In his new book, “The Lincoln Hypothesis”, Timothy Ballard (former CIA and DHS operative) tries to conflate the fact that Abraham Lincoln checked out the Book of Mormon to mean he was a friend of the Latter-day Saints and brought this nation, “closer to heaven”.
For a different view of Lincoln, but still anti slavery, I encourage you to check out “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas DiLorenzo. You may find Lincoln was not the great promoter of liberty, for as the saying goes, “history is written by the victors who have hung the heroes”.
Another truism is that water (and ideas) are purer at the source. What did contemporary prophet of God, Brigham Young, have to say about Abraham Lincoln? Well, it isn’t pretty.
“Abe Lincoln was no friend of Christ, particularly, he had never raised his voice in our favor when he was aware that we were being persecuted. He was acquainted with Joseph & Hyrum, and had been a Master Freemason.” [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 220.]
“old ‘Abe’ the President of the U.S. has it in his mind to pitch in to us when he had got through with the South. President Kimball observed that men that he had met with, whether they had little or much of the Spirit of God, were in favor of the South.” [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 266.]
“Stephen A. Douglass was a far better man than President Abel Lincoln, for he knew his feelings were hostile to this people. Pres Wells acquiesced in these remarks. “[The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), pp. 277-78.]
if the Kingdom of God was not in the way, Abraham was [a] pretty good man, but he acted as if he would rather the Kingdom of God was out of the way; he was not the man to raise his voice in favor of Joseph Smith when his enemies were persecuting him. He with many others had assented to the deaths of innocent men, and through that he is subject to the influence of a wicked spirit. [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 284.]
24 August 1861: The feelings of the Brethren are gratified by hearing of the continued success which attends the Southern Confederacy. [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 285.]
We need not expect any thing sensible from them, for the spirit of wisdom is taken away from them. He remarked that Pres Lincoln and Congress appear not to realize that there is a war on hand. It is not so with the South—they are keen and alive. [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 316.]
I will see them in hell before I will raise an army for them. Abe Lincoln has sent these men here to prepare the way for an Army. An order has been sent to California to raise an army to come to Utah. This is the reason why Ball came back. I pray daily that the Lord will take away the reigns of Government of the wicked rulers and put it into the hands of the wise and good. I will see the day when those wicked rulers are wiped out. The Governor quoted my sayings about the Constitution I do and always have supported the Constitution but I am not in league with such cursed scoundrels as Abe Lincoln and his minions. They have sought our destruction from the beginning and Abe Lincoln has ordered an army to this Territory from California and that order passed over on these wires. [Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, vol. 5 (Midvale, Utah: Signature Books, 1984), pp. 605-6.]
The President [Brigham Young] discussed with him the wicked course the American Nation had taken with this people, observing the government was running into a despotism, and they were willing the government should be despotic while they were in power. The President observed that Abraham Lincoln was a sagacious man, but believed he was wicked. [The Office Journal of President Brigham Young: 1858-1863, Book D (Hanna, Ut.: Collier’s Publishing Co., 2006), p. 362.]
Lincoln actively fought against the Saints in his signing of the Cullom bill (against plural marriage) and worked with the Republican party in its efforts to stamp out one of what it called “the twin relics of barbarism”, helping the enemies of the Saints in their war against the Church.
With the facts of the feelings of Gods prophets as well as Lincolns actions against the Saints and his war against the Declaration of Independence, it seems a more probable hypothesis regarding Lincolns checking out of the Book of Mormon was to learn more about his enemy.
24 thoughts on ““The Lincoln Hypothesis” or “The Modern Lincoln Propagandist?””
Fantastic article! Thanks for sharing these quotes. The South was right, and they were absolutely NOT the racists they have been made out to be. I recommend everyone read “The rise and fall of the Confederate government” by Jefferson Davis, the President of the Confederacy to get the true story. Abe Lincoln was a power-hungry man who used anti-slavery as a front for despotism. For details, read this article, written by a Black man: The Truth about Abraham Lincoln & Slavery.
Do you deny the power of the Lord to change lives? A bad man need not remain so. I believe the Civil War was the nation’s consequence for rejecting Joseph’s inspired counsel:
“Pray Congress to pay every man a reasonable price for his slaves out of the surplus revenue arising from the sale of public lands and from the deduction of pay from the members of Congress.
“…were I the president of the United States, by the voice of a virtuous people…when that people petitioned to abolish slavery in the slave states, I would use all honorable means to have their prayers granted, and give liberty to the captive by paying the southern gentleman a reasonable equivalent for his property, that the whole nation might be free indeed!” pp 444-5, “Joseph Smith the Prophet”
One of the things I learned from reading Jefferson Davis’s book, which I mentioned above, is that they had already agreed not to take on any more slaves, so that the practice was already on a course to be phased out gradually, giving the slave owners time to develop new business models. This whole business about Lincoln trying to put an end to slavery is hogwash. They were already doing that on their own.
Watch the video:
It may help your understanding of Tim’s book. The discussion is NOT merely over slavery, it is over covenant-breaking and repentance. Lincoln had a change of heart during his presidency to recognize that the North and South were both at fault for the war.
I disagree with your main premise about Lincoln. Firstly, I am familiar with Tim’s research and I find that he presents clear supporting research that Abraham Lincoln was a promoter of liberty — especially following his “conversion” sometime after he checked out the Book of Mormon. You haven’t quoted from his book so I would suggest reading it through as you might find a clearer more accurate picture of Lincoln.
You ask for evidence. What about the fact that Abraham Lincoln appeared in the St. George Temple to Wilford Woodruff requesting his work be done? Do you really believe that a “power-hungry man that used anti-slavery as a front for despotism” would appear to Wilford Woodruff along with Washington and the other noble founders?
The evidence concurs that Lincoln did appear. James G. Bleak who was present wrote:
Also, it doesn’t make sense that the presidents of the U.S. and the eminent men wouldn’t have appeared. Why would President woodruff do the work needed for random eminent men and women while under the pressure of doing the signers?
Because the work needed to be done. We are to do it for everyone, as much as possible, are we not? They may have felt that these prominent people were possibly led by God to do the things they did, which would mean they were waiting for their work, too.
After all, EVERY president of the United States up until that time, except for two, Martin Van Buren and James Buchanan appeared. Those two presidents did NOT appear, probably because of their actions against the saints. Why did Lincoln appear despite his supposed action against the saints?
I find it interesting you don’t support the view of Lincoln that Tim Ballard’s book portrays, while the book you recommend “The Real Lincoln” seems to clearly paint a biased, troubling picture of Lincoln’s character. Take this from the description of the book:
Really? I haven’t read the book so I am obviously no authority on its material, but for someone to paint Lincoln as seeking after his own agenda, while sacrificing innocent lives in the process seems like revisionist nonsense. Tim Ballard’s book contains some excellent research on Lincoln, and combined with the fact that Lincoln appeared in the temple seems to present plausible evidence of his true character. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
Also, if you don’t want to purchase Tim’s book, you can learn about his approach to Lincoln through this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsRWGX5hpBI
Interestingly, Heber J. Grant stated the following:
There is no ‘pitting’ them against each other if you consider the possibility that Brigham was stating what was true at the time, and that Heber was stating what became true.
This perspective is utterly new to me! I’ve always been a history buff, but for some reason this perspective on Abe Lincoln never really came to my attention before. By the way, I’ve only been a member of the LDS Church a little over 3 years,and am looking forward to further spiritual progress. And as far as Abe Lincoln goes,are you familiar with the fact that the “Log Cabin” Republicans (I don’t know too much about this group,but my minimal understanding of them is that they are pushing the homosexual agenda in politics) claim that Abe Lincoln had sexual relations with other men??? This is not an area that I have much interest in researching, but did Brigham Young (or any other Prophet for that matter) have any insights on this topic??? Take care,and God Bless!!!
Thomas DiLorenzo’s book is a very well researched and referenced piece of work. I’ve read it twice and find all the evidence compelling with a contiguous timeline, not the hypothetical evidence knitting that Tim tries to do in his book. Let’s all remember, even evil men can make good choices every now and then, but it’s the sum of all their work that makes them contributors to liberty and the Kingdom or evil and obstructionist.
For a great bit of historical sleuthing and a keen insight into a scandal in the Lincoln presidency that could have taken him down had he lived, check out ‘Civil War Sabotage?’ from PBS History Detectives.
In 1865 a steamboat full of 1800 Union prisoners returning home from the infamous Andersonville prison exploded and sank in the Mississippi River in the middle of the night. The team concludes that the ship’s boiler probably exploded due to the the ship being loaded with ten times the number of passengers it was designed to hold. First-person documents reveal Lincoln protecting the criminal responsible for over-booking the boat against the army generals who tried twice to remove him.
I’m shocked at the lack of intelligence the commenters here have about Lincoln. Many knowledge gaps here. Sic Semper Tyrranis.
I recommend reading “Truth of the War Conspiracy of 1861” by H. W. Johnstone. Convincing contemporary evidence of Lincoln’s conspiracy to start a war with the South. Available at Amazon.
There is much confusion around Lincoln. Those wishing to find supporting evidence for the window-dressed version of Lincoln the hero have all of the academically blessed sources they wish so they can continue to believe exactly what they want to believe. Those that wish to believe Lincoln a monster will also find the “secret” counter-culture tyrant narrative with its accompanying evidence crafted for the ego stroking of those who believe themselves too smart to be fooled by the official story. Adherents to both narratives will claim they have researched, studied and own the truth. After a lifetime of wandering through both camps, and reading everything I could find, trying to separate fact and fiction, this is my conclusion.
Lincoln was in fact a monster and a hero. He was both. He was two different men. Term 1 Lincoln was put into power by a very evil agenda that sought the destruction of the United States. He fomented a war of their devising. Most Lincoln haters never make it to this point in their research, stopping once they have confirmed that Lincoln was in fact the architect and agent provocateur of the Civil War. They have their truth, and their supporting evidence. It is rather overwhelming. DiLorenzo and others have done great work exposing the despot antics of Term 1 Lincoln. They win the argument, hands down, that slavery was the excuse to rile up a war and not the cause of it. However, many anti-Lincoln researchers, in their romanticized dreams of a free and prosperous south, miss the big picture of what was going on behind the scenes in Europe and around the world. They are surprisingly content to leave Lincoln as the planner, instigator, and perpetrator of the Civil War. Most never venture into the European power plays, the Russian Czars, and most importantly, the amazing contradictions and facts of Term 2 Lincoln. If they do, it is to try and deprecate, dismiss, or de-couple them from the events going on in America at that time. Usually they are simply ignored.
The Civil War was to be the end of this country, a war of attrition for both the North and South. There was never going to be a free and independent South. The states were to be divided up and returned to governance under European powers. Abraham Lincoln, Term 1, was the inside man that facilitated the war to accomplish this. He was a traitor to our nation and people, both North and South. It would have worked, but something happened to Mr. Lincoln toward the end of his 1st term.
Careful study shows that Term 1 Lincoln and Term 2 Lincoln are not the same man. Term 1 Lincoln was just about every bad thing the South said about him. He was a ribald, constitution shredding aggressor. Moving into Term 2 reveals a man of sorrow, weighed down by grief and sick of the bloodshed. Term 2 Lincoln did what no front-man, propped-up, would-be-tyrant in history has ever done. He cut his puppet strings and threw them back in the face of his handlers and began unraveling the very plans he helped lay. Term 2 Lincoln went to war with the very same European bankers he brought in. He ousted nearly every member of his KGC (Rothschild) riddled cabinet, including his own vice president. He quickly and brutally ended the war. The victorious, tyrant Lincoln sent the enemy soldiers and generals home–with their weapons–and immediately sent troops to both the northern and southern borders to confront the British and French forces poised for invasion.
I still do not know what happened to Mr. Lincoln that caused his change of heart. Rumors speak of his dead son appearing to him and possibly showing him the great evil he was doing. Maybe he realized it himself. I really don’t know. We know he kept detailed personal journals. They were supposedly never found after his death. What I do know is that Mr. Lincoln was absolutely guilty of some of the most horrendous crimes against humanity imaginable. I also believe he was doing what he was groomed and trained to do. He did exactly what was expected of him up to the point where he refused to go another step in that direction. I believe he stopped knowing it would cost him his life. I am sickened by all the evil he did, but I also acknowledge the true heroism of the man not told in the approved textbooks, nor in the demonized alternate histories shallowly buried to be discovered, canonized and preached by anti-Lincoln acolytes who always become so certain of the their discovered, hidden truths that they never realize they are also being manipulated and spoon fed, just as much as the believers of the mainstream narrative they so despise. Both narratives are designed to keep the dangerous secret of who Abraham Lincoln really was and why he started and ended the Civil War.
The same powers that sought the overthrow of our nation back then are alive and well today. They don’t care if you worship the default emancipator, glorified in the approved history books, or call him out as the would-be despot. Either story is acceptable. The story you are not allowed to know is how Lincoln betrayed the most powerful men on earth at the time, and in doing so, saved both the North and South and kept America on a path that continues to be a thorn in their side. I celebrate that man.
I don’t know how you can honestly say the term 2 was different than term 1, which is likely why you cast aspersions on anyone that disagrees with your assertions. His refusal to allow the nations he forced to stay in the Union to vote on amendments they’d be forced to live by was inexcusably tyrannical. Repentence means to not only feel sorrow, but to make right. He, as you say, brutally “finished” the war, not allowing the south to remain free as our Founders did from England. There was no true repentance. There were conspirators on both sides of the war, but Lincoln never disavowed the secret societies he was a part of and helped start the Republican party and propel him to power.
It is his actions before, during and after that have lead to the situation we are in today that is less and less a “thorn” in the side of the satanic conspiracy
So many people are in love with their hatred of Lincoln that they cannot see the man behind the monster.
Yes, Lincoln was tyrannical. I don’t dispute that. But why? I think at first, he was following the script he was given. Later, at the end of the war, I believed he felt he had no choice. I suspect you hold a notion that the South would have survived as a free nation on its own and the two nations could have gone their separate ways? I don’t blame you. I used to believe that. But I think Lincoln knew what a farce that was. Neither the North or the South would have survived independently. Both would have been gutted, divided up and handed back to European powers. That was the plan. Lincoln knew it.
We don’t know what Lincoln renounced or did not renounce. His journals are gone. What we do know is that his Term 1 cabinet was full of KGC members and that KGC was Rothschild funded. We know Lincoln and many KGC associates and cabinet members were privately enriching themselves from the war. We know that Booth was a KGC member.(Higham) Why would Term 1 Lincoln have a KGC filled cabinet? KGC was very pro-south. Why would Lincoln heading into Term 2 replace almost his entire cabinet and disband many of the organizations profiting from the war and illicit trade? Why would KGC not have killed Lincoln Term 1, before he could abruptly end the war and their honey pots? My conclusion is that Lincoln stabbed his co-conspirators in the back. He only would have done that if he had had some sort of massive change of heart. You are free to reach a different conclusion.
Brigham Young was quite right in his assessment of Lincoln. I find no fault with his judgments. However, they have to be reconciled with the praise other prophets later gave to Lincoln. I don’t know that Lincoln fully repented. I don’t know that he could. Not in this life. He was a monster. But if a person is groomed and trained to be a monster, acts the monster, and then realizes at the end the error of their ways and tries, even for a moment, even in error to undo some of the damage they have caused, are they still eternally damned in your kingdom?
I think your focus on only one of the secret society branches clouds the bigger picture of defending someone the conspirator text books want us to worship. The KGC was only one tentacle of the conspiracy in operation. Sometimes fiction gives a good analogy, so look at the actions of the Emperor in the Star Wars prequels. He stabbed his co conspirators (Trade fed) in the back. Does that mean he repented? Not even a little. “To the Victors Go The Myths and Monuments” is a great neutral look at the secret societies Lincoln was a part of. Was Lincoln the mastermind? No. Did he repent? I see no evidence.
Yes, I have the JBS book. It is a good book, especially for those who have only ever heard the official Lincoln story. It is far from the complete story. I have spent a lifetime reading through all the available Lincoln literature. I see evidence of repentance all over in the man’s letters, his speeches and reports on his character from those who knew him personally. Something happened to Abe Lincoln that changed him leading up to his 2nd Term. I don’t expect anybody so in love with their Lincoln hatred to ever forgive the man or even allow for the possibility of his repentance. It is much too delicious to hate him. Since you like Star Wars analogies so much, what evidence would you have that Vader ever repented had you not seen it yourself? All the evidence convicts him as the monster he was. Not having Lincoln’s journals, we know very little about his private thoughts, only what others say he thought. The fact is that he instigated the national banking act that gave the Rothschilds the control they wanted. Term 2 he fought against the very policies he instigated. Why would he do that? Why would he turn and bite the hand that fed him? For those with eyes to see, there is the monster behind the myth. For those with hearts, there is more than enough evidence to see the broken hearted man behind the monster.
you keep saying you see evidence, but I have not seen you provide it.
Not provided evidence? You really missed the whole picture, or you truly have no interest in evidence.
1. Lincoln the tyrant, did what no tyrant has ever done. He let the enemy soldiers go home without taking away their guns, or hanging their generals. Why he did this is still debated to this day. Jefferson Davis himself said he would have hanged every northern general had he won.
2. National Bank Act 1863. Term 1 Lincoln rammed it through congress with the support of Rothschild stooges. Term 2 Lincoln reversed himself and fought like a demon to get the bankers out. Again, why he did this is still being debated.
3. Lincoln cleaned out his cabinet that was full of Rothschild handlers. Why?
4. Book after book notes that Lincoln moving into Term 2 became a very different man. He gave up the ribald humor that was his hallmark. Why?
5. Lincoln started writing his own speeches that were very different in tone from early speeches. Why?
6. He sent troops to both the northern and southern borders in direct opposition to the demands of the bankers. Why?
7. He fought to return the country to the gold standard that he shredded. Why?
Why would a puppet tyrant do any of these things? What a pathetic tyrant.
I don’t need to prove any of these evidences. These are well known and documented key facts of Lincoln’s life. You can claim my opinions, interpretations or conclusions are faulty, and I am happy to have that debate. But you cannot claim I have provided no evidence when the evidence is some of the biggest, most well known events in history whose motivations are still being debated. Yet, I somehow doubt you are interested in evidence, or re-examining the evidence you believe supports your concrete views. You’ve drawn your conclusions based on whatever it is you call your research. That is fine. I’m glad you know that Lincoln was not the great, whitewashed hero of victor history. It is hard getting people to that point of understanding.
There are hundreds of other subtle evidences of a repentant Lincoln that one sees when spending a lifetime immersed in the literature. It took many years and many books before I quit hating the man myself. I don’t expect anybody in this forum to have the esoteric knowledge to discuss the finer points, but I would expect at least a few people to understand the basic evidences of his Term 2 character change that are well know and written about, and consider a new interpretation they have likely never thought of or heard before. Those that are intrigued will go and do their own research. Those not interested will simply demand I prove it, and go on believing whatever they want.
Lincoln ended a war that was not supposed to be ended or won, and in doing so saved both the North and the South from an imminent invasion neither would have withstood alone. I celebrate that man. I am sorry you cannot see it right now, but hope you will someday.
Again thank you for this truly enlightening information