The FAIR Wiki

Defending Mormonism by providing well-researched answers to challenging questions within a faithful context

Criticism

The name "Michael" was deleted from Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom because Adam is Michael. Critics claim that the Church was trying to hide a "slip up" by Joseph Smith, who had identified Adam as Michael on multiple occasions in the past.

Conclusions

Joseph tended to dictate his writings and even personal letters. Despite being in his "journal," the text is not something he produced himself, but something that a new scribe and member recorded--with an apparent error.

Supporting Data

See also: Why would Joseph edit or "improve" God's words?

Matthew Brown noted that the original text of this revelation may help explain what happened:

“[Warren] Parrish’s transcription of [Joseph Smith’s] vision [in Joseph Smith’s journal dated 21 January 1836] seems to differentiate Adam and the archangel Michael as two separate individuals. Yet [Joseph Smith] identified Michael as Adam at least a year earlier and made the same identification four years later.^[1] The text recorded by Warren Parrish may provide a clue about its incorrect content. It reads: “I saw father Adam, and Abraham and Michael and my father and mother, my brother Alvin.”^[2] The “Mi” of “Michael” and the word “my” that follows almost immediately after it have the exact same sound. The structures within the sentence are also identical (“and Mi . . . and my”). It seems, therefore, that Warren Parrish (a relatively recent convert [20 May 1833] and newly-assigned scribe for the Prophet [29 October 1835]) may have recorded a modified dittography based upon what he heard Joseph Smith say.^[3]

Endnotes

[note] Oliver Cowdery, Kirtland, OH, to John Whitmer, [Liberty, MO], 1 January 1834, in Cowdery, Letterbook, 15; Revelation, ca. August 1830, in Doctrine and Covenants 50:2, 1835 ed. [D&C 27:11]; Richards, “Pocket Companion,” 74–75; Robert B. Thompson, sermon notes, 5 October 1840, [Joseph Smith] Collection, [Church History Library]; Dean C. Jessee, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Richard L. Jensen, eds., The Joseph Smith Papers, Journals, Volume 1: 1832–1839 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2008), 167–68, n. 319.
[note] Joseph Smith Papers, Journals, Vol. 1: 1832-1839, 167–68.
[note] Matthew B. Brown, FAIR Conference address on Adam, text September 2009, endnote #54.

Doctrine and Covenants

Textual changes

Textual changes—
Joseph Smith and others made revisions, additions, and deletions to his early revelations when preparing them for publication. Critics claim that revelations from God are inerrant and should never be changed, and this proves that Joseph Smith did not receive revelation. (Link)
Oliver Cowdery and the "rod of nature"—
Critics claim that a revelation received by Joseph praised Oliver Cowdery's gift of using divining talents. It is claimed that the revelation was published in the Book of Commandments in its original form, then subsequently modified in the Doctrine and Covenants in order to hide the reference to the "rod of nature." Therefore, Joseph attempted to "cover up" Oliver Cowdery's work with a divining rod by changing a revelation. (Link)
Direct quotation from God?—
Is the wording of the D&C revelations a direct word-for-word quotation from God? Critics note that if the Doctrine and Covenants contained quotations from God, why would Joseph Smith later edit God's words? (Link)

Criticism of the Doctrine and Covenants

Contradiction between Section 132 and Jacob 2—
Critics note that D&C 132 speaks favorably about some Old Testament practitioners of plural marriage, while Jacob 2 is negative. Critics claim that this discrepancy is a contradiction, suggesting that Joseph Smith's ideas about plural marriage changed, and the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants are not inspired. (Link)
D&C 84 states that God cannot be seen without priesthood—
How could Joseph Smith has seen God the Father and Jesus Christ during the First Vision if he had not yet received the priesthood? (Link)