Mormonism Research Ministry

,

Q&A: The King Follett Discourse

—

Aaron Shafovaloff

Where can I read the sermon online?

Ensign published an edition of the sermon in two parts:

Was the sermon given at a general conference?

Yes. Jeffrey Tucker of the Church History Library writes that it was “a prominent general conference talk given by Joseph Smith shortly before his death.”1 Wilford Woodruff’s journal records that over 10,000 persons were present.2

Did Joseph Smith intend for it to be a significant sermon?

Yes. The Joseph Smith Papers Project observes, “It seems that Joseph Smith intended this to be a significant discourse.”3 Van Hale writes,

“Considering his upcoming sermon to be of great importance, he had assigned three clerks to take minutes. On only one other occasion had any of his discourses been reported by more than one clerk.”4

Was Joseph Smith speaking as a prophet?

Yes. In the sermon Smith presents his teaching on God as a test of his own prophetic legitimacy:

“My first object is to find out the character of the only wise and true God, and what kind of a being He is; and if I am so fortunate as to be the man to comprehend God, and explain or convey the principles to your hearts, so that the Spirit seals them upon you, then let every man and woman henceforth sit in silence, put their hands on their mouths, and never lift their hands or voices, or say anything against the man of God or the servants of God again. But if I fail to do it, it becomes my duty to renounce all further pretensions to revelations and inspirations, or to be a prophet.”5

Using words spoken of Jesus, Smith claims to speak with authority:

“This will let you know that I am his servant for I speak as one having authority and not as a scribe.”6

Was Joseph Smith just speculating?

No. He claims the principles of eternal life are given to him “by the revelations of Jesus Christ”; what he teaches are things “given me by inspiration of the Holy Spirit”; listeners are “bound to receive them as sweet”:

“This is good doctrine. It tastes good. I can taste the principles of eternal life, and so can you. They are given to me by the revelations of Jesus Christ; and I know that when I tell you these words of eternal life as they are given to me, you taste them, and I know that you believe them. You say honey is sweet, and so do I. I can also taste the spirit of eternal life. I know that it is good; and when I tell you of these things which were given me by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, you are bound to receive them as sweet, and rejoice more and more.”7

Is this sermon considered important in LDS history?

Yes. Robert Millet says, “I think it was Joseph Smith at his best.”8 William V. Smith writes, “Smith’s sermon of April 7, 1844, is widely recognized as his single most important preaching event and perhaps the most important Mormon sermon of all time.”9 James E. Faulconer and Susannah Morrison write, “The King Follett Sermon is one of the most important sermons on doctrine in the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”10 Van Hale writes that it was

“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.”11

B. H. Roberts wrote that the discourse was the “climax of his career”:

“The Prophet lived his life in crescendo. From small beginnings, it rose in breadth and power as he neared its close. As a teacher he reached the climax of his career in this discourse. After it there was but one thing more he could do—seal his testimony with his blood.”12

How is the manuscript support?

It is significant. Stan Larson writes,

“Of all the speeches given by Joseph Smith, this one has the greatest contemporary manuscript support, which certainly strengthens claims of its reliability and authenticity.”13

Who were the main reporters of the sermon?

Thomas Bullock, Wilford Woodruff, William Clayton, and Willard Richards. The Joseph Smith Papers also has all four accounts:

Are the accounts of the sermon basically reliable?

Yes. Speaking of the four accounts of the KFD, Stan Larson writes that

“the reports have have no irreconcilable parts—no contradictory statements—and it is sometimes quite amazing how easily the various accounts combine. A high degree of agreement and harmony exists among them… Every indication points to the Bullock, Clayton, and Richards versions’ being written as Joseph spoke; this fact deserves emphasis. There is no evidence that any account was made by copying and/or expanding any other account.”14

James E. Faulconer and Susannah Morrison summarize the differences between the Grimshaw and Larson’s amalgamations:

“Larson’s version deletes material added by Grimshaw and adds material from the notes that Grimshaw omitted, but nevertheless there are no substantial differences between it and any of the previous published versions. It is noteworthy that each of the editors who has worked with the notes of the sermon has created much the same final version. That should give considerable confidence in the text as we have it, even if it is only an amalgamation of notes made at the time.”15

What did Joseph Smith teach in the sermon?

The following quotations come from the critical text compiled by William V. Smith.16 TB refers to Thomas Bullock, WC to William Clayton, and WW to Wilford Woodruff.

  • 1. God did not create the world from nothing: “[The word create came from the word Barau—]WC it means to organize, same as [you]TB/[man]WC would [organize]TB/[use to build]WC a ship—[hence we infer that]WC God himself had materials to organize the world out of chaos—chaotic matter [which is]TB element [and in which dwells all the glory]TB.”
  • 2. The Spirit of man is eternal and uncreated: “God never had power to create the spirit of man at all. Intelligence exists upon a self-existent principle [it]TB is a spirit from age to age and [there is]TB no creation about it—[the first principles of man are self exist{ent} with God]TB.”
  • 3. Children who die rise unchanged in their stature, reigning eternally as children: “[As the Child dies]TB/[But as it falls]WW so shall it rise [from the dead]TB [It will never grow]WW [and be living in the burning of God]TB [—it shall be as it was before]TB/[It will be in its precise form as]WW it died out of your arms [Children dwell and exercise power in the same form as they laid them down]TB/[Eternity is full of thrones upon which dwell thousands of children]WW [reigning on thrones of glory not one cubit added to their stature.]WW.”
  • 4. That which has a beginning will have an end. “Is it logic to say [that a spirit is immortal and yet have a beginning{?} because if a spirit have a beginning it will have an end—good logic—illustrated by his ring]WC [I take]TB my ring [from my finger and]TB liken [it unto the mind]TB of man, [the immortal spirit because]TB it has no beginning [or end]WW. [Suppose you]TB cut it into [but as the Lord lives]TB there would be an end.”
  • 5. Salvation is like climbing a ladder and treading in the tracks of those previously exalted: “[When you climb a ladder you must begin at the bottom run{g} until you learn the last principle of the gospel]TB… I saw the Father work out his kingdom with fear and trembling and I [must]TB/[can]WC do the same [and]WC when I [get my kingdom]WC I will give/[present]WC [my kingdom]TB to the Father… Jesus treads/[steps]WC in his tracks [as he had gone]TB/[to inherit what God did]WC before.”
  • 6. Eternal life requires knowing God as he is: “The Apostle says this is eternal life to know God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent. If any man enquire what kind of a being is God [if he will search diligently his own heart]TB/[cast his mind to know if the declaration of the Apostle be true he will realize]WC [that unless he knows God]TB he has not eternal life [there can be eternal life on no other principle]WC.”
  • 7. God is a man like us with a body of flesh and bones: “God himself who sits enthroned in yonder heavens is a man like [unto]TB one of yourselves [This is the great secret]WC… if [the veil was rent today and [that]WW/[the great]WC who holds this world in its orbit [its sphere or the planets]WC [and upholds all things by his power]TB if you were to see him to day you would see him [in all the person image, very form of]WC a man.”
  • 8. God was once a man like us: “God himself who sits enthroned in yonder heavens is a man like [unto]TB one of yourselves… God himself the father [of us all]TB was once [as one of]WC/[like]TB us [was]WC/[dwelt]TB on an [earth]TBWW/[planet]WC [as Jesus was in the flesh]WC/[same as Jesus Christ himself]TB.”
  • 9. Humans can become gods: “[Here then is Eternal life to know the only wise and true God]TB you have got to learn how to be a God yourself [in order to save yourself]WC [and]TB/[to]WC be [a K{ing} and God Priest to God]TB/[priests and kings]WC as all [Gods]WC have done by going from a small [capacity]TBWW/[degree]WC to another from [grace to grace]TB/[exaltation to ex{altation}]WC [until the resurrection of]TB.”
  • 10. Salvation requires baptism: “The Baptism of Water [without the]TB Baptism of Fire and [the]TB Holy Ghost [attending it are necessary]TB/[are inseparably connected]WR [he must be born of water and spirit to get into the Kingdom of God]TB.”
  • 11. We have a responsibility to save the dead: “The greatest responsibility [that God has]TB laid upon us in this [life]WW/[world]WC is to seek after our dead. [the Apostle says]TB/[Paul said]WW they without us cannot be made perfect [now I am speaking of them I say to you Paul you cannot be perfect without us—those that are gone before and]TB.”
  • 12. Dissenters are among the irredeemably damned: “After a man has sinned the sin against the Holy Spirit there is no repentance for him]WC [from that time they begin to be enemies like many of the apostates of the Church of J. C. of L.D.S.—when a man begins to be an enemy he hunts him—for he has got the same Spirit that they had who crucified the Lord of life—the same Spirit that Sin against the Holy Ghost]TB/[Hence like many of the apostates of the C of J. C. L.D.S. they go too far the spirit leaves them hence they seek to kill me they thirst for my blood—they never cease—he has got the same spirit that crucified Jesus.]WC.”

Precedents

Did Smith previously teach that God became God?

Yes. An 1842 entry by Wilford Woodruff reads:

“Joseph the Seer taught the following principles that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world became the eternal God of that world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would do the same in turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many.”17

Jordan T. Watkins and Christopher James Blythe (2020):

“This entry confirms that over two years before Smith publicly revealed the ‘great secret’ of God’s history in the King Follett discourse, he was already teaching that God the Father was once mortal and had served as the savior of a previous world.”18

Did Smith previously teach that we can become gods?

Yes. According to the Joseph Smith Papers, in 1841 Thomas Sharp described

“the reasoning of the Apostle Parley: P. Pratt” and “the doctrine of the Church” to be that Latter-day Saints would “have power to create worlds” in the next life “and that those worlds will transgress the law given, consequently they will become saviors to those worlds, and redeem them; never, until all this is accomplished, will their glory be complete; and then there will be ‘Lords many and Gods many.’”19

Was the sermon favorably received by the Saints?

Yes. An LDS Institute manual summarizes:

“How did the Saints respond to this lengthy, yet eloquent and inspiring sermon? Most were profoundly moved by it. Joseph Fielding wrote in his journal, ‘I never felt more delighted with his Discourse than at this time, It put me in Mind of Herod when they said at his Oration It is the Voice of a God and not of a Man’ (see Acts 12:20–23).”20

On Wilford Woodruff:

“Nearly 50 years after the address, Wilford Woodruff, while speaking at the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple, declared that listening to the discourse was the strongest spiritual experience of his life.”21

How did critics understand the sermon?

They understood it to teach “the doctrine of many Gods” and “innumerable Gods… above the God that presides over this universe.” James E. Faulconer with Susannah Morrison:

“In June 1844, two months after the King Follett Sermon was delivered, anonymous former Latter-day Saint writers in the Nauvoo Expositor condemned the teaching: ‘Among the many items of false doctrine that are taught the Church, is the doctrine of many Gods. . . . It is contended that there are innumerable Gods as much above the God that presides over this universe, as he is above us.’”22

What effect did the teaching have on future LDS leaders?

Matthew Bowman:

“Throughout the nineteenth century, many Church leaders embraced the notion that God had achieved godhood through a process of maturation, learning, and growth.”

Writing of Brigham Young:

“For some, like Brigham Young, who succeeded Joseph Smith as President of the Church, this process was most comprehensible in terms of family and lineage. Young took Smith’s meaning at its most frank, imagining a long chain of divine parents.” (source, PDF)

And of Orson Pratt:

“Orson Pratt took the notion that God was not always God seriously, but he offered a more abstract version of divine progress than the lineal parentage statements of Young or Hyde, instead teaching that in some way God’s divinity is eternal and self-existent. From the King Follett Discourse, Pratt posited that “the primary powers of all material substance must be intelligent” and that therefore the totality of that intelligence, which was interconnected, self-existent, and eternal, was in fact what Pratt called the “Great God.” The being humans called “God,” then, partook of the eternal divine attributes that the “Great God” had always possessed as a singular manifestation of the eternal principles of divinity. Pratt thus insisted that “God” in the form of the “Great God” had indeed always existed and always possessed all the attributes of divinity, but that any particular “God” who entered into communion with the “Great God” might indeed have had a history of growth and change. He thus saw both eternity and progress in Smith’s ideas.”

Does the sermon have ongoing influence?

Yes. The LDS Church’s web site reads,

“Since 1844, the Church has continued to teach the core doctrines that Joseph presented in the King Follett discourse and to view the plan of salvation in light of the truths Joseph Smith taught about humankind’s premortal existence, mortal experience, and divine eternal potential.”23

William V. Smith:

“The Follett sermon’s historical superstructures and networks of thought still surface in the general conferences of the church (though Follett itself is usually not mentioned) and those thought networks and traditions still influence contemporary issues.”24

James E. Faulconer and Susannah Morrison:

“The sermon retains its power among Latter-day Saints because it brings together a number of Joseph Smith’s previous teachings on humanity’s relationship to God: God has the form of a human being; he once lived in a world like our own in the same way that we do; the Father created this world and gave it its laws so that the spirits around him could become like him; and intelligence, the essential aspect of the spirits for whom he created the world, is eternal… Though the King Follett Sermon has remained central to Latter-day Saint belief, since 1844 the Church’s understanding of several key elements of the sermon’s teachings have changed or at least been clarified: the teaching about the history of God, that about human potential, that about the nature of intelligence, and that about the resurrection of infants.”25

Did the sermon teach of God’s past progress unto godhood?

This is the conclusion of many Latter-day Saints. Matthew Bowman writes that Joseph Smith in the discourse “offered a series of statements that seemed to indicate that God had once been a man like human men and had progressed to achieve Godhood and that this was to be also the fate of his listeners.”26

How does the sermon relate to the Lorenzo Snow couplet?

B. H. Roberts wrote of the King Follett Discourse,

“The doctrine here taught was afterwards thrown into the following aphorism by Lorenzo Snow: As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may become. This form of expressing the truth was doubtless original with Lorenzo Snow, but not the doctrine itself. That is contained in the prophet’s remarks above, text and context.”27

Faulconer and Morrison:

“For Latter-day Saints, to the notion that in some sense, perhaps even literally, we can become gods, Snow’s couplet adds the idea that God became God in the same way, moving from being human to being divine.

“On his return to Nauvoo, Lorenzo Snow told Joseph Smith of his experience, and the latter said, “That is a true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you.”25 Four years later, both the teaching of the second part of the couplet (doctrine since 1832) and, more significantly, the teaching of its first part (that God has become God, having once been a human being) were part of Smith’s public King Follett Sermon. Though Smith never refers to the couplet in the King Follett Discourse, for Latter-day Saints, Snow’s couplet has become the précis of what Smith teaches in the sermon.

“One could understand much of the subsequent discussion of the King Follett Sermon as attempts to clarify Joseph Smith’s sermon with Lorenzo Snow’s couplet as a stand-in. With the exception of the teaching about the resurrection of those who die in infancy, discussions of the other King Follett doctrines have not usually been directly linked to the sermon, presumably because they have other, canonical, warrants. Snow’s couplet, thus, becomes the vehicle on which most discussion of the King Follett Sermon is loaded.

“For Brigham Young, the teachings of the two halves of the couplet— “As man now is, God once was” and “As God now is, man may be”— were equally important and to be taken equally literally. For example, with regard to the first he said, “How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds, and when men were not passing through the same ordeals that we are now passing through.” And with regard to the second he said, “[Eternal matter] is brought together, organized, and capacitated to receive knowledge and intelligence, to be enthroned in glory, to be made angels, Gods.” Brigham Young is perhaps best known (or even notorious) for taking a quite literal view of the teaching. In one address he said, “Then will they become gods, even the sons of God; then will they become eternal fathers, eternal mothers, eternal sons and eternal daughters. . . . When they receive their crowns, their dominions, they then will be prepared to frame earth’s [sic] like unto ours and to people them in the same manner as we have been brought forth by our parents, by our Father and God.”28

Did the “history of God” idea perpetuate throughout LDS history?

Yes. James E. Faulconer and Susannah Morrison:

“With regard to the history of God, along with Joseph Smith, nineteenth-century Latter-day Saints often thought of God as having once been a human being and having become, by his experience, God. However, by the early twenty-first century (indeed by the 1950s at the latest), though the nineteenth-century teaching is not denied, the official position has tended in the direction of agnosticism toward it, with the significant exceptions mentioned earlier of the Melchizedek Priesthood and Relief Society manuals.”29

How strong is the parallel between the Father, the Son, and others?

This is disputed. How similar is the “manner” in which the Father, Son, Holy Ghost, and the rest of humanity “laid down” their lives and “took them up again”?

Smith teaches that the Son did what the Father did, “even in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again.” In one account, Smith says, “Children dwell and exercise power in the same form as they laid them down.” In the Sermon in the Grove, Joseph Smith taught, “We then also took bodies to lay them down and take them up again.”

BYU professor Rodney Turner observes:

“[O]pinion is divided as to how closely the Son’s career paralleled that of his Father . . . These and the Prophet’s earlier remarks are believed by some to infer that our God and his father once sacrificed their lives in a manner similar to the atonement of Jesus Christ. It is argued that the Prophet’s words suggest that these gods did not simply live and die as all men do, they ‘laid down’ and ‘took up’ their lives in the context of sacrifice . . .

“This extrapolated doctrine rests upon a somewhat inadequate, if not shaky, foundation. Indeed, it is highly doubtful. The basic process of laying down and taking up one’s life is similar for all even though it is not identical for all.”30

When has the sermon been published?

Some publications of the sermon:

  • “Conference Minutes,” Times and Seasons 5, no. 15 (August 15, 1844): 612–617. Link 1. Link 2.
  • William W. Phelps and John Taylor, eds., The Voice of Truth, 1844 (Nauvoo, IL: John Taylor, 1845), 59. Link.
  • “History of Joseph Smith,” Deseret News, July 8, 1857. Link.
  • Joseph Smith. “Character and Being of God, Etc.” In Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, 1–11. Liverpool: Asa Calkin, 1859.​ Link.
  • “History of Joseph Smith,” Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 23, no. 16 (April 20, 1861): 245. Link.
  • “Sermons and Writings of the Prophets: King Follett’s Funeral,” The Contributor 4, no. 7 (April 1883): 252–261. Link.
  • B. H. Roberts, “The King Follett Discourse,” Improvement Era 12, no. 3 (January 1909): 169–191. Link.
  • Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1938), 342–362. Link.
  • History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, vol. 6, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1950), 302–317.
  • James R. Clark, comp., Messages of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1833–1964, vol. 1 (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965), 209–225. Link.
  • Ensign
    • “The King Follett Sermon”, Ensign, April 1971, 13–17. Link.
    • “The King Follett Sermon” (Continued), Ensign, May 1971, 12–17. Link.
  • Alma P. Burton, comp., Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1977), 261–273. Link.
  • Stan Larson, “The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text,” BYU Studies Quarterly 18, no. 2 (Winter 1978): 179–226. Link.
  • Millet, Robert L., ed. Joseph Smith: Selected Sermons & Writings. New York: Paulist Press, 1989. Amazon.
  • William V. Smith, The King Follett Sermon: A Biography (Salt Lake City: By Common Consent Press, 2023), Appendix A: A New Critical Text of the King Follett Sermon. Amazon.

A more comprehensive publication history is available in William V. Smith, The King Follett Sermon: A Biography (Salt Lake City: By Common Consent Press, 2023). A chart based on his work is available here.

References

  1. Jeffrey Tucker, “Researching the King Follett Discourse”, September 14, 2021. Link. ↩︎
  2. “Estimates of attendance varied. Wilford Woodruff wrote that 20,000 persons were present. Woodruff’s journal was later redacted to read 10,000. Wilford Woodruff journal, April 7, 1844, MS 1352, CHL. Scott G. Kenney, Wilford Woodruff ’s Journal, 1834–1898, 2:382.” Footnote 4 in chapter 1 of The King Follett Sermon: A Biography, by William V. Smith. ↩︎
  3. Joseph Smith Papers. ↩︎
  4. The Doctrinal Impact of the King Follett Discourse, by Van Hale. ↩︎
  5. “The King Follett Sermon”, April 1971, Ensign. ↩︎
  6. Larson, Stan (1978) “The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text,” BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 18: Iss. 2, Article 7. Link. ↩︎
  7. “The King Follett Sermon”, April 1971, Ensign. ↩︎
  8. “History Of The Saints: Joseph Smith’s Greatest Sermon – The King Follett Discourse.” Link. ↩︎
  9. Smith, William V. “Introduction.” In The King Follett Sermon: A Biography. Salt Lake City, UT: BCC Press, 2023. Amazon. ↩︎
  10. The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral?, BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol 60, Issue 3. ↩︎
  11. The Doctrinal Impact of the King Follett Discourse, by Van Hale. ↩︎
  12. B. H. Roberts, “The King Follett Discourse: The Being and Kind of Being God Is; the Immortality of the Intelligence of Man,” Liahona, the Elders’ Journal, December 5, 1911, 376–77. Link. ↩︎
  13. The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text, BYU Studies Quarterly, Volume 18, Issue 2, 1978. ↩︎
  14. The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text, BYU Studies Quarterly, Volume 18, Issue 2, 1978. ↩︎
  15. The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral? ↩︎
  16. A critical text is a reconstruction made by comparing and combining different sources. I have added superscript formatting to source attributions. ↩︎
  17. Discourse, 30 January 1842, p. 3, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed March 18, 2025. Link. ↩︎
  18. “Christology and Theosis in the Revelations and Teachings of Joseph Smith”, by Jordan T. Watkins and Christopher James Blythe. Link. ↩︎
  19. Historical Introduction. Link. ↩︎
  20. Church History In The Fulness Of Times Student Manual. ↩︎
  21. “King Follett Discourse”, accessed March 5, 2025. Link. ↩︎
  22. “The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral?”, p. 5. Link. ↩︎
  23. “King Follett Discourse”, accessed March 5, 2025. Link. ↩︎
  24. Smith, William V. “Introduction.” In The King Follett Sermon: A Biography. Salt Lake City, UT: BCC Press, 2023. ↩︎
  25. The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral?, BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol 60, Issue 3. ↩︎
  26. What Is the Nature of God’s Progress?, BYU Studies Quarterly, Volume 60, Issue 3, 2021. Link. ↩︎
  27. The King Follett discourse: the being and kind of being God is : the immortality of the intelligence of man / by Joseph Smith ; marginal notes and references by B.H. Roberts. Link. ↩︎
  28. The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral?, BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol 60, Issue 3. ↩︎
  29. The King Follett Discourse: Pinnacle or Peripheral?, BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol 60, Issue 3. ↩︎
  30. “The Doctrine of the Firstborn and Only Begotten,” in The Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God [Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1989], 91-117. Link. ↩︎

See also