Divine Claims in the Early Years
THE
FIRST VISION
There
are many versions of Joseph’s first vision story. For example, the
first official version that Joseph Smith wrote was in 1832. It
states that through his thorough study of the Bible between the ages
of 12 to 15 he “found
that [mankind] did not come unto the Lord but that they had
apostatised from the true and liveing faith and there was no society
or denomination that built upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ as
recorded in the new testament.”1 He
goes on to say that in his 16th
year he went to pray to the Lord for mercy and Jesus Christ appeared
to him and told him his sins were forgiven. An 1835 account talks of
him seeing many angels, but does not mention seeing God or Jesus
Christ. The 1838 version is the one in the Pearl of Great Price in
the LDS scriptures. In the 1838 account, Joseph’s story changed. He is
no longer convinced by his Bible reading that not a single
church is true. Instead he mentions attending many churches and
wondering if one or any were true. It is for the purpose of getting
an answer to know which church to join that Joseph says he went to
pray. “My
object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the
sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner,
therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak,
than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of
all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into
my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join. I was
answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and
the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an
abomination in his sight; that those proffesors[sic] were all
corrupt; that ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their
hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of
men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.’”2 I
find it interesting that he says that “it had never entered into
[his] heart” that all Christian sects “were wrong,” when that
clearly contradicts his testimony in 1832 where the belief that no
denomination “built upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ” is exactly
what led him to pray in the first place. So, did he do a thorough
study of the Bible between 12 and 15 years of age or not? There are
many other versions of the first vision that are mostly a mish-mesh
of these two accounts. I will let others seek them out if they wish
to read them. They can be found online. Although all are very
different, one can claim that most of the facts still fit if you
consider that he may just be telling part of the story each time. Some
parts are completely discrepant, but most can be argued around.
However, I would like to point out that the accuracy of memory tends
to get worse through the years. Joseph’s first vision story
evolved. Which account is more likely to be closer to reality, the
first telling or the telling 18 years after the claimed event? The
1832 account of the first vision is the first record we have that
Joseph claimed to be visited by Jesus 12 years earlier. Prior to
1835, there isn't a single first vision account that mentions more
than a single heavenly being. It isn't until the 1838 version of the
first vision that Joseph explicitly implies that he was visited by
God as well as Jesus. With our current resources, including the
records of Joseph's family members, this claim had never before been
stated in the 18 years since it was supposed to have happened. However,
Joseph states that after telling people about his heavenly
experience, “I
soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great
deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was
the cause of great persecution which continued to increase; and
though I was an obscure boy, only between fourteen and fifteen years
of age, and my circumstances in life such as to make a boy of no
consequence in the world, yet men of high standing would take notice
sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter
persecution; and this was common among all the sects—all united to
persecute me.”3
Contrary
to Joseph’s statements, there is no record of anyone hearing about
this vision or of any persecution that went on. Even LDS researchers
concede this point: “There
is little if any evidence, however, that by the early 1830s Joseph
Smith was telling the story in public. At least if he were telling
it, no one seemed to consider it important enough to have recorded it
at the time, and no one was criticizing him for it. Not even in his
own history did Joseph Smith mention being criticized in this period
for telling the story of the First Vision.”4 In
fact, public opinion did not seem very strongly in favor or
against him. Orasmus Turner who was in a debate club with Joseph
remembers him as a “lounging idle,” but also containing “some
very laudable aspirations.” He further states that Joseph, “after
catching a spark of Methodism ... became a very passable exhorter in
evening meetings.”5 This
means that despite Joseph’s claims that persecuting him “was
common among all the sects,” all of them being united against him,
the Methodists were at least not persecuting him. They were letting
him preach! Another man that worked in a store in Joseph’s area
recalls that, “Joe
had a jovial, easy, don’t care way about him that made him a lot of
warm friends. He was a good talker, and would have made a fine stump
speaker if he had had the training. He was known among the young men
that I associated with as a romancer of the first water.”6
(“Stump speaker” = comedy act in a minstrel show. “Romancer of
the first water” = sweet talker.) Both of these accounts are
examples of a fairly friendly public attitude toward Joseph. It is
also worth noting that his participation in debate clubs, his being a
“passable exhorter” and a “good talker” that would have made
a “fine stump speaker,” along with a multitude of other evidence
shows that Emma Smith’s later statement that, “Joseph
Smith . . . could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well
worded letter; let alone dictating a book like the book of Mormon”7
was not accurate. A boy like that could have very easily dictated a
letter.
KNOWLEDGE
OF ANCIENT AMERICA
The
"View of the Hebrews” is
a book that
a man named Ethan Smith (no relation to Joseph) published in 1823. It
tells of a group from the lost tribes of Israel that leave Israel,
come to the Americas and begin to live. The group splits up
into two peoples. One of them is civilized, the other is savage.
The civilized portion builds large cities and fortifications and
cultivates the land. They also keep a written language and a
record of their people on plates. The savage portion turns to a
life of hunting and ease. These two groups, due to rage and
jealousy, fight often and, after years of wars and contentions, the
more savage group eventually destroys the more civilized group.
It is the savage group that remains when the Europeans arrive on this
continent. He goes into much more detail about the culture, religion
and their way of life in general, but I feel the outline is enough
(more parallels can be found by searching online). Also, he states
that a part of his record was obtained after digging up yellow
parchments from a place called Indian Hill and then having them
translated. As LDS general authority B. H. Roberts (President of the
Seventy) admits in his own personal writings, which have since been
published, “One
acquainted with Book of Mormon historical events will recognize in
all this an outline of the Book of Mormon ‘history,’ what else
there is would be merely detail.”8 “View
of the Hebrews” is published in the area around where
Joseph Smith is living and the writer, Ethan Smith, is a pastor for
the congregation that Oliver Cowdery (Joseph’s chief scribe for the
Book of Mormon) attends.9 This
story is not just found in the “View of the Hebrews,” but
is a common belief of the time and is taught by the religious
preachers. As another example of the common belief that the Native
Americans were part of the lost tribes of Israel, a Jewish rabbi, M.
M. Noah, in speaking about the Native Americans states in Joseph’s
hometown newspaper, the Wayne Sentinel (which Joseph’s father
subscribed to), on October 11, 1825 that, “If
the tribes could be brought together, could be made sensible of their
origin, could be civilized, and restored to their long lost brethren,
what joy to our people!”10
Towards
the end of the year that "View of the Hebrews" is first
published, Joseph begins to tell stories of the ancient inhabitants
of this continent at home. His mother records: "During
our
evening
conversations,
Joseph
would
occasionally
give
us
some of
the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe
the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of
travelling, and their animals upon which they rode; their cities,
their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and
also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease,
seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them."11
SEER
Around
this time, Joseph had found a stone that he would look into and see
things. He later called it his seer stone. To the general
public, he became known as a glass looker. One account says
that he found the stone while digging a well. Another account
says that he was directed to his stone by borrowing the seer stone of
a girl in his area, Sally Chase, who was also a glass looker. Because
one is described as “whitish” and the other as brown,
some believe that there were two stones.12
After finding his stone(s), Joseph begins to go out with his stone
and take people to look for treasure. In 1826, he was brought up on
charges of disorderly conduct. “According
to the Laws
of the State of New-York,
a disorderly person includes, "All jugglersand
all persons pretending to have skill in physiognomy, palmistry, or
like crafty science, or pretending to tell fortunes, or to discover
where lost goods may be found … shall be deemed and adjudged
disorderly persons.”13
(Apparently, such superstitions were common back then, and it was
enough of a problem that it needed to be part of the law.) A number
of witnesses came forward. Some of them hostile, because Joseph
promised to lead them to treasure and no treasure was ever found.
Other witnesses were friendly in the sense that they believed Joseph
did have those abilities even though he never found them treasure. One
man tells a tale of Joseph looking at his stone in a hat and
leading them to a spot where he said to dig. The man says that they
started digging and hit something that sounded like wood. Before
continuing, Joseph said to wait because it was a treasure chest that
two Indians buried and one had killed the other, so there was an
enchantment/curse on it. They eventually began digging again, but
the man says that the chest kept sinking out of site, so they could
never retrieve it.14 As a
side note, this is reminiscent of stories in the Book of Mormon
of treasure that would disappear because the treasure and the land
were cursed. (I go into more detail about the trial in my Secular
History section)
THE
BOOK OF MORMON
It
is hard to know what happened between 1826 and 1829. A few accounts
state that Sidney Rigdon came to town in 1827 and, shortly after
that, talk of Joseph having found plates started spreading. If
Sidney did show up during this period, most of their meetings would
have been done in secret. This is significant, because many people
believe that Sidney was the author, or at least main author, of the
Book of Mormon (If the Book of Mormon was not really a translation of
ancient text, I believe that Joseph would have had to have put some
input into its writing since Lehi’s dream was virtually the very
same dream Joseph’s father had when Joseph was 6 years old.). Some
believe the manuscript for the Book of Mormon was given to Joseph in
1827 and that the translation process was really just Joseph reading
a few pages of the written manuscript at a time. This ties into the
“Spalding Manuscript” that some may have heard about. Like “View
of the Hebrews,” it is also considered a possible inspiration for
the Book of Mormon. Sidney shared a post office with Solomon
Spalding, as well as frequented the same print shop. Spalding’s
manuscript disappeared for a time and he is reported to have believed
that Rigdon took it. Some believe the Spalding Manuscript may have
been an inspiration for the general idea of the Book of Mormon, while
the theology of the Book of Mormon is closely tied to the teachings
and phraseology of Rigdon’s sermons. I think that the Spalding
Manuscript link is an unnecessary one since Sidney, being a preacher,
would have most certainly been familiar with the “View of the
Hebrews” teachings and the Bible. A recent computer analysis
printed in Literary
and Linguistic Computing
has also linked Rigdon’s writings to the Book of Mormon as well.15 (If
someone wishes to research into the Rigdon authorship theory
further, this
seems like a very good place to start.)
The
translation process is a fascinating one. Many people don’t know
this, but Joseph did not look at the plates at all during the
dictation process. They remained covered on the table in front of
him in a box or were not even in the room while he put his previously
mentioned seer stone into a hat and dictated the words.16 There
is also a matter of putting up a blanket to cover the
translation process, but it is not always clear where the blanket was
and who could actually see Joseph during this process. Martin Harris
was Joseph’s scribe before Oliver Cowdery. In an account told by
an acquaintance of Martin Harris, it is stated that, “Although
in the same room, a thick curtain or blanket was suspended between
them, and Smith concealed behind the blanket”
and that Joseph would “look
through his spectacles, or transparent stones, and would then write
down or repeat what he saw, which, when repeated aloud, was written
down by Harris, who sat on the other side of the suspended blanket.
Harris was told that it would arouse the most terrible divine
displeasure, if he should attempt to draw near the sacred chest, or
look at Smith while engaged in the work of decyphering the mysterious
characters.” (The “sacred chest” was
where the plates were kept.) Those who
do not believe Joseph actually translated any plates believe that he
was reading from pages already written, either hidden in the hat or
under/behind the blanket (a few think he may have had a photographic
memory, but that is a rare talent). Here are a few accounts of the
dictation process:
Joseph
Knight
(autograph [between 1833 and 1847]): But if it was not Spelt rite
it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous.
Emma
Smith (Edmund
Briggs interview, 1856): When my husband was translating the Book
of Mormon, I wrote a part of it, as he dictated each sentence, word
for word, and when he came to proper names he could not pronounce, or
long words, he spelled them out, and while I was writing them, if I
made a mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling,
although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down
at the time.
Martin
Harris
(Edward Stevenson's 1881 account): By aid of the seer stone,
sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by
Martin, and when finished he would say, "Written," and if
correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear
in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until
corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the
plates, precisely in the language then used.
David
Whitmer (Eri
Mullin interview, 1874):
. . . the words would appear, and if he failed to spell the word
right, it would stay till it was spelled right, then pass away;
another come, and so on.17
These
testimonies are incredible indeed, but untrue. The original
manuscript of the Book of Mormon contains thousands of spelling and
grammar errors. The current edition of the Book of Mormon also
includes the removal of some phrases that were written in the
original manuscript and the addition of other words and phrases (some
of the phrases didn’t make sense or were superfluous). Also, there
was even a necessary name change when the book mentions a living King
Mosiah when King Mosiah was already dead by that point. In two
verses of the current Book of Mormon, the name King Mosiah has been
changed to the still-alive King Benjamin.18 These
can be checked yourself since an RLDS member has scanned the
1828 Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon and put it on the
internet.19
SIDNEY
RIGDON and ALTERED REVELATIONS
I
wasn't going to discuss the Sidney Rigdon theory but decided to add a
section about it because it was able to capture my attention. So, I
mentioned that some believe that Sidney Rigdon wrote the Book of
Mormon and Joseph then dictated it. Sidney was a Campbellite
minister before joining the church. One of the thee witnesses of the
Book of Mormon, David Whitmer, declares “Rigdon
was a thorough Bible scholar, a man of fine education, and a powerful
orator. He soon worked himself deep into Brother Joseph’s
affections, and had more influence over him than any other man
living.”20Although
not
always mentioned a lot, Sidney was actually Joseph’s right hand
man throughout most of the years, including helping with work on the
Book of Abraham and the JST of the Bible, which includes the Book of
Moses. One witness mentions that Sidney wanted Joseph to be the
young prophet to bring forth the book while he controlled things
behind the scenes. He was willing to be the mastermind behind the
prophet. This concept is interesting to me right now because I just
started reading the Book of Mormon again. First, I noticed that, if
actually written in the 1820s, 11 of the 22 chapters in I Nephi are
actually stories from history, the New Testament, or chapters out of
Isaiah. Then I reached II Nephi 3. In reading it, I saw something
that, if the book was actually written by Sidney, is very
fascinating. It seems that Sidney is trying to tell Joseph his
place. It is discussing a prophecy by Joseph who was sold into
Egypt. Joseph in Egypt states that another Joseph [Smith] will be
raised up and bring forth the Book of Mormon to the remnant of Lehi’s
seed.
“7
Yea, Joseph truly said: Thus saith the Lord unto me: A choice seer
will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and he shall be
esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins. And unto him will I
give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins,
his brethren, which shall be of great worth unto them, even to the
bringing of them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made
with thy fathers.
8And I
will give unto him a commandment that he shall do none other work,
save the work which I shall command him.
And I will make him great in mine eyes; for he shall do my work.”21
Those
verses seem to be telling Joseph to not overstep his bounds, but what
are those bounds? Well, Lehi mentions that Joseph in Egypt
prophesied of Moses and Aaron and compares Joseph Smith’s position
to Moses’ and another person’s position to Aaron’s:
“17.
And the Lord hath said: I will raise up a Moses; and I will give
power unto him in a rod; and I will give judgment unto him in
writing. Yet I will not loose his tongue, that he shall speak
much, for I will not make him mighty in speaking. But I will
write unto him my law, by the finger of mine own hand; and I
will
make a spokesman for him.
18
And the Lord said unto me also: I will raise up unto the fruit of thy
loins; and I will make for him a spokesman. And I, behold, I will
give unto him that he
shall write the writing of the fruit of thy loins,
unto the fruit of thy loins; and
the spokesman of thy loins shall declare it.”22
To
me, it sounds like someone is telling Joseph where he stands. Joseph
will bring forth the writings, but he “will not loose his tongue.” The
Lord is telling Joseph that he will NOT be mighty in speaking,
just like Moses wasn’t (see Exodus 4:10). Joseph was to bring
forth the word of God, but he was then supposed to pass it on to a
spokesman. It is for the spokesman to do the talking, not Joseph. When
I read this, it blew me away. I felt like it was so clear what
it meant. I felt like it was Sidney saying, “Look, Joseph, you
will be the person set up as the boy prophet who translates God’s
word, but after that, I will do the talking.” The only other time
that I can think of where an idea struck me so powerfully was when I
read the 6th
Harry Potter book (Don’t laugh). When I read the 6th
book, there was a conversation between Harry and Dumbledore where the
idea just struck me that Snape was in love with Harry’s mother. When
the idea struck me, I knew it had to be right, because it fit
perfectly. I even wrote a blog about it before the 7th
book came out, in order to prove that I had come up with it on my
own. (Sorry if I spoiled the Harry Potter movies for anyone.) Anyway,
when I read those verses, that is how I felt. I decided that
I couldn’t have been the only one to make that connection, so I
searched online and returned to the Sidney Rigdon site that I sited
above. This passage had indeed been noticed by others and the
connection had been explored further. So, this concept, written in
the Book of Mormon, is repeated in an 1829 revelation published in
the 1833 Book of Commandments (the precursor to the Doctrine and
Covenants- a book containing modern LDS revelations):
“I
the lord am God, and I have given these things unto my servant
Joseph, and I have commanded him that he should stand as a witness of
these things, nevertheless I have caused him that he should enter
into a covenant with me, that he should not show them except I
command him, and he has no power over them except I grant it unto
him; and he
has
a
gift
to
translate
the
book,
andI have
commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will
grant him no other gift.”23
Again,
if you pretend that Sidney is the one writing these things, then he
is once again telling Joseph that his place is to translate and
nothing more. Interestingly, both the prophecy by Joseph in Egypt
and the words from the Lord turned out to be wrong in these verses,
because Joseph Smith turned out to be a much more charismatic and
dynamic individual than anticipated. Joseph was not content with a
low profile position and he began to take on more authority himself.
Due to this, it is interesting to note that the 1829 revelation from
the Lord published in the Book of Commandments was altered when
included in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants (D&C). By 1835,
Joseph had clearly established himself as the figure head of the
church and taken on many more roles than just translator. It is
interesting to see how the wording was changed:
“I
the Lord am God, and have given these things unto you, my servant
Joseph Smith, jr. and have commanded you that you shall stand as a
witness of these things, and I have caused you that you should enter
into a covenant with me that you should not show them except to those
persons to whom I command you; and you have no power over them except
I grant it unto you. And you have a gift to translate the plates;
and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you,
and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until
my purpose is fulfilled in this;
for I grant unto you no other gift until
it is finished.”24
With
those alterations, the meaning of the verse of scripture is changed
completely. I thought that was fascinating and was completely
convinced of the significance. I mentioned this idea to a few
people, but they started to use my own arguments against me. I had
told them that people see what they want to see, they find meaning
when they are looking for it. I had said that if people were taught
growing up that the play Hamlet or Macbeth was written by revelation,
then each time they read it, they would find something new that God
wanted them to know. It would be extra profound to them, not because
of the godly nature of the book, but because of their own keenness of
mind and desire to find a lesson they can learn. When I stated my
Sidney theory to them, they argued that I was just seeing what I
wanted to see. I knew they were wrong, but it was hard to argue
around my own logic. I just knew that this case was different,
because it fit the facts so perfectly. My theory of Sidney being the
“spokesman” mentioned in II Nephi was ultimately vindicated when
I found these verses in D&C 100:
“9
And it is expedient in me that you, my servant Sidney, should be a
spokesman unto this people; yea, verily, I will ordain you unto this
calling, even to be a spokesman unto my servant Joseph. 10
And I will give unto him power to be mighty in testimony. 11
And I will give unto thee power to be mighty in expounding all
scriptures, that thou mayest be a spokesman unto him, and he shall be
a revelator unto thee, that thou mayest know the certainty of all
things pertaining to the things of my kingdom on the earth.”25
I
was really excited when I found that verse. I saw all of these
scriptures as Sidney’s attempts at keeping Joseph in his place. He
did not succeed. Joseph quickly became the premier leader and Sidney
was forced to take a backseat. Twice through the years, Sidney
attempted to take the main spot from Joseph, but failed. He also
attempted to claim leadership after Joseph’s death, but once again
failed. During those times, he twice threatened to “expose the
secrets of the church.” In 1863, three Rigdonites wrote what is
called “Rigdon’s Appeal” to the Latter-Day Saints. It clearly
shows what the vision was that Rigdon had in mind for how the Kingdom
of God was to be run:
“ The
Lord had said, in the Book of Mormon, that he would raise up to
Joseph Smith a spokesman; and the Spirit said, in the Book of
Doctrine and Covenants, that Sidney Rigdon was that spokesman. The
case then stands thus: Joseph Smith was to translate the Book of
Mormon, and Sidney Rigdon was to take it, and gather Israel. Here is
the sum of the whole matter. The prophet Malachi had said that before
Christ came, he would send his messenger, and he should prepare the
way before him. Joseph Smith said that Sidney Rigdon was that
messenger. The Spirit said that the Lord would raise up a spokesman
to Joseph Smith, and Joseph Smith said that Sidney was that
spokesman. The Lord said he would prepare a priesthood with which he
would gather Israel. Joseph Smith said that Sidney Rigdon held that
priesthood.”26
(On a
quick note about priesthood, besides being referred to as
Aaron and the messenger prophecied by Malachi, Sidney Rigdon is also
referred to as John the Baptist in a few writings. Some believe that
Sidney was the “John the Baptist” that baptized Joseph Smith and
Oliver Cowdery in the Susquehanna River. And in fact, the messenger
prophecied by Malachi IS John the Baptist and was actually an already
fulfilled prophecy as stated by Jesus in Matt. 11:10 and Mark 1:2)27 From
the above passage, Sidney clearly felt that the original plan
was not followed. Joseph was to bring forth the words and Sidney was
supposed to step in and be the one to gather Israel. Although he was
Joseph’s number two for some time, Sidney never quite reached the
top spot. Poor Sidney’s vision for bringing forth the Kingdom of
God on Earth was taken over by another. An acquaintance of Rigdon
wrote, “I
have no doubt Rigdon thought to make a tool of Smith but Smith was
too sharp for him and turned the tables upon him and made a tool of
him.”28 In
1868, Sidney Rigdon wrote a letter to the First Presidency of the
church and made one last attempt to bring forth more scripture. He
claimed to know the contents of the sealed portion of the Book of
Mormon. “Rigdon
wrote that the sealed portion of The Book of Mormon contained an
account of the history of Zion, including prophecies of the Old
Testament prophets, and an account of Joseph in Egypt. He also
described the remnant of Joseph account as a kind of on-going
revelation, that was unfolding with the destruction of the Smith
family.”29
Before
Sidney Rigdon died, he asked that all of his personal writings be
burned. I think that a lot could have been learned from them. I
would not be surprised if rough drafts of the Book of Mormon would
have been there or at least Old and New Testament sermons that he had
given prior to the Book of Mormon being printed that were then placed
in the Book of Mormon.
One
last quote that ties Sidney Rigdon to the writing of the revelations
is found in the testimony of David Whitmer. In response to the
changes made when transferring revelations from the Book of
Commandments to the Doctrine and Covenants, Whitmer complains:
“I
was present when Brother Joseph gave nearly every revelation that is
in the Book of Commandments, besides many other revelations that were
never printed, and I knew everything that was in them, and when I
tell you that I know they were changed and added to, I know what I am
saying. One of the most important changes is in the very revelation
that was given to myself and Brother Oliver, to search out the
Twelve. This is the one about relying upon the Book of Mormon alone
in building up the Church. Many, many times have I read and studied
it, and I tell you I know that those seven words were added to it,
reversing the meaning entirely. What
Oliver Cowdery, F.G. Williams, and W.W. Phelps have written in theMessengerand
Advocate,
and other publications, does not conflict with my testimony that
these revelations were changed. They admit in their quotations which
you have published, that the revelations have been added to; that a
few items have been added from other revelations, etc…The errors
that these men refer to are "typographical
and other errors."
Now do you suppose that the type-setters in the printing office made
the error, and added to that revelation concerning Brother Joseph's
gift, adding twenty-two words to one paragraph, leaving room for
Brother Joseph to take upon himself the gift of seer to the church
when God commanded him to pretend to no other gift, for He would
grant him no other gift, except to translate the Book of Mormon? And
do you suppose those other changes are typographical errors? Of
course you must know that the important changes and additions to
these revelations did not happen by any errors or mistakes —
typographical, transcribing manuscript, or any other kind of
mistakes. How can you help but see and understand that these
revelations were wilfully changed and added to? Those
who are spiritually blinded enough to believe that God authorized
those changes spoken of in my letter, may have the right to believe
that God works in that manner, but I will not believe it, and
thousands of others will never believe it. When God gave his word,
saying he would grant Brother Joseph no other gift but to translate
the Book, he meant what he said. Brother Joseph giving the
revelations of 1829 through the same stone through which the Book was
translated, was the same gift. He then gave up the stone forever, and
told me and the rest of us that he was through what the Lord had
given him the gift to do….These changes were made by the leaders of
the church, who had drifted into error and spiritual blindness.
Through the influence of Sydney Rigdon, Brother Joseph was led on and
on into receiving revelations every year, to establish offices and
doctrines which are not even mentioned in the teachings of Christ in
the written word. In a few years they had gone away ahead of the
written word, so that they had to change these revelations.”30
David
Whitmer further wrote:
“Is
it possible that the minds of men can be so blinded as to believe
that God would give these revelations – command them to print them
in His Book of Commandments – and then afterwards command them to
change and add to them some words which change the meaning
entirely?
As if God had changed his mind entirely after giving his word?
Is it possible that man who pretends to any spirituality would
believe that God would work in such a manner?”31
Apostle
William E. McLellin, who left the church in 1838 because he no longer
had confidence in the presidency of the church wrote, “In
1835 in Kirtland another committee was appointed to fix up the
revelations for print again... I was often in Joseph’s office, and
know positively that some of the revelations were so altered,
mutilated and changed that a good scholar would scarcely know
them.
In one revelation I counted 20 alterations! Hence, who can
depend on them? I cannot. I will not.... All your trouble
arises from your taking that mutilated and altered Doctrine and
Covenants.”32
McLellin left the church over this and over the Kirtland Bank
failing after the Lord had said that the bank would be a resounding
success that would grow to “swallow up all other banks”33
(see my Secular History for more details on the Kirtland Bank
Collapse).
A
close look shows that every section in the Book of Commandments had
at least one deletion and one addition when transferred to the
Doctrine and Covenants. Many of the changes were more extensive than
a few words. Section 44 had 138 words removed from it while section
28 increased from 193 words to 649 words.
THE
3 WITNESSES
The
witnesses of the Book of Mormon are an interesting aspect of the
restoration. There are the 3 main witnesses and then an additional
8. The 8 witnesses claimed to have seen the plates and engravings. This
is not controversial to me since Joseph may very well have had
metal plates of some sort. The 3 witnesses, however, are a different
story. Not only did they claim to have seen the plates, but they
declared that an angel of God showed them the plates:
“And
we also testify that we have seeen [sic] the engravings which are
upon the plates; and they have been shewn unto us by the power of
God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an
angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before
our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings
thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and
our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these
things are true.”34
In
later years, others started claiming that the witnesses denied their
testimony, but they refuted these accusations. The real question
then is, did they really see those things or did they just believe to
see them? Did Joseph paint such a vivid picture before them that
they themselves started to see the same thing, or were perhaps later
convinced that they had seen such things as the story was told and
retold by Joseph? Who knows? Some of their accounts sound very
convincing and others less. Before the coming forth of the Book of
Mormon, the witness Martin Harris had a reputation for being “a
visionary fanatic.” He was seen as an honest man, but
“overbalanced by 'marvellousness.’”
Harris
“seems to have
repeatedly admitted the internal, subjective nature of his visionary
experience.’ The foreman in the Palmyra printing office that
produced the first Book of Mormon said that Harris “used to
practice a good deal of his characteristic jargon and 'seeing with
the spiritual eye,' and the like." John H. Gilbert, the
typesetter for most of the book, said that he had asked Harris,
"Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?"
According to Gilbert, Harris "looked down for an instant, raised
his eyes up, and said, 'No, I saw them with a spiritual eye."
Two other Palmyra residents said that Harris told them that he had
seen the plates with "the eye of faith" or "spiritual
eyes." In 1838, Harris is said to have told an Ohio congregation
that "he never saw the plates with his natural eyes, only in
vision or imagination." A neighbor of Harris in Kirtland, Ohio,
said that Harris "never claimed to have seen [the plates] with
his natural eyes, only spiritual vision."
In
March 1838, disillusioned church members said that Harris had
publicly denied that neither he nor the other Witnesses to the Book
of Mormon
had ever seen or handled the golden plates—although he had not been
present when Whitmer and Cowdery first claimed to have viewed
them—and they claimed that Harris's recantation, made during a
period of crisis in early Mormonism, induced five influential
members, including three Apostles, to leave the Church. Even at the
end of his long life, Harris said that he had seen the plates in "a
state of entrancement."35
Whether
seen
with
his
natural
eyes
or
spiritual
eyes,
most of Harris’
testimonies seem to indicate that he believed he saw the angel and
plates. Another witness, David Whitmer, was the most interviewed
witness of the Book of Mormon.
His
testimonies differed from one retelling to another. Recounting the
vision to Orson Pratt in 1878, Whitmer claimed to have seen not only
the Golden Plates but the "Brass Plates, the plates containing
the record of the wickedness of the people of the world....the sword
of Laban, the Directors (i.e. the ball which Lehi had) and the
Interpreters. I saw them just as plain as I see this bed...." On
other occasions, Whitmer's vision of the plates seemed far less
corporeal. When asked in 1880 for a description of the angel who
showed him the plates, Whitmer replied that the angel "had no
appearance or shape." Asked by the interviewer how he then could
bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied,
"Have you never had impressions?" To which the interviewer
responded, "Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the
spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a
feeling?" "Just so," replied Whitmer. A young Mormon
lawyer, James Henry Moyle, who interviewed Whitmer in 1885, asked if
there was any possibility that Whitmer had been deceived. "His
answer was unequivocal....that he saw the plates and heard the angel
with unmistakable clearness." But Moyle went away "not
fully satisfied....It was more spiritual than I anticipated."36
Oliver
Cowdery died in 1850, so there was little room for further clarifying
his testimony.
On
multiple occasions, throughout their years in the church, the 3
witnesses started following other members of the church that claimed
to see things in stones or made other such fantastic claims. This
includes a time when Hiram Page, one of the 8 witnesses, claimed to
be receiving revelations through a seer stone. Joseph would have to
show them a revelation saying that only he could receive revelations
from God and pull these men back in. Perhaps my favorite story of
Martin Harris is found in the History of the Church: “Martin
Harris having boasted to the brethren that he could handle snakes
with perfect safety, while fooling with a black snake with his bare
feet, he received a bite on his left foot.”37
Martin then had to be told not to “trifle
with the promises of God.”38
“Overbalanced by marvellousness” may be a fairly accurate
description of these men.
THE
LEARNED MAN
Another
interesting
account
about
the
coming
forth
of
the
Book of Mormon is
the account of Martin Harris writing about his visit to a Charles
Anthon:
“I
went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had
been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles
Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments.
Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so
than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then
showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they
were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were
true characters. He gave me a certificate, certifying to the people
of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation
of such of them as had been translated was also correct. I took the
certificate and put it into my pocket, and was just leaving the
house, when Mr. Anthon called me back, and asked me how the young man
found out that there were gold plates in the place where he found
them. I answered that an angel of God had revealed it unto him. He
then said to me, 'Let me see that certificate.' I accordingly took it
out of my pocket and gave it to him, when he took it and tore it to
pieces, saying that there was no such thing now as ministering of
angels, and that if I would bring the plates to him he would
translate them. I informed him that part of the plates were sealed,
and that I was forbidden to bring them. He replied, 'I cannot read a
sealed book.' I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned
what Professor Anthon had said respecting both the characters and the
translation.”39
One
comment I would like to make at this point is that Egyptian was a
language that could not be read at this time. The Rosetta Stone had
been found, but it had not yet been deciphered, meaning that no one
on Earth could read Egyptian (unless, perhaps, directed by God). Martin
Harris' account makes no sense. Charles Anthon was an expert
in Greek and Latin. It seems almost absurd that he would state that
the translation was correct and “more so than any he had before
seen translated.” No one had seen ANY Egyptian translated. It was
indecipherable! What does make some sense to me, however, is that a
man that had agreed to mortgage his farm to pay for the printing of
the Book of Mormon is trying desperately to add credence to the
veracity of the book. The version of the story from Charles Anthon’s
perspective is very different:
Some
years ago, a
plain, and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me with a
note from Dr. Mitchell of our city, now deceased, requesting me to
decypher, if possible, a paper, which the farmer would hand me, and
which Dr. M. confessed he had been unable to understand. Upon
examining the paper in question, I soon came to the conclusion that
it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax.
When I asked the person, who brought it, how he obtained the writing,
he gave me, as far as I can now recollect, the following account: A
"gold book," consisting of a number of plates of gold,
fastened together in the shape of a book by wires of the same metal,
had been dug up in the northern part of the state of New York, and
along with the book an enormous pair of "gold
spectacles"!
These spectacles were so large, that, if a person attempted to look
through them, his two eyes would have to be turned towards one of the
glasses merely, the spectacles in question being altogether too large
for the breadth of the human face. Whoever examined the plates
through the spectacles, was enabled not only to read
them, but fully to understand
their meaning. All this knowledge, however, was confined at that time
to a young man, who had the trunk containing the book and spectacles
in his sole possession. This young man was placed behind a curtain,
in the garret of a farm house, and, being thus concealed from view,
put on the spectacles occasionally, or rather, looked through one of
the glasses, decyphered the characters in the book, and, having
committed some of them to paper, handed copies from behind the
curtain, to those who stood on the outside. Not a word, however, was
said about the plates having been decyphered "by the gift of
God." Everything, in this way, was effected by the large pair of
spectacles. The farmer added, that he had been requested to
contribute a sum of money towards the publication of the "golden
book," the contents of which would, as he had been assured,
produce an entire change in the world and save it from ruin. So
urgent had been these solicitations, that he intended selling his
farm and handing over the amount received to those who wished to
publish the plates. As a last precautionary step, however, he had
resolved to come to New York, and obtain the opinion of the learned
about the meaning of the paper which he brought with him, and which
had been given him as a part of the contents of the book, although no
translation had been furnished at the time by the young man with the
spectacles. On hearing this odd story, I changed my opinion
about the paper, and, instead of viewing it any longer as a hoax upon
the learned, I began to regard it as part of a scheme to cheat the
farmer of his money, and I communicated my suspicions to him, warning
him to beware of rogues. He requested an opinion from me in writing,
which of course I declined giving, and he then took his leave
carrying the paper with him. This paper was in fact a singular
scrawl. It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in
columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had
before him at the time a book containing various alphabets. Greek and
Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes, Roman letters inverted or
placed sideways, were arranged in perpendicular columns, and the
whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various
compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied
after the Mexican Calender given by Humboldt, but copied in such a
way as not to betray the source whence it was derived. I am thus
particular as to the contents of the paper, inasmuch as I have
frequently conversed with my friends on the subject, since the
Mormonite excitement began, and well remember that the paper
contained any thing else but "Egyptian
Hieroglyphics."
Some time after, the same farmer paid me a second visit. He brought
with him the golden book in print, and offered it to me for sale. I
declined purchasing. He then asked permission to leave the book with
me for examination. I declined receiving it, although his manner was
strangely urgent. I adverted once more to the roguery which had been
in my opinion practised upon him, and asked him what had become of
the gold plates. He informed me that they were in a trunk with the
large pair of spectacles. I advised him to go to a magistrate and
have the trunk examined. He said the "curse of God" would
come upon him should he do this. On my pressing him, however, to
pursue the course which I had recommended, he told me that he would
open the trunk, if I would take the "curse of God" upon
myself. I replied that I would do so with the greatest willingness,
and would incur every risk of that nature, provided I could only
extricate him from the grasp of rogues. He then left me.40
PETER,
WHO? and JOHNAt some point, Joseph begins to claim that one must have
authority to act in the name of God; one cannot be
self-appointed, but one must receive this authority from someone who
already has the authority. This authority was referred to as the
priesthood or the priesthood keys. In Doctrine and Covenants 27,
it declares that he
received this authority from Peter, James and John.
"And also with Peter, and James, and
John, whom I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and
confirmed you to be apostles, and especial witnesses of my name, and
bear the keys of your ministry and of the same things which I revealed
unto them;"41
Interestingly, this is another example of a later addition to the
text. When this revelation was first recorded, it did not include
this
portion. At some point between 1833 and 1835, these words were
added and this part of the story began to be told. It has since
become a central tenet of the church. However, even Joseph seemed
to have a hard time keeping the revelations straight. When the
translators of the King James Version of the bible were creating the
translation, they decided to add homage to their king in the
translation. What should have been rendered Peter, Jacob and John
was written as Peter, James and John. Joseph became aware of this
discrepancy towards the end of his life. In his famous speech
given at the funeral of a man named King Follett (that's right, his
first name was King), he points out the problem:
"Some learned doctors
might take a notion to say the Scriptures say thus and so; and we might
believe the Scriptures; they are not to be altered. But I am going to
show you an error in them. I have an old edition of the New
Testament in the Latin, Hebrew, German and Greek languages. I have been
reading the German, and find it to be the most [nearly] correct
translation, and to correspond nearest to the revelations which God has
given to me for the last fourteen years. It tells about Jacobus, the
son of Zebedee. It means Jacob. In the English New Testament it is
translated James. Now, if Jacob had the keys, you might talk about
James through all eternity and never get the keys. In the 21st of the
fourth chapter of Matthew, my old German edition gives the word Jacob
instead of James...The Latin says Jacob and the German says Jacob; here
we have the testimony of four against one."42
While I applaud the fact that Joseph was able to figure out that James
should not have been rendered James, one line stands out glaringly to
me in this passage, "Now, if Jacob had the keys, you might
talk about James through all eternity and never get the keys."
Joseph had figured out that it should have never been James and that
someone who claimed to have received the priesthood keys from James
would have never actually received them. Ummmm....but Joseph....you claimed to get the keys from
James...
RELIGIOUS CLIMATE
Before
I move on into the church years, I would like to discuss what seems
to have been the religious climate at the time. Nowadays, religions
seem much more formal and organized. In those days, people would go
from one religion to the next without giving it much of a second
thought. If they were tired of one religion, they would switch. They
seemed to get very caught up in the excitement of new religions
and new “kingdoms of God” being formed. Not only that, but it
was very common for people to come forward claiming to have received
prophecies and claiming to be guided by the spirit of God. The New
Testament makes it clear that the gift of prophecy was for all to
seek and a certain segment of the population really took that to
heart. Taking that into perspective, Joseph’s claims of talking
with heavenly messengers was actually not that uncommon and much of
the population considered Joseph’s claims just as bogus as everyone
else’s. Here are some examples of others that claimed the
abilities to speak with the divine.
In 1831,
just one year
following the organization of Joseph Smith’s Church of Christ, the
Mormon prophet was confronted with the conflicting claims of two
rivals: Wycam Clark who formed his own Pure Church of Christ and the
self-proclaimed prophet John Noah. Even prior to that, in late 1830,
two early church members manifested unorthodox beliefs and practices
at variance with the church’s emerging norms. The first, Black
Pete—an African American convert—was active among Smith’s
Kirtland followers as “a self-styled revelator” or “chief man”
and “sometimes seized with strange vagaries and odd conceits.”
The second, a woman, Laura Hubble “professed to be a prophetess of
the Lord wanting to establish herself as a “teacher in the church.43
Feeling
threatened by Laura Hubble, Joseph brought forth the revelation in
D&C 43, which states that he was the only one that could receive
commandments and revelations. Also, D&C 28 talks about Hiram
Page, one of the witnesses of the Book of Mormon, needing to stop
writing revelations he was receiving through a seer stone that he had
because they were of the Devil. As the section header of 28
indicates, “Hiram
Page, a member of the Church, had a certain stone, and professed to
be receiving revelations by its aid concerning the upbuilding of Zion
and the order of the Church. Several members had been deceived by
these claims, and even Oliver Cowdery was wrongly influenced
thereby.” Joseph’s method of putting
a stop to all the others out there also
claiming inspiration from God was to write a revelation stating that
their revelations were not from God. This method did not end his
difficulties, however.
In 1832,
a Mormon by
the name of Hoton withdrew from the church, rejecting both Joseph
Smith and the Book of Mormon, organizing his own Independent Church.
Four years later James Colin Brewster, a precocious ten-year-old
child, claimed direct communication with the Angel Moroni and
proceeded to write his own works of scripture—all of which led to
his disfellowship and ultimate excommunication. A more serious threat
came in 1837 with the formation of the Church of Christ by Warren
Parrish. A one-time traveling elder with a reputation as an “eloquent
preacher,” Parrish brought into his organization a number of
important dissidents, including three original members of Smith’s
Council of the Twelve—specifically, brothers Luke S. and Lyman
Johnson along with John F. Boynton. Members of Parrish’s Church of
Christ believed that Smith and other leaders “had strayed from the
gospel. Also joining Parrish’s organization following his break
with Smith was Martin Harris—an important early convert and
financial benefactor in the church, made famous as one of the Three
Witnesses to the Book of Mormon. In March 1842, Oliver H. Olney was
disfellowshipped on charges of setting himself up “as a prophet.”
Olney claimed to have been “set apart by the ‘ancient of days’”
and “charged with setting up a new dispensation.” Also in 1842,
Francis Gladden Bishop asserted his own claims as a prophet.
Presenting himself as an “inspired man of God,” Bishop “received
and taught revelations which resulted in the formation of his own
group, the Kingdom of God.44
So,
let’s just say that people were either all much closer to God than
the people of today, or society was just wacky back then, and
claiming to have a special connection with the divine was the cool
thing to do.
THE
ABILITY TO TRANSLATE
Joseph’s
claims
to
being
a
prophet
hinge
greatly
on
his ability to translate
ancient documents. If he can do that, then he probably translated
the Book of Mormon through his seer stone. If he cannot, then he
didn’t.
Retranslation
of
the
Bible
Joseph
Smith and Sidney Rigdon worked on the retranslation of the Bible
together, most of it being in Sidney’s handwriting.
In
chapter 13 of I Nephi, a history lesson is given. An angel is
telling Nephi that after Christ dies, a church will start up that
will have the Bible, but that church will end up killing a lot of
good people. It will also become very wealthy. Then the angel says
that gentiles (Protestants) will leave the captivity of that
abominable church and come to America. Eventually, the gentiles will
fight against their “mother gentiles” (Revolutionary War) and win
their freedom. Nephi notices that the gentiles have a book and he
asks what the book is. The angel tells him that it is the Bible. In
verse 24, it says that “when
it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fullness
of the gospel of the Lord.” Verse 25 and 26 continue
that “these
things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according
to the truth which is in God. And after they go forth by the hand of
the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles,
thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which
is most abominable above all other churches, for behold, they have
taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and
most precious…”
Verse 28 and 29 say, “Wherefore,
thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of
the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and
precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the
Lamb of God. And after these plain and precious things were taken
away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after
it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across
the many waters which thou hastseen
with
the
Gentiles
which
have
gone
forth
out
of captivity, thou
seest—because of the many plainandprecious
things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain
unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the
plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which
are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great
many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over
them.” While the ideas that the
Catholic Church became very rich and
powerful and started killing people that disagreed with them are
pretty well known, what about this claim that the Catholic Church
changed the words in the Bible? Again, that was popular to believe
at the time the Book of Mormon was transcribed, but is it true? No.
Many versions of the Bible were made and translated through the
years. Many of these were built on other works, which could leave
room for manipulation between translations. However, as more and
more ancient Hebrew and Greek texts are being found, these
manuscripts that predate the Catholic church, show that current
editions are remarkably free from errors. There are a few sections
that appear to have been added that are not in the original sections
, like the 'He who is without sin, cast the first stone' section, but
overall the document is relatively sound. It appears that the angel
in I Nephi was wrong. The changes that are claimed to have been
made, just do not exist. The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible
makes many changes to the Bible, but as more and more ancient
manuscripts are found, none of them correspond to Joseph’s
translation, but rather show that the Bible has remained very well
preserved through the years. In fact, the Book of Mormon often
copies whole chapters word for word from the King James Version of
the Bible, chapters that Joseph Smith later made changes to in his
version of the Bible. And yet, the Lord, sending Joseph the words of
the Book of Mormon through the seer stone chooses not to make those
changes at that time. Strange. (Yes, I know that some argue that
Joseph stopped looking in the seer stone and started reading from the
Bible when he got to those chapters. That, however, is a theory that
disagrees with every account we have of the translation process.) What
about the few sections that were later additions? Was Joseph
inspired to remove those? He was not.
Also,
Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible mostly consisted of additions
to the Bible rather than changing words. One example where he did
change a word is in Mark 15:22. The King James Version states, “And
they bring him unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted,
The place of a skull.” In the Joseph Smith
Translation, this verse is changed to say,
“…Golgotha,
which
is,
(being
interpreted,)
The
place
of
a
burial.”45 This
change is unnecessary and inaccurate. Golgotha or Gûlgaltâis
an Aramaic word that means “place of the skull.”
The
angel in I Nephi 13 continues on in verse 35 and 36 to say that the
Book of Mormon will come forth because the “great and abominable
church” had made those changes to the “plain and precious”
things. The Book of Mormon will come forth and shall have the gospel
of the Lamb. I am confused as to what plain and precious things the
Book of Mormon contains that were supposed to have been removed from
the Bible. If anything, it had just been added to.
Book
of Abraham
I
went to Egypt and Israel with my family last May. When I was in
Egypt, I bought a piece of papyrus. After arriving home, I decided
to decipher my papyrus the best I could. I started looking on
Egyptian language and mythology sites. I wanted to see if I could
recognize the gods in my papyrus by what they looked like and I also
wanted to see if I could find their names in the hieroglyphs above
them. After a couple of days of studying, I was able to do just
that, plus I had a pretty good feel for some of the items, like the
different crowns that the pharaohs and gods wore and some of their
scepters. I was a rookie, but I was proud of how much I had learned.
When I was winding down with the papyrus that I bought, I thought it
would be fun to pull out the Book of Abraham and check out the
facsimiles and see how much I could decipher from them. I turned
directly to facsimile 3, because it has the figures that would be
most recognizable. With just a quick glance, I could see that the
person sitting on the throne was Osiris, god of the dead. I looked
at Joseph Smith’s interpretation which stated, “Abraham
sitting upon Pharaoh’s throne, by the politeness of the king, with
a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood, as emblematical
of the grand Presidency in Heaven; with the scepter of justice and
judgment in his hand.”46 I was
surprised at how specific he was and how wrong he was. I also
noticed that the woman behind Osiris was Osiris’s wife, either Isis
or Hathor-Isis, depending on what period of Egyptian history the
facsimiles were made in. Joseph Smith said this woman was, “King
Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.”47 He
couldn’t even get the gender right! And the characters above
HER head say “Isis.”
The
papyri that Joseph Smith obtained were from a man traveling around
the country with a few mummies. The man made his way to Kirtland,
Ohio where Joseph bought them. Joseph began their translation. The
History of the church quotes him as saying, “…with
W.W. Phelps and Oliver Cowdery as scribes, I commenced the
translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to
our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of
Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc. — a more
full account of which will appear in its place, as I proceed to
examine or unfold them. Truly we can say, the Lord is beginning to
reveal the abundance of peace and truth.”48 He
later states, “The
remainder of this month,I was
continually engaged in translating an alphabet to the book of
Abraham, and arranging a grammar of the Egyptian language as
practiced by the ancients.”49 The
Book of Abraham papyri were lost after Joseph’s death, only to
be rediscovered in a museum in 1966. LDS members were excited to
have them translated and finally be vindicated about their belief
system. Alas, it was found that the papyri fragments that we have
from the Book of Abraham are common depictions and writings from what
is called the Egyptian Book of the Dead. It is a kind of funeral
rite that the Egyptians placed with mummies. There is nothing about
Abraham.
FACSIMILE
3. JOSEPH SMITH EXPLANATION
Abraham
is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the king’s court.
Fig.
1. Abraham sitting upon Pharaoh’s throne, by the politeness of the
king, with a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood, as
emblematical of the grand Presidency in Heaven; with the scepter of
justice and judgment in his hand.
Fig.
2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his
head.
Fig.
3. Signifies Abraham in Egypt as given also in Figure 10 of Facsimile
No. 1.
Fig.
4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.
Fig.
5. Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by
the characters above his hand.
Fig.
6. Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince. 50
Unlike
Joseph’s description of Facsimile 3, the scene above shows a man
named Hor or Horus (Fig. 5), being led into the presence of Osiris to
be judged. The writing at the bottom of the facsimile is very
specific. It tells us what is being viewed in the scene, “O
gods of the necropolis, gods of the caverns, gods of the south,
north, west, and east grant salvation to the Osiris Hor, the
justified, born by Taikhibit...”51 Hor
was apparently a man that lived in Egypt and had passed away. His body
was mummified and an Egyptian funeral rite scene showing him
being introduced into Osiris’ presence was placed with his body. That
is all. This information can be understood in just a few days
of studying Egyptian online. You don’t even have to take the
professional Egyptologists’ words on it. You can find out for
yourself! Besides the facsimiles, we also have a section of text
from the papyri. That text also talks about Hor. The text has a
couple of sections. The first section says, “...
the prophet of Amonrasonter, prophet [?] of Min Bull-of-his-Mother,
prophet [?] of Khons the Governor... Hor, justified, son of the
holder of the same titles, master of secrets, and purifier of the
gods Osorwer, justified [?]... Tikhebyt, justified. May your ba live
among them, and may you be buried in the West...May you give him a
good, splendid burial on the West of Thebes just like…”52
Tikhebyt (sometimes written Taikhibit or Taykhebyt, etc.) is Hor’s
mother and the “ba” mentioned is Hor’s spirit. The second
section displays, “this
great pool of Khonsu [Osiris Hor, justified], born of Taykhebyt, a
man likewise. After (his) two arms are [fast]ened to his breast, one
wraps the Book of Breathings, which is with writing both inside and
outside of it, with royal linen, it being placed (at) his left arm
near his heart, this having been done at his wrapping and outside it.
If this book (meaning the Egyptian Book of Breathings) be recited for
him, then he will breathe like the soul[s of the gods] for ever and
ever.”53
None of the papyrus mentions anything about Abraham. Besides just
the images in Facsimile 3, there is writing above and to the side of
the figures as well. The writing that corresponds with the person
Joseph called Abraham says, “Recitation
by Osiris, Foremost of the Westerners, Lord of Abydos(?), the great
god forever and ever(?).”54 Just
as it looks like Osiris, the writing SAYS that it is Osiris. The
writing that corresponds with the person Joseph called Pharaoh
says, “Isis
the great, the god's mother.”55 Just
as it appears to be Isis, the writing SAYS that it is Isis. The writing
that corresponds with the person Joseph referred to as
the “Prince of pharaoh” says, “Maat,
mistress of the gods.”56
Again, Joseph got the sex wrong. The writing that corresponds with
the person that Joseph called Shulem, the kings waiter, says, “The
Osiris Hor, justified forever”57
and is the man who had died. The writing that corresponds with the
person that Joseph calls “Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince”
says, “Recitation
by Anubis, who makes protection(?), foremost of the embalming
booth,..”58
Anubis was the son of Osiris, God of the dead. Anubis was the God
that would protect the dead and bring them to the afterlife. This
scene shows him bringing Hor, who had died, into Osiris’ presence.
Egypt
has a fairly extensive and advanced written language that evolved
over the years. It is interesting to note that the writing on the
papyri is in a form of Egyptian that didn’t exist until 1500 years
after Abraham lived, which means that it could not have been written
by Abraham, although it is written in first person and Abraham even
declares that he is doing the writing: “…and
I shall endeavor to write some of these things upon this record, for
the benefit of my posterity that shall come after me.”59 Since
the original accounts no longer make sense with what we know,
the stories have had to change. Some LDS scholars have argued that
perhaps Abraham wrote his story back in his day and then it was
copied down in the other form of Egyptian centuries later and placed
with the Book of the Dead of some random priest of pharaoh, that
mummy was later found and sent across the ocean and ended up in
Kirtland, Ohio for Joseph to translate the papyri that came with it.
This argument is an interesting one, but ignores the fact that the
papyri do not contain the story of Abraham at all. This concept is
also refuted by the numerous accounts we have. Joseph Smith said,
“…with
W.W.
Phelps
and
Oliver
Cowdery
as
scribes,I
commenced
the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics,
and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the
writings of Abraham,
another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc. — a
more full account of which will appear in its place, as I proceed to
examine or unfold them. Truly we can say, the Lord
is beginning to reveal the
abundance of
peace and truth.”60 As
Joseph mentioned above, one of his scribes was W. W. Phelps. W.
W. Phelps wrote that the record they were making was a “Translation
of the Book of Abraham written by his own hand upon papyrus and found
in the Catacombs of Egypt.”61 One
of Joseph’s personal secretaries, Willard Richards, wrote a
description of the Book of Abraham which is still found in the
current header, “A
Translation of some ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands
from the catacombs of Egypt.—The writings of Abraham while he was
in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written
by his own hand, upon papyrus.”62
Wilford Woodruff recorded in his diary that, “Joseph
the Seer has presented us some of the
Book of Abraham which was written by his own hand
but hid from the knowledge of man for the last four thousand years
but has now come to light through the mercy of God.”63 Even
outsiders were told the same story. When visitors came through
Nauvoo, Joseph enjoyed showing off the mummies to them. Josiah
Quincy visited Joseph in Nauvoo and reported the following: “ 'And
now come with me,' said the prophet 'and I will show you the
curiosities.'... There were some pine presses fixed against the wall
of the room. These receptacles Smith opened, and disclosed four human
bodies, shrunken and black with age. 'These are mummies,' said the
exhibitor. 'I want you to look at that little runt of a fellow over
there. He was a
great man
in his day. Why, that was Pharaoh
Necho, King of Egypt!'Some
parchments inscribed with hieroglyphics were then offered us....
'That is the handwriting
of Abraham,
the Father of the Faithful,' said the prophet. 'This is the autograph
of Moses,and
these lines were written by his brother Aaron.
Here we have the
earliest account of the Creation,
from which Moses composed the First Book of Genesis.'... We were
further assured that the prophet was the only mortal who could
translate these mysterious writings, and that his power was given by
direct inspiration.'”64
Despite
eye witness accounts of many people as well as Joseph’s own claims
of translating the papyri in his journal, and also the existence of a
book of Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar that was made during the
process that further indicates that a translation was being
attempted, many LDS scholars are now suggesting that Joseph never
really tried to translate the papyri at all. They say that Joseph
saw the papyri and his mind was opened to a revelation of the story
of Abraham. This is a nice bypass of a lot of the issues, but it
ignores all the evidence. (Incidentally, the book of Alphabet and
Grammar that was made during the translation process has a number of
Egyptian symbols that are found at the beginning of the written
portion of the papyri text that connects to facsimile 1 from the Book
of Abraham. Next to each symbol is written the supposed meaning of
each, which Egyptologists have also found to be incorrect.) Even
Joseph’s mom got in on the fun of “translating” the papyri in
yet another example stating that the papyri was written by Abraham. In
an account from Charlotte Haven, a young woman who visited Nauvoo
in 1843, we read, “From
there we called on Joseph's mother, passing the site of the Nauvoo
House, a spacious hotel, the first floor only laid. It is like the
Temple in being erected on the tithe system, and when finished will
surpass in splendor any hotel in the State. Here Joseph and his heirs
for generations are to have apartments free of expense, and they
think the crowned heads of Europe will rusticate beneath its roof.
Madame Smith's residence is a log house very near her son's. She
opened the door and received us cordially. She is a motherly kind of
woman of about sixty years. She receives a little pittance (small
wage) by exhibiting The Mummies to strangers. When we asked to see
them, she lit a candle and conducted us up a short, narrow stairway
to a low, dark room under the roof. On one side were standing half a
dozen mummies, to whom she introduced us, King Onitus and his royal
household, -- one she did not know. Then she took up what seemed to
be a club wrapped in a dark cloth, and said "This is the leg of
Pharaoh's daughter, the one that saved Moses. Repressing
a smile, I looked from the mummies to the old lady. but could detect
nothing but earnestness and sincerity on her countenance.
Then she [Mother Smith] turned to a long table, set her candlestick
down, and opened a long roll of manuscript (yes it was not a modern
document - they didn't come in long rolls! Furthermore, old papyrus
scrolls can be remarkably well preserved and "rollable"),
saying it was "the writing of Abraham and Isaac, written in
Hebrew and Sanscrit," and she read several minutes from it as if
it were English. It sounded very much like passages from the Old
Testament-and it might have been for anything we knew-but she said
she read it through the inspiration of her son Joseph, in whom she
seemed to have perfect confidence. Then in the same way she
interpreted to us hieroglyphics from another roll. One was Mother Eve
being tempted by the serpent, who-the serpent, I mean-was standing on
the tip of his tail, which with his two legs formed a tripod, and had
his head in Eve's ear.”65
It
is interesting that Lucy Mack could read the papyrus as if it were in
English when it took her son seven years to complete the Book of
Abraham translation. It seems she, like a lot of people at the time,
wanted to show off her claim to revelation.
Respectable
Egyptologists
from
the
1800s
till
now
have
been
saying that the
papyri have nothing in relation to the Book of Abraham. I, as an
extremely novice Egyptologist, unequivocally state the same. Joseph
Smith did not translate the papyri. I think that when the mummies
came through Kirtland, he saw an opportunity to bring forth more
scripture. Throughout his years in the church, many accused him of
being a false and/or fallen prophet. It was an excellent opportunity
for him to quell those accusations and build his reputation. Also,
it was perfect that they were Egyptian papyri because just as the
plates were said to be written in reformed Egyptian, no one could
contradict his translation, since Egyptian couldn’t be read at that
time. Unfortunately for him, a decade later, the Rosetta Stone was
cracked and now we can read the papyri like reading French or
Spanish. Of course, the church doesn’t bring this stuff up, so I
had to find out for myself by buying a sheet of papyrus in Egypt and
studying Egyptian for a couple of days.
There
is
more
I
could
write
on this, but I think I have written enough for
now. If you would like to know more about the Book of Abraham, there
is an excellent video called the “Lost Book of Abraham” that you
can find on Youtube. It is an hour long, so it might take awhile to
load, but it is very fascinating and very worth it. It seems obvious
that the makers of the video do not believe the Book of Abraham is a
true book of scripture, but if you can get past that, they are
actually very fair in their presentation. They may leave out a few
of the LDS arguments, but they include the main ones. Also, the
Wikipedia page on the Book of Abraham gives you a nice comparison
between Joseph Smith’s translation and the translation from
Egyptologists.
Other
good links on this subject:
http://www.neirr.org/bof.htm
http://mormonismi.info/jamesdavid/facsimil.htm
The
Kinderhook Plates

Another
example
of
Joseph’s
translating
ability
is
with
a
case called the
Kinderhook Plates. I had never heard of it until I went exploring
into church history. The Kinderhook plates were a set of 6
bell-shaped plates (the above image shows writing on the front and
back of four of them). They were made of brass and said to be found
buried by human bone remains. One account of the tale was printed in
the Quincy Whig
on May 3, 1843,
“It
appears that a
young man by the name of Wiley, a resident in Kinderhook, dreamed
three nights in succession, that in a certain mound in the vicinity,
there was treasures concealed. Impressed with the strange occurrence
of dreaming the same dream three nights in succession, he came to the
conclusion, to satisfy his mind by digging into the mound. For fear
of being laughed at, if he made others acquainted with his design, he
went by himself, and labored diligently one day in pursuit of the
supposed treasure, by sinking a hole in the centre of the mound.
Finding it quite laborous, he invited others to assist him. Finally,
a company of ten or twelve repaired to the mound, and assisted in
digging out the shaft commenced by Wiley. After penetrating the mound
about 11 feet, they came to a bed of limestone, that had apparently
been subjected to the action of fire, they removed the stone, which
were small and easy to handle, to the depth of two feet more, when
they found SIX BRASS PLATES, secured and fastened together by two
iron wires, but which were so decayed, that they readily crumbled to
dust upon being handled...By whom these plates were deposited there,
must ever remain a secret, unless some one skilled in deciphering
hieroglyphics, may be found to unravel the mystery. Some pretend to
say, that Smith the Mormon leader, has the ability to read them. If
he has, he will confer a great favor on the public by removing the
mystery which hangs over them. We learn there was a Mormon present
when the plates were found, who it is said, leaped for joy at the
discovery, and remarked that it would go to prove the authenticity of
the Book of Mormon -- which it undoubtedly will…The plates above
alluded to, were exhibited in this city last week, and are now, we
understand, in Nauvoo, subject to the inspection of the Mormon
Prophet. The public curiosity is greatly excited, and if Smith can
decipher the hieroglyphics on the plates, he will do more towards
throwing light on the early history of this continent, than any man
now living.”
Charlotte
Haven,
the
same
young
woman
who
was
shown
the mummies and papyri by
Lucy Mack Smith was still in the Nauvoo area at the time the
Kinderhook Plates came to town. She speaks of the excitement
surrounding the Plates,
“We
hear very frequently from our Quincy friends through Mr. Joshua
Moore, who passes through that place and this in our monthly zigzag
tours through the State, traveling horseback. His last call on us was
last Saturday and he brought with him half a dozen thin pieces of
brass, apparently very old, in the form of a bell about five or six
inches long. They had on them scratches that looked like writing, and
strange figures like symbolic characters. They were recently found,
he said, in a mound buried a few miles below quincy. When he showed
them to Joseph, the latter said that the figures or writing on them
was similar to that in which the Book of Mormon was written, and if
Mr. Moore could leave them, he thought that by the help of revelation
he would be able to translate them. So a sequel to that holy book may
soon be expected.”66
Joseph
Smith had scribes write his daily activities for him, rather than
keep such an extensive journal himself. On the day that Joseph saw
the Kinderhook plates, William Clayton records from Joseph’s
perspective, “I
have seen 6 brass plates...covered with ancient characters of
language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. I have
translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of
the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of
Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he
received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.”67
It
is interesting to note that, once again, Joseph chose to tie this
find into Egyptian descent. What a person of that lineage was
supposed to be doing buried in a place like Kinderhook, Illinois is
beyond me.
Just
like the papyri from the Book of Abraham, the Kinderhook Plates
disappeared for many years. Facsimiles of them were occasionally
published in church publications, and used as an example of the
prophet’s divine calling.
In
1879, W. Fugate, one of the men who was at the mound when the plates
were said to have been discovered, went before Jay Brown, justice of
the peace in Illinois, and in an affidavit stated that he, Robert
Wiley and Bridge Whitton thought up the whole thing as a hoax to
trick the Mormon prophet. He mentions that Bridge Whitton made the
plates using his skills as a blacksmith and then Robert Wiley “…made
the hieroglyphics by making impressions on beeswax and filling them
with acid, old iron and lead, and bound them with a piece of hoop
iron, covering them completely with the rust.”68
In
compiling the History of the Church, President of the Seventy B.H
Roberts writes of the events surrounding the Kinderhook plates and of
the testimony of W. Fugate. In reference to the affidavit, B. H.
Roberts declares, “Of
this presentation of the matter it is only necessary to say that it
is a little singular that Mr. Fugate alone out of the three said to
be in collusion in perpetrating the fraud should disclose it, and
that he should wait from 1843 to 1879- a period of thirty-six years-
before doing so when he and those said to be associated with him had
such an excellent opportunity to expose the vain pretensions of the
Prophet…For while the statement in the text of the Prophet’s
journal to the effect that the find was genuine, and that he had
translated some of the characters and learned certain historical
facts concerning the person with whose remains the plates were found,
may not have been known at the time to the alleged conspirators to
deceive him still it is quite apparent that the editor of the Times
and
Seasons-John
Taylor, the close personal friend of the Prophet- took the find
seriously, and expressed implicit confidence in his editorial that
the Prophet could give a translation of the plates...How easy to have
covered Joseph Smith and his followers with ridicule by proclaiming
the hoax as soon as they accepted the Kinderhook plates as genuine!
Why was it not done? The fact that Fugate’s story was not told
until thirty-six years after the event, and that he alone of all
those who were connected with the event gives that version of it, is
rather strong evidence that his story is the hoax, not the discovery
of the plates, nor the engravings upon them.”69
The
Kinderhook Plates were eventually found and were put into the hands
of the Chicago Historical Society. When they were found, testing was
done on them to find out the composition of the metal and the way
that the engravings on the plates had been made. As with the papyri,
there was much anticipation about the findings of the proceedings. If
Joseph was right about the origin of the plates, then he would be
vindicated and Fugate’s affidavit would prove to be a lie. If
Fugate’s testimony of the events proved to be accurate, then
Joseph’s abilities as a prophet, seer, and revelator would be in
question. Welby W. Ricks, president of the BYU Archeological Society
jumped the gun when he stated,
"A
recent rediscovery of one of the Kinderhook plates which was examined
by Joseph Smith, Jun., reaffirms his prophetic calling and reveals
the false statements made by one of the finders.... The plates are
now back in their original category of
genuine....
Joseph Smith, Jun., stands as a true prophet and translator of
ancient records by divine means and all the world is invited to
investigate the truth which has sprung out of the earth not only of
the Kinderhook plates, but of the Book of Mormon as well."70
The
results, however, did not turn out that way. It was found that the
metal was an actual brass alloy consistent with the 1800’s, whereas
the ‘brass’ of ancient times was actually bronze, not a true
brass. Also, the engravings were not made by ancient means, but
indeed etched with acid as Fugate testified. The church acknowledged
these findings and that the plates were a hoax, but made no further
comment. They tend to just not discuss these types of things. They
have probably learned that if it is not discussed, most people will
never hear about it. LDS scholars now argue that Joseph was never
tricked by the Kinderhook plates hoax and that the account written by
Joseph’s scribe, William Clayton, must have been written down
wrong. I find this argument to be a bit weak since the words
describing what Joseph said about the plates are very specific,
“…they contain the history of the person with whom they
were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of
Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the
Ruler of heaven and earth.”
Those
are some fairly specific details for Joseph’s scribe to get things
THAT wrong. I also find that argument weak since Joseph apparently
kept the plates and was working on a translation. The Mormon
publication the Nauvoo
Neighbor
published the facsimiles of the plates and declared that the
translation would be forthcoming, “The contents
of the Plates, together with a Fac-Simile of the same, will be
published in the 'Times and Seasons,' as soon as the
translation is completed.”71 On
January 15, 1844, The
Times and Seasons
wrote, “Why
does the circumstance of the plates recently found in a mound in Pike
county, III., by Mr. Wiley, together with ethnology and a thousand
other things, goto
prove the Book of Mormon true? — Ans. Because it is true!”72 This
statement about the Kinderhook Plates, “ethnology and a
thousand other things” have all proven to be false. The Kinderhook
Plates were a hoax. Ethnology does NOT correlate and thousands of
pieces of archeological evidence have been shown to prove the Book of
Mormon is not true. LDS scholars do not have proof of the Book of
Mormon. I have only found them to have justifications for why
virtually all of the evidence is against them.
If
Joseph
had
not
been
killed,
he
probably
would have brought forth a
translation of the Kinderhook Plates and, thus, another book of
scriptures. The Kinderhook Plates, just like the Book of Abraham, in
my opinion, prove almost incontrovertibly that Joseph did not have
the abilities he claimed to have.
___________________________________________________________________________________
1 http://www.lds-mormon.com/fv.shtml
2JSH 1:18-19,
Pearl of Great Price
3JSH 1:22,
Pearl of Great Price
4 "The Significance
of Joseph Smith's First Vision in Mormon Thought", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn 1966, p. 30
5 http://www.boap.org/LDS/History/HTMLHistory/v1c1history.html
6
Daniel Hendrix, young friend of Joseph.
Found in “Joseph Smith and the Origins of the Book of Mormon,” a copy
of which can be found scanned onto the internet on http://books.google.com.
7
History of the Church, Volume 3 pg. 357
8 B. H. Roberts,
Book of Mormon Studies, Pt. I, VII, 2
9
Grant H. Palmer, “An Insider’s View of
Mormon Origins,” 58-60.
10http://olivercowdery.com/texts/ethninfo.htm
11History of Joseph
Smith by his Mother, 1954 edition, p. 83
12
Quinn, “Early Mormonism,” 38-41
13
Revised Laws of the State of New York,
1813. p. 114
14http://www.omninerd.com/articles/The_1826_Trial_of_Joseph_Smith_Jr
Or http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no68.htm
15
Reassuring Authorship of the Book of
Mormon Using delta and nearest shrunken centroid classification,
Literary and Linguistic Computing, Oxford Journals, Dec. 2008. see: http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/fqn040
16http://farms.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=7&num=1&id=167
17
Ibid
18http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/3913intro.htm
19http://www.scribd.com/doc/2097751/1828-Printers-Manuscript-of-the-Book-of-Mormon
20
David Whitmer, “An Address to All
Believers in Christ,” pg. 35, 1887
21
II Nephi 3:7-8
22
II Nephi 3:17-18
23
Book of Commandments, 1833, Section
4:2; see comparison on http://www.irr.org/mit/boc/
24
Doctrine and Covenants, 1835, Section
32:1; see comparison on http://www.irr.org/mit/boc/
25
Current Doctrine and
Covenants, Section 100:9-11
26
An Appeal to the Latter-Day Saints,
pg. 27, 1863; see http://sidneyrigdon.com/books/Appl1863.htm
27http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/rigdon1.htm
28
Jasper Jesse Moss Letter, 17 Dec
1878. Wisconsin State Historical Society Library. See transcript: http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs/Wil1878a.htm#Moss1
29
Ibid.
30David Whitmer, “An
Address to All
Believers in Christ,” pg. 2-3, 1887; see http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/addressbom.htm
31
David Whitmer, Saints' Herald,
February 5, 1887
32Apostle
William E.
McLellin, Saint's Herald, v. 17, pp.
556-557
33
Warren Parrish, Painesville
Republican, February 22, 1838
34
Introduction to the Book of Mormon
35Martin
Harris page on Wikipedia. Check
references at bottom of Wikipedia page for sources of information.
36David
Whitmer page on Wikipedia.
Check references at bottom of Wikipedia page for sources of information.
37
History of the Church Vol. 2, pg.95.
38
Ibid.
39Joseph Smith
History 1:64-65
40
Letter by Charles Anthon to
acquaintances; http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/anthonletter.htm
41
Doctrine and Covenants 27:12
42
King Follett Discourse: http://mldb.byu.edu/follett.htm
43
“Scattering of the Saints: Schism
within Mormonism,” Introduction; see http://www.johnwhitmerbooks.com/books/samplepages/Sample_SotS_text.pdf
44
Ibid.
45
Joseph Smith Inspired Version of the
Bible, Mark 15: 25.
46
Book of Abraham, Pearl of Great Price,
Facsimile 3.
47
Ibid.
48
History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg. 236.
49
History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg.
238.
50
Ibid.
51
University of Chicago Egyptologist,
Robert K. Ritner, 2003.
52
Ibid.
53
Ibid.
54
Ibid.
55
Ibid.
56
Ibid.
57
Ibid.
58
Ibid.
59
Book of Abraham 1:31, Pearl of Great
Price.
60
History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg.
236.
61H.
Michael
Marquardt,
comp.,The
Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers (Cullman, Alabama: Printing
Service, 1981), 148; from Translation Manuscript No. 1 of the Book of
Abraham, p. 1.
62
Header, Book of Abraham.
63
Diary of Wilford Woodruff, entry of 19
February 1842, LDS archives; also in Saga, 221
64
Josiah Quincy, “Figures of the Past,”
1958. See: http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/kinderhookplates.htm
65
Charlotte Haven, Letter From Nauvoo,
Jan 3, 1843. Printed in the Overland Monthly, Dec. 1890. see: http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1880s-1890s/havn1890.htm
66
Charlotte Haven, Letter From Nauvoo,
May 2, 1843. see: http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1880s-1890s/havn1890.htm
67
History of the Church, V. 5, p. 372.
68
History of the Church, V. 5, p. 378.
69
History of the Church, V. 5, p. 379,
footnote.
70
Welby W. Ricks, The Kinderhook
Plates, 1962
71
Nauvoo Neighbor, June 1843.
72
Times and Seasons, V. 5, p. 406.
|