Criticism of Mormonism/Books/The Changing World of Mormonism/Chapter 3

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Response to claims made in "Chapter 3: Changes in Revelations"

Chapter 2

A FAIR Analysis of: Criticism of Mormonism/Books A work by author: Jerald and Sandra Tanner

Chapter 4

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

*According to the authors, "Mormon writers" have "admitted" that revelations have been modified after they have been received.

Author's sources: *History of the Church, vol. 1, p.173

• John William Fitzgerald, "A Study of the Doctrine and Covenants," Master's thesis, BYU, 1940, p.329
• Melvin J. Petersen, "A Study of the Nature of and Significance of the Changes in the Revelations as Found in a Comparison of the Book of Commandments and Subsequent Editions of the Doctrine and Covenants," Master's thesis, BYU, 1955, typed copy, p.147

Question: Have edits to the revelations been discussed in the present day?

The official Church magazine, the Ensign has published several discussions of the editing process

• Robert J. Woodford, "The Story of the Doctrine and Covenants," Ensign (December 1984): 32. off-site
• Robert J. Woodford, "How the Revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants Were Received and Compiled," Ensign (January 1985): 27. off-site
• Melvin J. Petersen, "Preparing Early Revelations for Publication," Ensign (February 1985): 14.off-site
• Gerrit Dirkmaat, "Great and Marvelous Are the Revelations of God," Ensign (January 2013).off-site

Elder Boyd K. Packer also discussed the changes to the revelations in general conference

Elder Boyd K. Packer also discussed the changes to the revelations in general conference:

Some have alleged that these books of revelation are false, and they place in evidence changes that have occurred in the texts of these scriptures since their original publication. They cite these changes, of which there are many examples, as though they themselves were announcing revelation. As though they were the only ones that knew of them.

Of course there have been changes and corrections. Anyone who has done even limited research knows that. When properly reviewed, such corrections become a testimony for, not against, the truth of the books.

The Prophet Joseph Smith was an unschooled farm boy. To read some of his early letters in the original shows him to be somewhat unpolished in spelling and grammar and in expression.

That the revelations came through him in any form of literary refinement is nothing short of a miracle. That some perfecting should continue strengthens my respect for them.

Now, I add with emphasis that such changes have been basically minor refinements in grammar, expression, punctuation, clarification. Nothing fundamental has been altered.

Why are they not spoken of over the pulpit? Simply because by comparison they are so insignificant, and unimportant as literally to be not worth talking about. After all, they have absolutely nothing to do with whether the books are true.

After compiling some of the revelations, the ancient prophet Moroni said, “… if there be faults they be the faults of a man. But behold, we know no fault; nevertheless God knoweth all things; therefore, he that condemneth, let him be aware lest he shall be in danger of hell fire.” (Mormon 8꞉17) “And whoso receiveth this record, and shall not condemn it because of the imperfections which are in it, the same shall know of greater things than these. …” (Mormon 8꞉12)

It is difficult to understand how detailing changes and discussing them in general conference constitutes "hiding the truth." Church members pay comparatively little attention to such matters, however, because the mechanism by which revelations are produced are of far less importance than the content of the revelations, and whether the revelations are true.

B.H. Roberts discussed the changes in the revelations

And, B.H. Roberts also wrote of the publication of the revelations in 1833 that they

were revised by the Prophet himself in the way of correcting errors made by the scribes and publishers; and some additional clauses were inserted to throw increased light upon the subjects treated in the revelations, and paragraphs added, to make the principles for instructions apply to officers not in the Church at the time some of the earlier revelations were given. The addition of verses 65, 66, and 67 in sec. XX of the Doctrine and Covenants is an example.

Marlin K. Jensen discussed the changes to the revelations

With the advent of the Joseph Smith papers project, Church Historian Elder Marlin K. Jensen wrote an extensive article about changes and their rationale:

• Marlin K. Jensen, "The Joseph Smith Papers: The Manuscript Revelation Books," Ensign (July 2009): 46–51. off-site

The claim that the changes have been hidden simply cannot be sustained.

Claim

• According to the authors, "Mormon apostle" John A. Widtsoe said that the revelations "have remained unchanged. There has been no tampering with God's word," and that Joseph Fielding Smith, the "tenth president," said that there was no need for "there was no need for eliminating, changing, or adjusting any part to make it fit; but each new revelation on doctrine and priesthood fitted in its place perfectly to complete the whole structure, as it had been prepared by the Master Builder"

Author's source(s)

• John A. Widtsoe, Joseph Smith—Seeker After Truth, p.119
• Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 1:170.

Response

• Doctrine and Covenants/Textual changes
• See Quote mining—Doctrines of Salvation 1:170 to see how this quote was mined.

Claim

• David Whitmer said that the revelations in the Book of Commandments were printed correctly and didn't need to be modified later.

Author's source(s)

• An Address to All Believers in Christ p. 56.

Response

•  Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
• David Whitmer had fundamentalistic ideas about scripture, but these are not—and were not—binding on the Church.
• Were changes to the D&C hidden from the Church?

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

David Whitmer objected to changing the revelations.

Author's sources: Saints' Herald, Feb. 5, 1887

FAIR's Response

•  Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
• David Whitmer had fundamentalistic ideas about scripture, but these are not—and were not—binding on the Church.

Question: If the Doctrine and Covenants contained quotations from God, why would Joseph Smith later edit God's words?

Joseph did not always consider the words of the revelations to be "direct quotations" from God

It does not seem that Joseph considered the words which he wrote to be, generally, "direct quotations." As Elder John A. Widtsoe explained:

The language [of the Doctrine and Covenants], with the exception of the words actually spoken by heavenly beings, is the language of the Prophet. The ideas were given to Joseph Smith. He wrote them in the best language at his command. He was inspired at times by the loftiness of the ideals so that his language or words are far above that ordinarily used by a backwoods boy of that day.

The concepts and ideas were God's, while the wording was Joseph's. That he freely and openly edited them demonstrates that he did not consider them to be some type of fixed, inerrant text.

Claim

• D&C 68 was changed from its original printing in the Evening and Morning Star.

Author's source(s)

• The Evening and the Morning Star, October 1832
• Doctrine and Covenants—Sec. 68

Response

•  Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
• Anyone interested in all the textual variants for all sections of the Doctrine and Covenants can see a BYU PhD thesis: Robert J. Woodford, The Historical Development of the Doctrine and Covenants, Ph.D. dissertation (3 volumes), Brigham Young University, 1974. (CD-ROM version from BYU Studies.) (Hard copy available from UMI Dissertation Express; order number 8027231.)
• Note that BYU Studies allows the purchase of a digital version. The Tanners wish to make this appear to be something hidden. The thesis was written half a decade before their volume.

Claim

• It is claimed that Joseph Smith was not supposed to do any translating beyond the Book of Mormon, as shown in Book of Commandments 4:2, which was changed in D&C 5:4.

Author's source(s)

• Book of Commandments 4:2; DC 5꞉4

Response

• Doctrine and Covenants textual changes—Added material or expansions

Claim

• Joseph Smith claimed to have translated a parchment written by the Apostle John. According to the authors, LDS writers cannot explain why this revelation was changed.

Author's source(s)

• Book of Commandments 6; DC 7

Response

•  Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
• Changes to "translation" in D&C 7?
• Doctrine and Covenants textual changes—Added material or expansions

Claim

• The name "Urim and Thummim" was added to the revelations later.

Author's source(s)

• Book of Commandments 9; DC 10꞉1-12

Response

• "Urim and Thummim" was a biblical term which members adopted for seeing or revelatory instruments. When the revelations were republished, its use had become common among the Saints.
• The authors impose their own fundamentalist expectations on the Saints—Joseph and others made no secret that the revelations were edited, expanded, and clarified with reprintings.

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

The United Order was simply a form of Communism.

Author's sources: *Book of Commandments 44; DC 42꞉24-36

FAIR's Response

 Prejudicial or loaded language

Question: Was the United Order simply a form of communism?

The starting point of modern socialism was well after Joseph Smith's implementation of the United Order

Some have asserted that the United Order was simply a form of "communism." Marion G. Romney notes that, "The 'Communist Manifesto' drafted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels for the Communist League in 1848 is generally regarded as the starting point of modern socialism." However, Joseph Smith's implementation of the United Order predated Marx and Engels, so it would be impossible for him to have drawn upon their ideas.

There are some similarities, but also some important differences between the United Order and Marxist Communism

Similarities between communism and the United Order:

• Both the United Order and communism deal with production and distribution of goods.
• Both the United Order and communism aim to promote the well-being of men by eliminating their economic inequalities.
• Both the United Order and communism envision the elimination of the selfish motives in our private capitalistic industrial system.

Differences between the United Order and Marxist Communism include:

• The United Order is based upon "belief in God and acceptance of him as Lord of the earth and the author of the United Order," while socialism is wholly materialistic, and "is founded in the wisdom of men and not of God."
• The United Order is "implemented by the voluntary free-will actions of men, evidenced by a consecration of all their property to the Church of God," while "socialism is implemented by external force, the power of the state."
• The United Order is based upon the principle that "that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property" (D&C 134:2), while communism requires that the government control all property.

Elder Marion G. Romney summarized this as: "Socialism takes: United Order gives. That is the spirit of socialism: We're going to take. The spirit of the United Order is: We're going to give."

What happened if one did not choose to participate in the United Order?

Elder Marion G. Romney notes,

One time the Prophet Joseph Smith asked a question by the brethren about the inventories they were taking. His answer was to the effect, "You don't need to be concerned about the inventories. Unless a man is willing to consecrate everything he has, he doesn't come into the United Order." (Documentary History of the Church, Vol. 7, pp. 412-13.)

Claim

• The United Order was claimed to have actually been Sidney Rigdon's idea.

Author's source(s)

• Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 108. ( Index of claims )

Response

• The authors need to produce actual evidence. Did Sidney ever claim it was his idea, even when estranged from Joseph?

Claim

• The authors claim that "thousands of words which were added, deleted or changed in the revelations," including a section on marriage that was removed from the D&C.

Author's source(s)

• 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants

Response

•  Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
• Polygamy/1835 Doctrine and Covenants denies polygamy

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

The Lectures on Faith were removed from the D&C.

Author's sources: 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants

FAIR's Response

FAIR Answers—back to home page

<onlyinclude>

1. REDIRECTLectures on Faith

FAIR Answers—back to home page

<onlyinclude>

1. REDIRECTLectures on Faith

FAIR Answers—back to home page

<onlyinclude>

1. REDIRECTLectures on Faith

FAIR Answers—back to home page

<onlyinclude>

1. REDIRECTLectures on Faith

Question: Are the Lectures on Faith not made available through Latter-day Saint sources?

The Lectures on Faith are available through Deseret Book

The Lectures on Faith are available through Church-owned Deseret Book in hardcover, softcover, illustrated and audio formats. They are also available in English and Spanish. (See: Deseret Book: Lectures on Faith). If there is an effort by the Church to hide or suppress them in any way, then they are not hiding them very well.

62 - It is claimed that few LDS writers will "admit" to changes made in the D&C

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

*It is claimed that few LDS writers will "admit" to changes made in the D&C.

Author's sources: *Authors' opinion.

FAIR's Response

• It is no surprise that there is no source for this claim—it is just unproven opinion.
• As noted for p. 43 above, a BYU PhD student had examined every change to the D&C in 1974, well before the Tanners wrote.

Question: Were the changes to the revelations hidden from the Church members?

Oliver clearly understood that some changes were corrections, and some were additions given by revelation which were made prior to publication

One aspect of the prophet's mission includes the editing and modification of revelation prior to publication. There is plenty of evidence that the Church has done nothing to hide the fact that changes were made.

This information has been available since the first publication of the revelations which later became the Doctrine and Covenants. The Saints of Joseph Smith's day had read the revelations in their initial form, many having been published in Church newspapers. Oliver Cowdery wrote, upon the publication of the revised revelations:

On the revelations we merely say, that we were not a little surprised to find the previous print so different from the original. We had given them a careful comparison, assisted by individuals whose known integrity and ability is uncensurable. Thus saying we cast no reflections upon those who were entrusted with the responsibility of publishing them in Missouri, as our own labors were included in that important service to the church, and it was our unceasing endeavor to have them correspond with the copy furnished us. We believe they are now correct. If not in every word, at least in principle. For the special good of the church we have also added a few items from other revelations.

Oliver clearly understood that some changes were corrections, and some were additions given by revelation which were made prior to publication.

Orson Pratt noted that "line was added upon line to several of the sections and paragraphs about to be published"

In 1854, Orson Pratt discussed changes:

We often had access to the manuscripts when boarding with the Prophet; and it was our delight to read them over and over again, before they were printed. And so highly were they esteemed by us, that we committed some to memory; and a few we copied for the purpose of reference in our absence on missions; and also to read them to the saints for their edification. These copies are still in our possession. When at length the time arrived to print the manuscripts, it was thought best not to publish them all, on account of our enemies, who were seeking every means to destroy the Prophet and the Church…. It was concluded, through the suggestions of the Spirit, that by altering the real names given in the manuscripts, and substituting fictitious ones in their stead, they might thus safely appear in print without endangering the welfare of the individuals whose real names were contained therein….

It may be asked, had the Prophet a right to alter names given by revelation and substitute fictitious ones in their stead? We reply, that it is only the printed edition that contains the substituted names, while the original manuscripts, that are safely preserved in the hands of the church, contain the names as they were originally given. Moreover, the substitution of fictitious names for persons and places does not alter or destroy the sense or ideas contained in the revelations. But what the Prophet did in relation to this thing, was not of himself; he was dictated by the Holy Ghost to make these substitutions…. And by revelation line was added upon line to several of the sections and paragraphs about to be published.

But some may inquire, are not the Almighty’s revelations perfect when they are first given? And if so, where was the propriety of the Lord’s adding any thing to them, when they were already perfect? We reply that every word of God is perfect; but He does not reveal all things at once, but adds ‘line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little,’ revealing as the people are able to bear, or as circumstances require…. The Lord, therefore, adds to His own revelations whenever he thinks proper.

"The Prophet was inspired in several instances to write additional sentences and paragraphs to the earlier revelations"

In 1857, the Millennial Star noted:

Joseph, the Prophet, in selecting the revelations from the Manuscripts, and arranging them for publication, did not arrange them according to the order of the date in which they were given, neither did he think it necessary to publish them all in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, but left them to be published more fully in his History. Hence, paragraphs taken from revelations of a later date, are, in a few instances, incorporated with those of an earlier date. Indeed, at the time of compilation, the Prophet was inspired in several instances to write additional sentences and paragraphs to the earlier revelations. In this manner the Lord did truly give ‘line upon line, here a little and there a little,’ the same as He did to a revelation that Jeremiah received, which, after being burned by the wicked king of Israel, the Lord revealed over again with great numbers of additional words (See Jeremiah 36:32)

63 - The name "Michael" was deleted from Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom because Adam is Michael

The author(s) of The Changing World of Mormonism make(s) the following claim:

The name "Michael" was deleted from Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom because Adam is Michael.

Author's sources:

• Joseph Smith's Diary, January 21, 1836, p.136; original in LDS historical department (reference with Michael)
• Deseret News, Church Section, April 3, 1976 (reference without Michael)

FAIR's Response

Question: Why was the name "Michael" deleted from Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom?

Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom mentions both Adam and Michael, even though Adam is Michael

Joseph's diary entry for January 21, 1836 mentions both Adam and Michael, even though Adam is Michael:

heads, and attend to all duties that pertain to that office. I then took the seat, and father annoint[ed] my head, and sealed upon me the blessings, of Moses, to lead Israel in the latter days, even as moses led him in days of old, also the blessings of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. all of the presidency laid their hands upon me and pronounced upon my head many prophesies, and blessings, many of which I shall not notice at this time, but as Paul said, so say I, let us come to vissions and revelations, The heavens were opened upon us and I beheld the celestial Kingdom of God, and the glory thereof, whether in the body or out I cannot tell, I saw the transcendant beauty of the gate that enters, through which the heirs of that Kingdom will enter, which was like unto circling flames of fire, also the blasing throne of God, whereon was seated the Father and the Son, I saw the beautiful streets of that Kingdom, which had the appearance of being paved with gold I saw father Adam, and Abraham and Michael and my father and mother, my brother Alvin that has long since slept, and marvled how it was that he had obtained this an inheritance in that Kingdom, seeing that he had departed this life, before the Lord had set his hand to gather Israel the second time and had not been baptised for the remission of sins Thus said came the voice of the Lord unto me saying all who have

The name "Michael" was deleted from the original text of Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom in which both Adam and Michael were mentioned

The name "Michael" was deleted from Joseph Smith's vision of the Celestial Kingdom. Critics of the Church claim that this was done because Adam is Michael, and it would not be possible to have both Adam and Michael in the same vision. It is claimed 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.

Warren Parrish, Joseph's scribe, appears to have recorded a dittography based upon what he heard Joseph say

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. Wikipedia notes that "Dittography is the accidental, erroneous act of repeating a letter, word, phrase or combination of letters by a scribe or copyist."

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 (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). 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” (ibid., 167–68). 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.

The dittography in this case would be the repeated vocal phrase "and my...and my"

When spoken to a scribe, the phrase "and my...and my" may have resulted in the first instance being interpreted by the scribe as "and Michael".

Notes