook 2, item 12.2.2, we read:
Ward Sunday School Presidency
“Members of the ward Sunday School presidency are priesthood holders. Where possible, the president holds the Melchizedek Priesthood. They work under the direction of the bishopric. They receive orientation and ongoing support from the stake Sunday School presidency”.
 
There are four auxiliary organizations in a ward or branch:  Sunday School, Relief Society, Young Women and Primary. Only Sunday School presidency is composed by priesthood holders. Why?
We need some historic background to try to understand why only men can preside Sunday School. The first formal Sunday school in the LDS Church was held on December 9, 1849, Salt Lake City in the Salt Lake City Fourteenth Ward Other Church congregations followed the Fourteenth Ward's example and adopted Sunday school programs based on the Richard Ballantyne’s (a former Sunday school teacher from Scotland) model. At this stage, each Sunday school was completely autonomous and under the sole direction of the local bishop.
Anxious to bring a standard structure and organization to the over 200 independent Sunday schools that had been created, president Brigham Young ordered that a union of the Sunday schools be carried out. On November 11, 1867, President Young plus Daniel H. Wells, George A. Smith, Wilfoord Woodruff, George Q. Cannon and Brigham Youn Jr organized the Parent Sunday School Union. President Young appointed Cannon as the first general superintendent of the Sunday School, a position he would hold until his death in 1901. In 1872, the Sunday School organization was renamed the Deseret Sunday School Union.
The organized Sunday School addressed lesson topics and source materials, grading, prizes and rewards, use of hymns and songs composed by members of the Church, recording and increasing the attendance, developing an elementary teaching system, and libraries. It also sponsored the publication of administrative guidelines and materials for classroom use, resulting in increased uniformity lesson content.
Until the turn of the century, only children were taught by the Sunday School. Eventually, classes were added for the youth of the church; in 1904, an adult Sunday School class was created.
The 1970s saw dramatic change within the Sunday School. In 1971, as part of the Church Priesthood Correlation Program, the name of the Deseret Sunday School Union was changed to simply Sunday School, and the Sunday School general “superintendent” was renamed the general Sunday School "president". Additionally, curriculum planning and writing became more centralized and coordinated; for the first time, the Sunday School stopped providing unique lesson manuals each year, and the Church began a four-year curriculum rotation pattern. In 1979, Hugh B. Pinnock became the general president of the Sunday School, the first general authority of the Church to hold the position.
Here is the Sunday School Board since its creation:
Time
 
President
 
1867–1901
George Q. Cannon
1901
Lorenzo Snow
1901–18
Joseph F. Smith
1918–34
Daid O. Mckay
1934–43
George D. Pyper
1943–49
Milton Bennion
1949–66
George R. Hill
1966–71
David Lawrence Mckay
1971–79
Russel M. Nelson
1979–86
Hugh B. Pinnock
1986–89
Robert L. Simpson
1989–92
Hugh B. Pinnock
1992–94
Merlyn G. Lybbert
1994–95
Charles A. Didier
1995–2000
Harold G. Hillam
2000–01
Marlin K. Jensen
2001–03
Cecil O. Samuelson
2003–04
Marril J. Bateman
2004–09
A. Roger Merrill
2009–14
Russell T. Osguthorpe
2014–
Tad R. Callister
 
 
So, since the beginning, only priesthood holders have been called to be part of the Sunday School  General Board, and this has also been a pattern in stakes, wards and branches.
I hope it was useful to you!
Best wishes!
 
 
 
 

I understand exceptions have been made in branches where a sister as called to clerk, executive secretary or Sunday School President. The only rationale I can think of for requiring a priesthood holder would have to do with the defined priesthood role (as put forth in D&C 20) to oversee, by delegation, the specific teaching program for that hour. Relief Society, Young Women and Primary Presidencies oversee broader responsibilities in addition to the sole teaching of classes.

But:
a)  Is the spirit realm/spirit world the same place (ie, do spirits who are waiting for birth, populate the same realm as spirits who have died and await the Resurrection?)
b)  Isn't there a statement out there from Brigham Young suggesting that the spirit world is here, on this earth?

The Community of Christ (the name was changed in 2001, aIr, by the first non-Smith from the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). The claim that Joseph III and his heirs would always run the RLDS/CoC was poo-pooed into oblivion at the time W. Grant McMurray took the office. He resigned under interesting, and unspecified, circumstances.
When the Saints left Nauvoo, one of the important things they did not take with them was the JST manuscript. Emma had it in her possession, and refused to give it to the Church that was leaving her (by her own choice). As its custodian, she eventually gave it to the RLDS Church through her son, JS III.
In the late 1860s the RLDS decided to print the JST (they call it the Inspired Version of the Holy Scriptures), and formed a committee to make that happen. But, when they got the manuscript, they discovered that Joseph didn't have a "manuscript", he had "notes". Putting it together for the printer (a process called "engrossing") took years for the seven-person committee. They made a lot of choices about what to include and what to leave out from among the three versions (called manuscripts 1, 2, & 3), and sometimes made what most might consider mistakes by choosing an earlier version over a more difficult-to-understand later version.
However, one of the RLDSs sent Parley P. Pratt (who was intimately involved in the translation with Joseph) a copy of the first printing. He sat down and read it through, and said that those who had done it had done it well.
Earlier, John Bernheisel (I forget how to spell his name), a doctor, was passing through and visited Emma in Nauvoo. He asked her to see the ms, and she allowed him to look at it and take notes. He produced what we call the "Bernheisal manuscript". It is useful, but he made copyist errors and didn't do a complete transcription, so it isn't as helpful as we might like, but it does (or did) give us a view into the text, and a touchstone to the printed version's accuracy. He included his own interlinear notes, at one point saying "this I not understand."
Feelings between the LDS and RLDS churches were bad to horrid until the mid-70s, aIr. The only way for a Saint to buy a copy of the IV/JST was to get it from Herald House (the RLDS publisher). I got mine from Deseret Book in the mid 70s, but it was more expensive there than I could have bought it directly from the publisher. I think it may have been that HH wouldn't discount the cover price for DB. That's an assumption based on one experience: I haven't even tried to verify it. This animus abated about this time, and it was due to several factor, not least on the efforts of Robert J. Matthews.
The most important LDS scholar to review the mss was Dr. Matthews (A Plainer Translation: Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible--A History and Commentary). The thawing probably came about when he asked for permission from his friend, the RLDS Church historian, to examine the mss. This friendship had been on-going for years, so it was not a surprise that he granted it.
Dr. Matthews examined every page of the extensive mss, and the Bible needed to "decode" the text. He made hand-written copies of the mss and made identical (as far as possible) marks in his own copy of the Bible. See his book for more details.
Following the change, and when the Brethren decided we needed a better edition of the Bible, we got permission to use the IV/JST in foot- and end- notes in the LDS edition of the AV.
I could go on (and on, and on), but I hope this will suffice.
Lehi

Just adding to the awesome reply from @LeSellers, I would also suggest the reading of this article:
http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Joseph_Smith_Translation_of_the_Bible_(JST)
In my view, as Joseph opened the seventh and last dispensation of the gospel, he had special gifts and talents unique to his person and role at the time of the restoration. Remember that in the 19th Century there wasn’t so much technology available to help in translation. Nowadays we have a lot of resources that can help us in translation processes. So, the other 13 Church presidents had different roles in their presidency time and certainly translating the Bible was not part of it. We acknowledge these men to be prophets, seers and revelators, meaning that if God so desired, they could have accomplished that task, but somehow they didn’t.
Our living prophet, Thomas S. Monson, has the same prerogatives as his former prophet companions. We don’t know what the Lord has been reveling to him and what sort of revelations they might be. The only thing we can do is speculate.
It’s my personal opinion that there are lots of things that these 15 prophets have been taught by the Lord that hasn’t been allowed to be told to the general membership of the Church. Why? Simply because we still need to use the resouces already available to us and because the Lord has said so.