Hill-Billy Dave's second post; D&C 45:25-39

[Hemidakota]

They will be replaced by thousands and thousands of High-Priests.

[Maya]

o... good then I can have my boys home then...

(my younger is out 2012... )

[rameumptom]

One of the problems with John Taylor's 1886 revelation is that it was never brought before the membership of the Church for a sustaining vote. It was not doctrine, even if written by President Taylor, because it did not go through the standard process for establishing doctrine or accepting new revelations.

Second, any revelation given by one prophet can be trumped/superseded by a more recent prophet. Therefore, even if John Taylor's prophecy were real and valid, it became null and void with Pres Woodruff's revelation on the Manifesto ending plural marriage.

Pres Brigham Young explained this once by placing all the scriptures on the pulpit and said they were inspired of God, but were nothing compared to the voice of the living prophet. We believe in living prophets, not dead ones. This is exactly why we are not delineated with just the Bible. "A Bible, a Bible, we have got a Bible and need no other" is often screamed by fundamentalists who insist that Wilford Woodruff is a fallen prophet.

Even IF President Grant made mistakes concerning priesthood ordination (and I do not believe it), it has nothing to do with previous revelations. If Pres Woodruff was fallen, then President Grant was also not a prophet. But the Twelve and membership all sustained the Manifesto. And the Twelve and membership sustained President Grant as prophet, and he was ordained to the position.

Now, has the times of the Gentiles been fulfilled? If not, it is definitely close to being fulfilled. We see the conversion rates among the Gentile (European) nations dwindling, and that Christianity as a whole is shrinking there. It struggles here in the USA, also. Meanwhile, it grows in other areas of the world.

While some criticized Pres Grant for stopping the gathering to Utah, it actually fulfilled a prophecy in the Book of Mormon:

1 Nephi 14:

11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

We can see that having members spread throughout the world was viewed by Nephi anciently. Pres Grant began the fulfillment of that prophecy.

[Justice]

Another problem I see (I think) is his interpretation.

Hillbilly, I guess you're going to have to copy the exact text from the "revelation" and tell me what you think it means. I saw nothing odd or unusual about it.

[Hill-Billy]

Sorry it has taken some time to go to work.... YUK

If this is not enough info. Maybe we should just pray about it!!

1886 Revelation

Given to President John Taylor September 27, 1886

My son John, you have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant how far it is binding upon my people.

Thus saith the Lord: All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority, and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant, for I the Lord am everlasting and my everlasting covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with, but they stand forever.

Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject? Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandments, and yet have I borne with them these many years; and this because of their weakness—because of the perilous times, and furthermore, it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters. Nevertheless, I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not, and as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph: All those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law. And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham’s seed and would enter into my glory, they must do the works of Abraham. I HAVE NOT REVOKED THIS LAW, NOR WILL I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory MUST obey the conditions thereof; even so, Amen.

Official Church Statement

In the “Official Statement” from the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, signed by Heber J. Grant, A.W. Ivins and J. Reuben Clark, Jr., “First Presidency,” the words are as follows:

“It is alleged that on September 26-27, 1886, President John Taylor received a revelation from the Lord, the purported text is given in publications circulated apparently by or at the instance of this organization (Fundamentalists).

“As to this pretended revelation it should be said that the archives of the Church contain no such a revelation; the archives contain no record of any such a revelation, nor any evidence justifying a belief that any such a revelation was ever given. From the personal knowledge of some of us, from the uniform and common recollection of the presiding quorums of the Church, from the absence in the Church archives of any evidence whatsoever justifying any belief that such a revelation was given, we are justified in affirming that no such a revelation exists.”

If the revelation to John Taylor was not then in the archives of the Church, it is because it had been taken out from the archives of the Church, in order to make the statement, for each of the brethren had been familiar with it and knew that it was in existence. These three men signed the false statement with full knowledge of its falsity and with the intent of deceiving the Saints. To make the deception more complete, A. W. Ivins, one of the signers to the false statement, wrote one of our California friends as follows:

“The latter purported revelation of John Taylor (of 1886) has no standing in the Church. I have searched carefully, and all that can be found is a piece of paper found among President Taylor’s effects after his death. It was written in pencil and only a few paragraphs, which has no signature at all. It was unknown to the Church until members of his own family claimed to have found it among his papers. It was never presented or discussed as a revelation by the presiding authorities of the Church.”

Then without any apparent thought of corroboration of this statement with facts, Apostle Melvin J. Ballard stumbles into a trap and leaves Brother Ivins out on a limb, as follows:

“The pretended revelation of John Taylor never had his signature added to it but was written in the form of a revelation and undoubtedly was in his handwriting.” (Marriage—Ballard-Jenson Correspondence, p. 17.)

Thus the revelation is confirmed by two independent statements made by two leading Church officials, each of whom tried to destroy it.

The late B. H. Roberts, while Assistant Historian of the Church, stated to friends that he had seen, on more than one occasion, the original copy of this 1886 revelation, and knew that it was in the Church archives; and in his opinion it was genuine.

Lorin C. Woolley Statement

As further and ultimate proof of the existence of this revelation we quote a statement in extenso from Lorin C. Woolley, a bodyguard of John Taylor at the time the revelation was received, and who was given a copy of the same on the day it was written, as the statement indicates.

Statement of Lorin C. Woolley with reference to the revelation of 1886, on the subject of Celestial or plural marriage, given September 22, 1929: There were present Lorin C. Woolley, Daniel R. Bateman, John Y. Barlow, J. Leslie Broadbent and J. W. Musser. Prayer was offered by John Y. Barlow.

Lorin C. Woolley related the following:

While the brethren were at the Carlisle residence (in Murray) in May or June of 1886, letters began to come to President John Taylor from such men as John Sharp, Horace Eldredge, William Jennings, John T. Cain, Abraham Hatch, President Cluff and many other leading men from all over the Church, asking the leaders to do something, as the Gentiles were talking of confiscating their property in connection with the property of the Church.

These letters not only came from those who were living in the plural marriage relation, but also from prominent men who were presiding in various offices in the Church who were not living in that relation. They all urged that something be done to satisfy the Gentiles so that their property would not be confiscated.

George Q. Cannon, on his own initiative, selected a committee comprising himself, Hyrum B. Clawson, Franklin S. Richards, John T. Caine and James Jack, to get up a statement or manifesto that would meet the objections urged by the brethren above named. They met from time to time to discuss the situation. From the White home, where President Taylor and companions stopped, after leaving the Carlisle home, they came out to father’s. George Q. Cannon would go and consult with the brethren of the committee, I taking him back and forth each day.

On September 26, 1886, George Q. Cannon, Hyrum B. Clawson, Franklin S. Richards, and others met with President John Taylor at my father’s residence at Centerville, Davis County, Utah, and presented a document for President Taylor’s consideration.

I had just got back from a three days’ trip, during most of which time I had been in the saddle, and being greatly fatigued, I had retired to rest.

Between one and two o’clock P.M. Brother Bateman came and woke me up and asked me to be at my father’s home, where a manifesto was to be discussed. I went there and found there were congregated Samuel Bateman, Charles H. Wilkins, L. John Nuttall, Charles Birrell, George Q. Cannon, Franklin S. Richards and Hyrum B. Clawson.

We discussed the proposed Manifesto at length, but we were unable to become united in the discussion. Finally George Q. Cannon suggested that President Taylor take the matter up with the Lord and decide the same the next day.

Brothers Clawson and Richards were taken back to Salt Lake. That evening I was called to act as guard during the first part of the night, notwithstanding the fact that I was greatly fatigued on account of the three days’ trip I had just completed.

The brethren retired to bed soon after 9 o’clock. The sleeping rooms were inspected by the guards as was the custom. President Taylor’s room had no outside door. The windows were heavily screened.

Some time after the brethren retired and while I was reading the Doctrine and Covenants, I was suddenly attracted to a light appearing under the door leading to President Taylor’s room, and was at once startled to hear the voices of men talking there. There were three distinct voices. I was bewildered because it was my duty to keep people out of that room and evidently someone had entered without my knowing it. I made a hasty examination and found the door leading to the room bolted as usual. I then examined the outside of the house and found all the window screens intact. While examining the last window, and feeling greatly agitated, a voice spoke to me saying, “Can’t you feel the Spirit? Why should you worry?”

At this I returned to my post and continued to hear the voices in the room. They were so audible that although I did not see the parties I could place their positions in the room from the sound of their voices. The three voices continued until about midnight, when one of them left, and the other two continued. One of them I recognized as President John Taylor’s voice. I called Charles Birrell [Footnote: Charles Birrell was also a bodyguard of the brethren and was to take the second shift in watching on this night.] and we both sat up until eight o’clock the next morning.

When President Taylor came out of his room about eight o’clock of the morning of September 27, 1886, we could scarcely look at him on account of the brightness of his personage.

He stated, “Brethren, I have had a very pleasant conversation with Brother Joseph (Joseph Smith).” I said, “Boss, who is the man that was there until midnight?” He asked, “What do you know about it, Lorin?” I told him all about my experience. He said, “Brother Lorin, that was your Lord.”

We had no breakfast, but assembled ourselves in a meeting. I forget who opened the meeting. I was called to offer the benediction. I think my father, John W. Woolley, offered the opening prayer. There were present at the meeting, in addition to President Taylor, George Q. Cannon, L. John Nuttall, John W. Woolley, Samuel Bateman, Charles Wilkins, Charles Birrell, Daniel R. Bateman, Bishop Samuel Sedden, George Earl, my mother, Julia E. Woolley, my sister, Amy Woolley, and myself. The meeting was held from about 9 o’clock in the morning until 5 in the afternoon, without intermission, being about eight hours in all.

President Taylor called the meeting to order. He had the Manifesto, that had been prepared under the direction of George Q. Cannon, read over again. He then put each person under covenant that he or she would defend the principle of Celestial or plural marriage, and that they would consecrate their lives, liberty and property to this end, and that they personally would sustain and uphold that principle.

By that time we were all filled with the Holy Ghost. President Taylor and those present occupied about three hours up to this time. After placing us under covenant, he placed his finger on the document, his person rising from the floor about a foot or eighteen inches, and with countenance animated by the Spirit of the Lord, and raising his right hand to the square, he said, “Sign that document? -- Never! I would suffer my right hand to be severed from my body first. Sanction it—never! I would suffer my tongue to be torn from its roots in my mouth before I would sanction it!”

After that he talked for about an hour and then sat down and wrote the revelation which was given him by the Lord upon the question of Plural Marriage (the text of which revelation is given above). Then he talked to us for some time, and said, “Some of you will be handled and ostracized and cast out from the Church by your brethren because of your faithfulness and integrity to this principle, and some of you may have to surrender your lives because of the same, but woe, woe, unto those who shall bring these troubles upon you.” (Three of us were handled and ostracized for supporting and sustaining this principle. There are only three left who were at the meeting mentioned—Daniel R. Bateman, George Earl, and myself. So far as I know, those of them who have passed away all stood firm to the covenants entered into from that day to the day of their deaths.)

After the meeting referred to, President Taylor had L. John Nuttall write five copies of the revelation. He called five of us together: Samuel Bateman, Charles H. Wilkins, George Q. Cannon, John W. Woolley, and myself.

He then set us apart and placed us under covenant that while we lived we would see to it that no year passed by without children being born in the principle of plural marriage. We were given authority to ordain others if necessary to carry this work on, they in turn to be given authority to ordain others when necessary, under the direction of the worthy senior (by ordination), so that there should be no cessation in the work. He then gave each of us a copy of the revelation.

I am the only one of the five now living, and so far as I know all five of the brethren remained true and faithful to the covenants they entered into, and to the responsibilities placed upon them at that time.

During the eight hours we were together, and while President Taylor was talking to us, he frequently arose and stood above the floor, and his countenance and being were so enveloped by light and glory that it was difficult for us to look upon him.

He stated that the document (referring to the Manifesto) was from the lower regions. He stated that many of the things he had told us we would forget and they would be taken from us, but that they would return to us in due time as needed, and from this fact we would know that the same was from the Lord. This has been literally fulfilled. Many of the things I forgot, but they are coming to me gradually, and those things that come to me are as clear as on the day on which they were given.

President Taylor said that the time would come when many of the Saints would apostatize because of this principle. He said “one-half of this people would apostatize over the principle for which we are now in hiding; yea, and possibly one-half of the other half” (rising off the floor while making the statement). He also said the day will come when a document similar to that (Manifesto) then under consideration would beadopted by the Church, following which “APOSTASY AND WHOREDOM would be rampant in the Church.”

He said that in the time of the seventh President of this Church, the Church would go into bondage both temporally and spiritually and in that day (the day of bondage) the one Mighty and Strong spoken of in the 85th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants would come.

Among other things stated by President Taylor on this occasion was this, “I would be surprised if ten per cent of those who claim to hold the Melchizedek Priesthood will remain true and faithful to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, at the time of the seventh president, and that there would be thousands that think they hold the priesthood at that time, but would not have it properly conferred upon them.”

John Taylor set the five mentioned apart and gave them authority to perform marriage ceremonies, and also to set others apart to do the same thing as long as they remained upon the earth; and while doing so, the Prophet Joseph Smith stood by directing the proceedings. Two of us had not met the Prophet Joseph Smith in his mortal lifetime and we—Charles H. Wilkins and myself—were introduced to him and shook hands with him.

(Signed) LORIN C. WOOLLEY.

Daniel R. Bateman, being present while the above experience was related by Brother Woolley, testified as follows: “I was privileged to be at the meeting of September 27, 1886, spoken of by Brother Woolley, I myself acting as one of the guards for the brethren during those exciting times. The proceedings of the meeting, as related by Brother Woolley, are correct in every detail. I was not present when the five spoken of by Brother Woolley were set apart for special work, but have on different occasions heard the details of the same related by Brother Lorin C. Woolley and John W. Woolley, and from all the circumstances with which I am familiar, I firmly believe the testimony of these two brethren to be true.”

Additional Corroborative Evidence

Items of special interest relative to the 1886 REVELATION. The following excerpts taken from the trial minutes of special meetings of the Twelve Apostles held in the Salt Lake Temple, February 22nd, and March 1st, 1911.

Those in Attendance were: Apostle John W. Taylor, President Francis M. Lyman and Apostles Heber J. Grant, Hyrum M. Smith, Charles W. Penrose, George F. Richards, Orson F. Whitney, David O. McKay, Anthony W. Ivins and Joseph F. Smith Jr.

President Francis M. Lyman presided and specifically informed Apostle John W. Taylor that he had been summoned to the trial, “TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.”

Apostle John W. Taylor: My father received a REVELATION which however was never presented to the Church, and I refer to this not because it was a REVELATION to my father; I don’t think a REVELATION because it came through him was any greater than one received through any other president of the Church, but because it seems to pertain to this question.

Edited December 8, 2009 by Hill-Billy

[Mahone]

... and I think it is about Bella from the movie Twillight.

You actually saw that? I hope the reward you got for it was worth the suffering you went through.

This is possibly the most realistic post in this thread

[Justice]

The problem is that there is no proof that this "revelation" was authentic, and even if it was, it was never presented to the church for a sustaining vote.

We don't know why he didn't present it to the church. Maybe he was unsure about the number 7?

I don't know, Billy. It seems like a far reach to base all your beliefs on a revelation that can't be confirmed, and was never sustained, over the hundreds that have been.

[Hill-Billy]

Might we consider the missionaries have been called home because they might not have priesthood (as Pres. John Taylor Prophesied) and maybe because they don’t travel without purse or script? Might we consider that the calling of the missionaries is not such an act of a human phone call. Remember they were called home during the Second World War. Can we consider that when God calls them home or puts a stop to missionary work, it is in his way and under His understanding, not our understanding or our thinking. Just a though.

[Hill-Billy]

Oh... I think you have it. It doesn't matter if it was given to the church or not. JS, and others have had revelations that have not been voted on by the church. So, to say that God can not be heard or obeyed unless it is voted on by the church members, I think is going to far. If I read a revelation and I find it to be true by Prayer.... then I will live it. I don't care if you or others voted on it or not. I live to follow my Heavenly Father, not man. We each have our Free Agency to believe or not to believe. How wonderful a doctrine. When you arrive at the other side, you will be judged by what YOU decided to believe or not to believe. I have never heard of anyone being condemned for believeing too much of the gospel, but for unbelieve. Thanks for your post...

[pam]

Might we consider the missionaries have been called home because they might not have priesthood (as Pres. John Taylor Prophesied) and maybe because they don’t travel without purse or script? Might we consider that the calling of the missionaries is not such an act of a human phone call. Remember they were called home during the Second World War. Can we consider that when God calls them home or puts a stop to missionary work, it is in his way and under His understanding, not our understanding or our thinking. Just a though.

I wonder if the wording "being called home" is being interpreted the same way in this thread. Being called home could just be the missionaries were sent home..or are we talking about being called home as in life ending?

I'm so dang confused over this thread..maybe I just need to go home..Oh wait..I am home.

[Snow]

Might we consider the missionaries have been called home because they might not have priesthood (as Pres. John Taylor Prophesied) and maybe because they don’t travel without purse or script? Might we consider that the calling of the missionaries is not such an act of a human phone call.

Well, we might but wouldn't that be negated through the application of intelligent thought?

[Just_A_Guy]

Sorry it has taken some time to go to work.... YUK

If this is not enough info. Maybe we should just pray about it!!

1886 Revelation . . .

I almost got suckered into a point-by-point refutation, until I realized your post was just a copy-paste job from a website operated by the FLDS. The only material points there come either from Woolley's own testimony or from an unsubstantiated "quote" from B.H. Roberts; the rest is quite easily refuted by anyone not out to make someone an "offender for a word" (how's that for a find-your-own Isaiah application?)

“Many of the things I forgot, but they are coming to me gradually, and those things that come to me are as clear as on the day on which they were given.”

I'm sure they were.

Can we consider that when God calls them home or puts a stop to missionary work, it is in his way and under His understanding, not our understanding or our thinking.

How elegant. When war begins and Heber J. Grant calls them home, it's God's doing. But when war ends and Heber J. Grant sends them out again . . .

I have never heard of anyone being condemned for believeing too much of the gospel, but for unbelieve. Thanks for your post...

Yeah, no one's ever gotten into trouble for believing the words of apostates . . .

Edited December 8, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[Wingnut]

Interesting. I'm really starting to think that MOE may have been onto something...this guy might actually be Kris Umffrey after all.

[pam]

I do not believe this is Kristoffer Umfrey.

[Hill-Billy]

To get down to the 1886 revelation etc. The only people who have written about it is the Book. A leaf in Review, by Allred and the truth mag. by Musser. There are a lot of conflicting information about who, what and when. The only safe way for us to come to the truth is PRAYER. We can debate this from one end to the other and keep getting on each others nerves. Just pray about it and move on...

Pam, you got me... who the heck is Kristoffer Umfrey, is it a person, place or thing?

[pam]

Former member of the site.

[pam]

To get down to the 1886 revelation etc. The only people who have written about it is the Book. A leaf in Review, by Allred and the truth mag. by Musser. There are a lot of conflicting information about who, what and when. The only safe way for us to come to the truth is PRAYER. We can debate this from one end to the other and keep getting on each others nerves. Just pray about it and move on...

Pam, you got me... who the heck is Kristoffer Umfrey, is it a person, place or thing?

Okay now wait just a minute here. YOU brought this whole thing up. People have responded with such things as:

The original to that document is gone. Here is a surviving photocopy. Wikipedia has the text.

The 1886 "revelation" says nothing about a seventh president of the Church.

Originally Posted by Hill-Billy

4. Isaiah, Chapter 7, I think is regarding the 7th president of the Church.

This chapter in Isaiah happens to be a prophecy in the OT about the birth of Christ. Not sure how that relates to the 7th President of the Church

I would like Mr. Billy to address the points brought up here.

Yet you have answered none of these points. So now..we should just pray about it and move on?

How about answering these points that were brought up in response to the thread that YOU started?

[Wingnut]

Okay now wait just a minute here. YOU brought this whole thing up.

...

How about answering these points that were brought up in response to the thread that YOU started?

Apparently none of those people you quoted is a person with mind or body in their thinking. Or maybe they all have flies in their empty belfries.

In order to prevent a lot of useless negative and sometimes just plain mean and rude chatter, I am going to set my own rules for my responses.

Anyone who has flies in their empty belfry, or uses loud obnoxious talk without first engaging the mind, or is a person without mind or body in his thinking, I will not respond to such negative discussions with them. If it is negative, hateful, and rude and lacks common good taste I will not respond.

Edited December 8, 2009 by Wingnut

[Hill-Billy]

OK Pam..

I am not sure what is your question and what is a comment.

Naturally the church wants to hide or not talk about these things. I understand that. So the only way we can read them or try to understand them is to look to the books I listed. Being that You or I will not agree on these points. I wrote these posts trying to get people to get out of he box and read some history of our church. This is not a court trial. We must read, gather the documents and then pray about it. How you and I interpret these things is up to our free agency.

I have studied Isaiah for many years; I have read it in Hebrew. There are three ways to read all scriptures, superficial reading of the print, next in regard to ourselves and in regard to priesthood, future events etc. etc. The study of Isaiah is complex, yet easy to understand if you understand the way the old Hebrews wrote prophesies. To help you understand Isaiah purchase and read all the books by Abraham Gileadi. (You may already have them, if so I apologize) I do not want to preach.

I decided to change my picture to something that fits my personality.

OK someone list (bullets) all your questions for me one by one and not to many, I will do my best to answer them.

Edited December 8, 2009 by Hill-Billy

[pam]

I'm not sure what is so difficult to answering your claims. You state that revelation is talking about the 7th President. Yet there is no mention of that.

You say Isaiah Chapter 7 is about the 7th President..yet there is no mention of that.

So instead of answering those questions, you give me mumble jumble about the books by some Abraham Gileadi.

You talk about having intelligent conversations. Conversation is going both ways where both understand to some extent what the other person's point is. Sorry I don't find that here.

[john doe]

Why would the church want to hide from these things if they are legitimate?

[Just_A_Guy]

To help you understand Isaiah purchase and read all the books by Abraham Gileadi.

Hmm. Does he still stand by the stuff he wrote before 1993?

[john doe]

Apparently none of those people you quoted is a person with mind or body in their thinking. Or maybe they all have flies in their empty belfries.

You must be talking about me again.

[Hill-Billy]

Pam

First, the revelation of 1886 does not talk about Heber J. Grant. We are talking about the morning meeting that the prophet explained the revelation and who gave it to him. Take note that the one might and strong came during the 7th president. Never caught that before.

Pres. Taylor said

He said that in the time of the seventh President of this Church, the Church would go into bondage both temporally and spiritually and in that day (the day of bondage) the one Mighty and Strong spoken of in the 85th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants would come.

Among other things stated by President Taylor on this occasion was this, “I would be surprised if ten per cent of those who claim to hold the Melchizedek Priesthood will remain true and faithful to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, at the time of the seventh president, and that there would be thousands that think they hold the priesthood at that time, but would not have it properly conferred upon them.”

So that what Pres. Taylor the prophet said, you can believe it or not.

John Doesay, Why would the church want to hide from these things if they are legitimate? Because the church as a body during that time refused to live the Celestial Laws of God and past there own rejection of them. So to accept this 1886 revelation would be say they were wrong in not living the law.

Just a guy: Hmm. Does he still stand by the stuff he wrote before 1993? I have no idea what this means or why it was said.

The rest of the stuff is just slams and ignorant bad mouth talking.

If you have a question ask it, but ask it in a way that I see a ?

No one commented on my new picture.

Edited December 8, 2009 by Hill-Billy

[pam]

3. Prophesy of John Taylor in the 1886 Revelation regarding the 7th president of the church, which happens to be Pres. Heber J. Grant.

Here you state the revelation is regarding the 7th President of the church in your OP.

First, the revelation of 1886 does not talk about Heber J. Grant. We are talking about the morning meeting that the prophet explained the revelation and who gave it to him. Take note that the one might and strong came during the 7th president. Never caught that before.

Yet you turn around when confronted and state it doesn't. You are contradicting yourself.