JOEL - The accuracy and reliability of the Journal of Discourses has been brought under question because of the way articles were witten down in shorthand and then sometime later rewritten into a more readable script. Mistakes could have been made and some important words or concepts left out. But we need to look at what Brigham Young actually said in its context in the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 171:
"But as it was in the days of our Savior, so was it in the advent of this new dispensation. It was not in accordance with the notions, traditions, and pre-conceived ideas of the American people. The messenger did not come to an eminent divine of any of the so-called orthodoxy, he did not adopt their interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven in power and great glory, nor send his messengers panoplied with aught else than the truth of heaven, to communicate to the meek, the lowly, the youth of humble origin, the sincere enquirer after the knowledge of God. But he did send his angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith, Jr., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong; that they were following the precepts of men instead of the Lord Jesus; that he had a work for him to perform, inasmuch as he should prove faithful before him."
Brigham does not deny that the Lord came nor that he sent angels, but he is saying that these two things did not occur in a big and flashy way for all to see. They were personal and private manifestations. He then goes on to say that God did indeed send an angel to Joseph, and that God informed Joseph that he should not join any sect. (If he had meant that an angel told Joseph not to join any church, the phrase "and informed him" should be "who informed him.") The angel Brigham was talking about is of course Moroni.
Besides this, the above JofD quote was delivered in 1855. The official "First Vision" story was written in 1838(which mentions both God and Jesus). The Brigham Young quote and many other quotes critics use to question the presence of God and Jesus in the first vision were spoken many years after the 1838 version was published. So of course Brigham Young knew about the appearance of God and Jesus to Joseph Smith. When Brigham and others spoke of angels visiting Joseph and what he learned from them, they were talking about all the occurances of any heavenly being who appeared to him, which would include God, Jesus, Moroni, John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John, etc.
Jacob also called God an "angel" in Genesis 48: 15,16:
"God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day. The Angel which redeemed me from all evil."

KB - Is there any evidence that it's A BAD THING to be a sign seeker? I know it says somewhere that one shouldn't seek signs, however, i also know that somewhere statements such as "it will be a sign unto you" are made. Then there is the doubting thomas story. I know it says some other guy is more blessed because he believed without seeing, but was Thomas damned for seeing and then believing? Even the mormon church implements what one could call a version of sign seeking (read BOM / pray / get answer via burning of the bosom (the sign)).
One example : the church claims that the priesthood, and i suppose just good LDS folk who pray, can perform certain acts (blessings, etc.), that implicitly others cannot perform. I also assume that these acts would have some sort of detectable results (different than that seen from a control herd of atheists with no blessing). these sorts of things seem easily quantifiable, verifiable, and demonstrable. I have commented to people that demonstrations of this ability would be an invaluable missionary tool. thats when i get the "don't seek signs" story.
I know most people are saved without it, but there are probably a fair number who would respond positively to this evidence who otherwise would question (such as myself).

JOEL - I understand what you are saying. I am a scientist by profession. I solve problems by performing experiments and make conclusions based on the hard tangible evidence of my results. But when it comes to religion I know that there is not always going to be that evidence. LDS believe that one of the main reasons we are here on this earth is to see if we can live by faith rather than by tangible proof. We are told to first exercise a little faith and believe that something told to us by God or one of His servants is true; to live that principle perhaps not even knowing why; then when the blessings come after living it we can take comfort in the fact that what we first believed in was indeed true. The more experience we have doing this the stronger our faith becomes.
There is nothing wrong about looking for a little validation in something you want to believe. But if all our beliefs were based on signs or proofs before you believed, it would no longer be a religion; it would be a science. Like the little elf said in the movie "The Santa Clause": "Seeing isn't believing, believing is seeing". Your reading the Book of Mormon example is a good one. The skeptic would place the burdon on someone else and require them to provide tangible proof that the Book is true. On the other hand, one who has some faith would read the book first, study it over in his mind, and then pray to God and ask if it is true. God confirms the truth of it through the Holy Ghost(the sign). This is the correct approach; the first one is that of a sign seeker. One believes first then gets the sign; the other wants the sign first before he will believe. The second one will almost always be disappointed.
There is a saying coined by one of our prophets, "Faith preceeds the miracle". There is an eternal law of heaven that requires one to demonstrate the faith first before receiving the sign that vindicates the faith. When that happens our faith grows stronger which helps us to believe more things and grow closer to God. I have seen my share of miracles, but in every case they came after I exercised the faith, believing and hoping and praying that God would make it happen. And the miracles have come. I have tried telling people not of our faith about these miracles, as you suggest, but usually they give me a blank look and say, "That's nice" and continue on in their disbelief. I have decided to not share such sacred things like that with people anymore unless they really are interested and are obviously willing and ready to believe me. It seems many people need to see the sign for themselves rather than taking my word for it. But rarely has God shown signs to disbelievers except for a few times when He really needed to get their attention on a grand scale; like parting the Red Sea for example, or the plagues of Egypt.
Jesus said: "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign;" (Matt. 16:4) This is because these people have lost the spiritual quality of exercising faith in something. They only respond to the physical tangible satisfaction of their appetites, rather than believing in something simply because God has told them. I don't believe that Thomas was damned for what he did. I think Jesus was just trying to teach an important concept when He said:
"Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." (John 20:29) If we want the blessings we need to believe first.
I guess it all depends on whether or not you have even a small desire to believe that there is a God and a heaven. No one will ever be completely convinced of this simply by seeing signs and miracles. History has proven this. A change must take place inside the person, where they humble themselves and decide to show just a little faith in something at first, and work on it till it grows. When done in this way the Holy Ghost will bear witness to the person of the truthfulness of it in a way more convincing than a sign would provide.
As Jesus said: "It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it." (Luke 13:19) What is unique about a mustard seed is that it is "the least of all seeds(very small): but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs"(Matt 13:32) If someone exhibits only a tiny amount of faith in God and continues to nourish it and let it grow, it can become a great and powerful force in their life. And they will begin to know with more sureness that there is a God and a heaven and that we can be with Him there someday.