Monday, June 9, 2025

Dartmouth and the FAITH model

A well-known paper titled "Dartmouth Arminianism And Its Impact on Hyrum Smith And the Smith Family" was published in 2006 by the John Whitmer Historical Association Journal, written by Richard K. Behrens. It is located online here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43200240. Hereafter I'll refer to it as the "Behrens paper." 

LDS apologists and critics approach this topic differently. Critics tend to portray Hyrum as having assimilated the theological concepts circulating at Dartmouth, which he then imparted to his younger brother Joseph, who then expressed them in the Book of Mormon, D&C, various sermons, etc.

Apologists tend to minimize Hyrum's experience in Hanover, observing that he wasn't attending Dartmouth but instead Moor's Indian Charity school, and even then he attended only briefly. They tend to resist the idea that Joseph's revelations were influenced by (or the product of) what he learned from Hyrum, largely because most modern apologists don't think Joseph actually translated anything but instead was an ignorant farm boy to whom every word was revealed (such as through the stone-in-the-hat or SITH).

In my view, the Lord prepared Joseph from a young age to become a translator and prophet, which included giving Joseph the handicap (leg surgery) that turned him into a religious seeker and a thoughtful reader of Christian material. As Joseph put it, he had "an intimate acquaintance with those of different denominations," such that anything Hyrum shared from the school he attended was simply part of Joseph's preparation.

In other words, I understand the competing narratives but IMO both are not well founded. I encourage everyone to apply the FAITH model of analysis to clarify the different interpretations, in the spirit of charity (assuming everyone acts with good intentions) and in the pursuit of understanding instead of argument and debate designed to convince of, or coerce compliance with, a particular point of view.

_____

The Behrens paper is a good example of why the academic world should move toward adopting the FAITH model of analysis. This model clearly distinguishes between Facts on one hand, and Assumptions, Inferences, Theories and Hypotheses on the other.

The topic of Hyrum's attendance at Dartmouth involves only a few objective, clear facts. Everyone can see and agree upon these facts. 

The Behrens paper creates a narrative that extends far beyond the known facts through a series of assumptions and inferences, apparently driven by the author's overriding hypothesis.

One of the final paragraphs in the paper summarizes the author's conclusions:

Hyrum’s exposure to Dartmouth’s theology, cosmology, ancient language studies, architecture, Ethan Smith’s son Lyndon, and Solomon Spaulding’s nephew James Spaulding from Sharon, Vermont, who was attending the Medical School, all provided discussion material for tutoring Joseph during his long recovery from leg surgery that kept Joseph at home on crutches until the Smith family reached Palmyra.

To assess the plausibility of these conclusions, we should begin with the known facts.

_____

Known Facts

The known historical documents provide us with this information about Hiram's (Hyrum's) attendance at Moor's school. Everyone, regardless of their assumptions, inferences, theories, and hypotheses, agrees with these facts. 

Whether the contents of these documents are accurate, reliable, credible, etc., is a separate matter that invokes assumptions, inferences, etc.

1. "Hiram Smith" is listed on the tuition rolls of Moor's school for the first quarter of 1814, studying "Arithmetic," with his home town in Hanover, and he paid no tuition because he attended as a "Charity Scholar."

2. The other Charity Scholars at Moor's school studied these subjects:

1 student -  "Virg. & Gr. Test," (presumably Virgil and Greek New Testament)

2 students - "Virgil" 

1 student - "Mathematics" 

1 student - "Navigation & Eng. Gr."

3 students - "Reading" 

The ages of the students are not shown so it is impossible to say how old the "Reading" students were or even what they were reading.

The paying students studied these subjects: 

5 students - "Cic. de Or. & Gr. Test." (presumably Cicero de Oratore in Latin and the Greek New Testament)

1 student - "Cic. & Arith." 

6 students - Virgil

1 student - "Gr. Test. & Cic" 

2 students - "Lat. Primer 1/2 gr"  

2 students - "Lat. Primer"  


Tuition record from Moor's I.C. (Indian Charity) School from Aug 1814 to Aug 1815,
First quarter from Aug 28th to Nov. 19th 1814.
(click to enlarge)
 
3. No other extant tuition or attendance documents from Moor's school include Hiram/Hyrum as a student or refer to him in any way.

For the full records for 1814-1915, see 

https://mormonr.org/files/0g2tC8/scan-htH5td-0g2tC8.pdf?r=htH5td&t=eyJhbGciOiJkaXIiLCJlbmMiOiJBMjU2R0NNIn0..wkmOvDnsR8Pm7jDQ.JcPX5PZClptaGXyi_mwXwkNtOge-xHVGNoF7BCP9qcnIQwGibJQntyfq7zItzqP816nvT4MCHaXSBZ7HMSv-IUlXeWnF0oJri153kw4BU93KbmDfg2ZMC2hO6eaFl4VLMWPD5rXlHJ-vpWgbCe4tdSMY66cqrVzzuZISrjeDl2iHBhe-S6okaLLNsgwYvtBn1qjXX4uCYQdnHJvZeS2fW9Q-U6VyteQYBEp2sTv2uj_hlzWgo_m7snlQYq93JC7l97oCMZJQwzDd5qbPRHcAJxNqpIyBqdEcdKSidJvIv8XKucusW64WnrE7FzSU0FjOKeGKogBb0x6fiJknAkCDDHjfsV9EpKXFF3TtiC_aPw4DONp43Xzu_RAORO5f6cmgLOSTwUlvGmiVLLHmf8Cya7mNsvA.Drq7BNvaRU31x4hOCh_BJQ

and for 1816

https://mormonr.org/files/ZFhmCh/scan-9LK9tc-ZFhmCh.pdf?r=9LK9tc&t=eyJhbGciOiJkaXIiLCJlbmMiOiJBMjU2R0NNIn0..JxHR4QbsASNWPay5.Y9M686v3dzZ5p8HezsLoyf8nNSP85_NKChL8TSwWZJ9fI80d_JG3fR4oKV-MvK0W4ayIqeiBfbSdWdu1J7aOBOg9rnjvENp81ag2Xl5WiqvkSwKA6gEjeBq5xjVGpEUFFsuJ0CUY6lEC8E2RlMXH6IH-rXudAy7CZV2dhd3LP06F_INyHdc_RANA4PB3e6U5HfQw6Nzi0c5eF6Umr0FI4UE71ELW7n81dJKxIINuhJTiUG6NyyCLKkBG0bFL-5beun9eREh4HkReVD0-6D6aZe-IN4KxItNYG8kIoTzvoRF0Ln5C1XyTdltp16BT0fTXivsqhrx9WtgAGMJ83oRaopb5-6ShjpkSDx5sj5DQ5g4lTlkbXjggm-Qc9a5J6Xm4UtpOK2J-Ef7mRAR9oltvteZ6JLI.ykbRowponGlSLBBWxWifcw

4. In 1844-5, after Hyrum had been murdered, Lucy Mack Smith, Hyrum's mother, recalled that sometime after 1811 when the family moved to Lebanon "as my children had been deprived of school we made every arrangement to suply that deficency our second son <​Hyrum​> we <​established in​> the accademy in Hanover" [1844-45 history]  and "we established our second son (Hyrum) in an academy at Hanover" [1845 history].  

5. Lucy added, "<in 1813> the typhus fever came into Lebanon and raged there horribly among the rest who were seized with this complaint was my oldest daughter Sophronia who was sick 4 weeks next Hyrum came from Hanover <sick> with the same disease" [1844-5] and "The typhus fever came into Lebanon, and raged tremendously; and among the number seized with this complaint; was first Sophronia, and then Hyrum, who was taken while at School and came home sick" [1845]  

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/33  

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/63 

6. Lucy added, "After one whole year of affliction we were able once more to look upon our children and each other in health...My Husband now determined to change his residence accordingly we moved to Norrige in <​vermont​>." [1844-5 history]  "Shortly after sickness left us, we moved to Norwich, in the state of Vermont." [1845 history] 

7.  The precise date (or even month) of the typhus outbreak in West Lebanon, NH, is unknown, but it most likely began in November or December 1812 because of the epidemiological tendency of typhus to surge in colder months when people are in close quarters, supporting a late fall onset in the winter of 1812–1813.

Assumptions and Inferences

These facts support a variety of assumptions and inferences.

1. Based on Lucy Mack Smith's vague recollections in 1844-5, Hyrum started attending Moor's school ("the academy in Hanover") sometime in after the family moved to Lebanon in 1811, which could mean in the year 1811 or sometime in 1812 (after the family had established themselves), until early 1813 due to the typhus outbreak. This gives a range of possibility from anywhere between two years to a few months. The Dartmouth records don't show his name because they were lost, because he started school late after the tuition was recorded, or for some other reason.

2. In the fall of 1814, after everyone in the family had recovered, Hyrum was able to return to school to study "Arithmetic" for one quarter as indicated on the Moor's school records. Maybe he also attended during other quarters in 1813 or 1814, but his name does not appear on the records of the final 3 quarters for 1814 even though his classmates' names do appear. 

3. The extant record from the fall of 1814 shows Hyrum studying "Arithmetic." Compared with the subjects his classmates were studying, "Arithmetic" is fairly basic, if not remedial. This reality lends credence to the lower range of his school attendance, more likely only a few months in 1812 than two or more full years. Alternatively, the fact that by 1814 Hyrum was still studying "Arithmetic" could mean he was a poor student.

4. Whether Hyrum's attendance at Moor's school was limited or he was a poor student, in either case it is not plausible that he was attending sophisticated theology lectures, engaging in philosophical debates and discussions, studying architecture, and otherwise participating in the advanced intellectual activities at Dartmouth college.

5. On the other hand, maybe Lucy downplayed Hyrum's attendance and in reality Hyrum spent several years at Moor's academy, which exposed him to the advanced intellectual activities at Dartmouth college. Maybe Hyrum was an exceptional student who understood and remembered what he heard at hundreds of lectures and during innumerable conversations and debates. Maybe the records were lost or nonexistent for some reason other than that Hyrum simply wasn't there.

The purpose of this analysis is to differentiate between facts upon which everyone can agree, and assumptions and inferences upon which people probably disagree, depending on their subjective weighing of the evidence, their confirmation bias, their worldview, their own experience, etc.

By separating facts and clearly spelling out assumptions, inferences and theories, everyone can make informed decisions about the ultimate hypotheses about Hyrum's experience in Hanover.

_____

With this background, we can assess the author's objectives for his article. The Introduction summarizes these objectives (I added the numbering for clarity)

In this paper I shall demonstrate

(i) the close relationship between the early Dartmouth College community and curriculum (see exhibits 2 and 3); 

(ii) the members of the extended family of the prophet Joseph Smith, who were an integral part of that community from 1771 to 1817 (see exhibit 1 and exhibit 4); 

(iii) and subsequent Mormon doctrine and community, which emerged under the direction of Joseph Smith (see exhibit 5). 

I shall proceed to develop a plausible intellectual development view of Joseph Smith from the perspective of his brother Hyrum Smith.

If you read the paper, keep in mind these objectives because they explain why the author did what he did in the paper.

_______

In the pursuit of clarity, charity, and understanding, I did a detailed review, which you can see here. The review is preliminary, pending new information and comments, before I finalize it and post it on this blog and on academia.org.

https://interpreterpeerreviews.blogspot.com/2025/06/behrens-paper-on-dartmouth.html

In the spirit of charity I assume Behrens researched and wrote in good faith. In 2006 there were probably not as many online sources. Maybe detailed citations were not expected back then, although I used to require them from students and from myself...

The paper is replete with the author's conclusions about how deeply Dartmouth affected Hyrum for the rest of his life, including science, architecture, and theology.

But unfortunately the paper is also replete with factual errors, compound assumptions and inferences, poor to nonexistent citations, and logical fallacies. 

Conclusion: Unless and until additional evidence comes forth, the connection between Joseph Smith and Dartmouth is tenuous at best. The only connection is through his brother Hyrum, who attended Moor's school as a "Charity Scholar" for perhaps as little as one quarter in 1812 and one quarter in 1814 to learn "Arithmetic" while his classmates studied Virgil and Mathematics. 

Hyrum apparently taught Joseph about the arithmetic he had learned at Moor's school. Joseph mentioned in his 1832 history that “I was mearly instructtid in reading and writing and the ground <rules> of Arithmatic which const[it]uted my whole literary acquirements.” 

Beyond that, the connections with Dartmouth appear illusory at best.

_____


Dartmouth College in the early 1800s.

https://dartreview.com/history-of-dartmouth-college-vol-1-a-review/

(click to enlarge)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dartmouth_College_campus_-_The_Green,_early_1800s.jpg

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

The Joseph Smith locket

On the Mormon Book Reviews channel, Curtis Weber gave a detailed explanation of his analysis of the Joseph Smith locket.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AyKyDOtbEU&t=6279s

(click to enlarge)

As both an artist and a 3D computer animator, I found the presentation fascinating and convincing.

Kudos to both Curtis and Steve Pynakker for an outstanding presentation. 

Additional images from the presentation (click to enlarge):






:


Sunday, April 6, 2025

Reviewing Rough Stone Rolling


One of the most popular "Pages" on this blog is the commentary on Richard Bushman's Rough Stone Rolling, but many readers don't know about the Pages.

We have all learned more about Church history in the years since Rough Stone Rolling was published, and while it would be great to have a new edition, that seems impractical at this point. Instead, we can offer suggestions for improvement, such as those at this link:

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/p/rough-stone-rolling-analysis-part-1.html

_____

Below is an excerpt from the review. The original is in blue, my comments are in red, and my revision, or emendation, is in purple.

5. p. 71. Neither Joseph nor Oliver explained how translation worked, but Joseph did not pretend to look at the "reformed Egyptian” words, the language on the plates, according to the book's own description. 

"Joseph did not pretend" assumes Joseph would have been pretending had he claimed to look at the engravings on the plates. But Joseph himself said he not only looked at the plates, but he copied the characters, studied the characters, and translated the characters. As we'll see below, Joseph's mother explained that Joseph applied the U&T to his eyes and looked on the plates, but RSJ omitted that, too.

Ironically, the Lord warned Joseph that his enemies would say "that you have pretended to translate." In our day, it is certain LDS scholars who claim Joseph merely pretended to translate.

Furthermore, in D&C 10:41, the Lord told Joseph "you shall translate the engravings which are on the plates of Nephi." In verse 45, the Lord said "it is wisdom in me that you should translate this first part of the engravings of Nephi." Neither instruction makes sense if Joseph was not actually translating the engravings.

Proposed emendation: Joseph reported, “immediately after my arrival there I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the Urim and Thummim I translated some of them.” (Joseph Smith—History 1:62) Furthermore, the Lord instructed Joseph to "translate the engravings" on specific plates. (D&C 10:41, 45) However, neither Joseph nor Oliver explained in detail how the translation worked.



Monday, March 24, 2025

Royal Skousen's excerpt technique

In my review of Royal Skousen's Part Seven, I noted that Skousen spent several pages to promote the narrative that it was Moroni who showed the plates to Mary Whitmer (pages 43-47).

Near the conclusion of that discussion, Skousen wrote this:

We should also add here the earliest record of the angel appearing to Mary Whitmer. This is found in Edward Stevenson’s interview of David Whitmer on 22-23 December 1877 and is recorded as follows in Stevenson’s diary [Cook 13, Vogel 5:31]:

& the next Morning Davids Mother Saw the Person at the Shed and he took the Plates from A Box & Showed them to her She Said that they were fastened with Rings thus: D he turned the leaves over this was a Sattisfaction to her.

Skousen quotes both Cook's David Whitmer Interviews and Vogel's Early Mormon Documents. Both of those references are out of print and difficult to find (although I have both of them). 

I previously commented on how Skousen selectively quoted from these two sources to omit what David said about the messenger (the Person at the Shed) being "one of the Nephites." 

https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/2024/12/creating-narrative-with-selective.html

(click to enlarge)

In that post, I included an image from Vogel's book to show how Skousen omitted David's statement that Joseph identified the man as one of the Nephites.

The part circled here in orange is Skousen's quotation. The top part circled in red is a continuation from the previous page, where David reported that Joseph "said it was one of the Nephites & that he had the Plates."

We can speculate why Skousen omitted that part of Stevenson's journal. Maybe he omitted it because it contradicted his personal belief that it was Moroni who showed the plates to Mary Whitmer, or because he didn't actually read the original and simply copied and pasted someone else's excerpt, or because he decided that Moroni was "one of the Nephites" anyway.

But it doesn't matter because regardless of the reason, omitting a relevant part of an original document to promote one's personal views is inexcusable.

Note: Vogel's footnote refers to one of several other versions of the interview that Stevenson produced. Stevenson also reported in another account that Joseph told David "their visitor was one of the three Nephites to whom the Savior gave the promise of life on earth until He should come in power" and that this was the Nephite whom mother Whitmer saw.  

All these references are available here:

https://www.mobom.org/trip-to-fayette-references

_____

To verify the Cook and Vogel references, we can read directly from Stevenson's journal.

https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets/82199881-7613-43e6-a79e-b72609d95b23/0/22?lang=eng

page 17
click to enlarge

Again, we can see how Skousen omitted the part of the journal that contradicts his Moroni theory.

Page 18, annotated
Click to enlarge


Friday, March 7, 2025

JSP, CHD are awesome

Just a brief note about how awesome the Joseph Smith Papers (https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/) and the Church History Department are. 

Readers here know how much I rely upon the expertise of Church historians, their staff, and everyone involved with accumulating, indexing, organizing, and presenting historical documents. They are careful and professional. 

Every time I do a presentation, fireside, etc. about Church history, I encourage audience members to become familiar with the Joseph Smith Papers.

There are other invaluable collections of historical material that I often rely upon as well, such as the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale (http://edwards.yale.edu/), archive.org, the Founding Fathers resources (https://founders.archives.gov/), etc. 

But the Joseph Smith Papers is probably the best organized and most accessible, with outstanding images of original documents accompanied by transcripts and notes.

The Church History Library Catalog is also outstanding, and it is improving all the time. 

https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/

The staff is helpful, responsive, and prompt. 

_____

I sometimes make recommendations for improvement. Many of these suggestions seem obvious, and it surprises me that it takes so long for changes to be made, but there is always institutional inertia to overcome. Plus, everyone is busy and apparently there is no one assigned at the Joseph Smith Papers or the Church History Department to make corrections/improvements, such as an ombudsman. 

But eventually the right thing happens....


Thursday, March 6, 2025

Dirkmaat and Jonathan Edwards

The recent focus on Jonathan Edwards adds a lot to our understanding of the Restoration, but scholars need to be careful to avoid perpetuating false stereotypes. 

BYU Professor Gerrit Dirkmaat, an awesome scholar and a great guy, gave a fireside that was uploaded to YouTube. During the fireside he related a misleading account of what Jonathan Edwards taught. Maybe it was effective for his rhetorical purposes, but viewers are better served by learning accurate history.

This is important because of the influence Jonathan Edwards and others had on young Joseph Smith, which we're documenting here: https://www.mobom.org/jonathan-edwards. That site includes annotated chapters and sections from the Restoration scriptures that indicate Joseph's familiarity with ("intimate acquaintance with") the work of Jonathan Edwards. Brother Dirkmaat's presentation leads to another type of annotation. We can read Edwards' works and see how his nonbiblical terminology appears in the Restoration scriptures. An example of this is included at the end of this post.

Brother Dirkmaat makes an important and legitimate point about the influence Jonathan Edwards had on Joseph Smith, but it is neither necessary nor appropriate to misrepresent Edwards' work to make this point.

_____

This is the section of the fireside where Brother Dirkmaat begins to discuss Edwards. (We'll refer to Brother Dirkmaat as simply Dirkmaat through the rest of this post.)

https://youtu.be/TVSKjHqCFqY?t=253

(click to enlarge)

This slide shows an excerpt from Edwards' famous sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.”  

Below is the YouTube transcript with my comments. Original in blue, my comments in red, interlinear quotations in green.

Dirkmaat introduces Edwards here:

this is Jonathan Edwards who gave the great sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” 

Notice how he explains God's relationship to mankind.

As anyone who reads the sermon can see, Edwards is not explaining "God's relationship to mankind" but instead is describing the fate of those who are not born again. Dirkmaat completely misleads his viewers by omitting Edwards’ introduction to this part of the sermon (see below). 

It is possible that Dirkmaat simply relied on the quoted excerpt which he found somewhere, such as in the writings of Terryl Givens and Steven Harper, who teach a caricature of Edwards similar to what Dirkmaat does in this fireside.

But as a professional historian, Dirkmaat surely read Edwards' sermon before quoting an out-of-context excerpt. Thus we are left concluding that he deliberately omitted the introduction for rhetorical purposes.

[Here Dirkmaat quotes from the slide] 

God abhors you and he's dreadfully provoked his wrath towards you burns like fire he looks at you as worthy of nothing else but be cast Into the Fire. He is of purer eyes than to Bear you in his sight you are 10,000 times as abominable in his sight as the most hateful and venomous serpent…

Definitely this is harsh rhetoric by Edwards. But is that God's "relationship to mankind" as Dirkmaat claims? 

Let's read Edwards' introduction that Dirkmaat omitted, which appears two paragraphs before the except Dirkmaat quoted:

Thus are all you that never passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit of God upon your souls; all that were never born again, and made new creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and before altogether unexperienced light and life...you are thus in the hands of an angry God; it is nothing but his mere pleasure that keeps you from being this moment swallowed up in everlasting destruction. [Emphasis added]

Far from explaining "God's relationship to mankind," Edwards was explaining the fate of those who are not born again, using terminology that appears in the Book of Mormon, including nonbiblical terminology. See the annotation at the end of this post.

Now that's not exactly the message that you hear, you know, in church on Sunday, about how much God loves you. 

If we don’t hear this in Sunday School, it’s because we no longer quote certain passages from the Book of Mormon, as we can see in the annotation at the end of this post.

In fact the message that Jonathan Edwards is sharing is that God hates you and he hates you because you're a sinner. You're vile in his sight because of that, because you're a sinner and you know once you get through this life, you know, lucky you, you're going to end up most likely going to hell and as Edwards explains how, you know, he gives you an idea of what this hell is like.

Obviously, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of what Edwards taught in this very sermon. Edwards was specifically addressing those who were "never born again," who "never passed under a great change of heart," etc. 

Just as the Book of Mormon teaches, using the identical language.

Compare how Dirkmaat portrays Edwards to the actual language Edwards uses in this very sermon, such as this passage. [Note: the terms in red below are nonbiblical Book of Mormon terms.]

And now you have an extraordinary opportunity, a day wherein Christ has flung the door of mercy wide open, and stands in the door calling and crying with a loud voice to poor sinners; a day wherein many are flocking to him, and pressing into the kingdom of God; many are daily coming from the east, west, north and south; many that were very lately in the same miserable condition that you are in, are in now an happy state, with their hearts filled with love to him that has loved them and washed them from their sins in his own blood, and rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. 

How awful is it to be left behind at such a day! To see so many others feasting, while you are pining and perishing! To see so many rejoicing and singing for joy of heart, while you have cause to mourn for sorrow of heart, and howl for vexation of spiritHow can you rest one moment in such a condition? Are not your souls as precious as the souls of the people at Suffield, where they are flocking from day to day to Christ? 

[Dirkmaat next quotes this slide, again without explaining Edwards' additional introduction]


(click to enlarge)

It would be Dreadful to suffer the fierceness of the Wrath of the almighty God for one moment but you must suffer it for eternity. 

Ironically, this is another example of the influence of Jonathan Edwards on Joseph Smith. The term "fierceness" appears in the scriptures in this frequency: OT (9) NT (1) BM (1) DC (2)

But the phrase "fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God" appears only twice in the scriptures--both in the Doctrine and Covenants.

107 When he shall deliver up the kingdom, and present it unto the Father, spotless, saying: I have overcome and have trodden the wine-press alone, even the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God. (Doctrine and Covenants 76:107)

106 And again, another angel shall sound his trump, which is the seventh angel, saying: It is finished; it is finished! The Lamb of God hath overcome and trodden the wine-press alone, even the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God(Doctrine and Covenants 88:106)

There will be no end to this Exquisite horrible misery

"Exquisite" is a nonbiblical term that appears in this frequency: BM (2) DC (1) PGP (1).

"Horrible" appears in this frequency: OT (6) BM (2)

"Misery" appears disproportionately in the Book of Mormon in this frequency: OT (6) NT (1) BM (25) DC (3) PGP (3).

When you look forward you shall see a long forever, a boundless duration before you which will swallow up your thoughts and amaze your soul. And you you will absolutely despair of ever having any deliverance, any end, any mitigation, any rest at all. You will know certainly that you must wear out long ages, millions of millions of ages in wrestling with this Almighty, merciless vengeance. And then when you have done so, when so many ages have actually been spent by you in this manner, you will know that that is all but a DOT to what remains. So that your punishment will indeed be infinite.

It's important to reiterate that Edwards was specifically addressing those who have not been born again, such as in this passage.

How dreadful is the state of those that are daily and hourly in danger of this great wrath, and infinite misery! But this is the dismal case of every soul in this congregation, that has not been born again, however moral and strict, sober and religious they may otherwise be. ... If we knew that there was one person, and but one, in the whole congregation that was to be the subject of this misery, what an awful thing would it be to think of! If we knew who it was, what an awful sight would it be to see such a person! How might all the rest of the congregation lift up a lamentable and bitter cry over him! 

... 

Consider this, you that are here present, that yet remain in an unregenerate state.... Now God stands ready to pity you; this is a day of mercy; you may cry now with some encouragement of obtaining mercy; But when once the day of mercy is past, your most lamentable and dolorous cries and shrieks will be in vain."

Compare Alma: "now is the time and the day of your salvation... this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God... For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked." (Alma 34:31, 32, 35)

Note: "prepare to meet God," "procrastinate," "subjected to," "spirit of the devil," and "final state" are all nonbiblical Book of Mormon terms used by Edwards several times. E.g., "the judgment of God, by which the final state of wicked men is determined..." (Alma 34:35)

Like the Book of Mormon, Edwards often quotes Isaiah as authority. Here is an example from this sermon:

How awful are those words, Isaiah 63:3, which are the words of the great God. "I will tread them in mine anger, and will trample them in my fury, and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment." 'Tis perhaps impossible to conceive of words that carry in them greater manifestations of these three things, viz. contempt, and hatred, and fierceness of indignation. 

Thus it will be with you that are in an unconverted state, if you continue in it; 

[Next, Dirkmaat makes his rhetorical point, which is a good one that explains how Joseph was affected by Jonathan Edwards in a positive way (as were most of Edwards' listeners and readers).]

Wow. I mean that's certainly is a message uh about God. You can see the reason why a young Joseph hearing sermons like that might, as he writes in the 1832 account he gives of the first Vision, at about the age of 12 years old my mind became seriously impressed with regard to the all important concerns for the welfare of My Immortal Soul which led me to the searching the scriptures. 

I mean this, this idea is something that matters to him because he's hearing about the fact that hell is terrible and you're probably going there

In this 1832 account, Joseph Smith referred to "my intimate acquaintance with those of differant denominations." 

The evidence of Joseph's "intimate acquaintance" exists throughout the Restoration scriptures, which is also evidence that Joseph actually translated the plates (contrary to SITH). 

To reiterate: The recent focus on Jonathan Edwards adds a lot to our understanding of the Restoration, but scholars need to be careful to avoid perpetuating false stereotypes. 

_____

Annotation of Edwards' introduction quoted above, showing blending of biblical passages. Red words are nonbiblical Book of Mormon terms used by Edwards.

Thus are all you that never passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit of God upon your souls; all that were never born again, and made new creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and before altogether unexperienced light and life...you are thus in the hands of an angry God; it is nothing but his mere pleasure that keeps you from being this moment swallowed up in everlasting destruction. [Emphasis added]

Biblical and Book of Mormon terminology

mighty powerOT (4) NT (2) BM (4) DC (1) JE (150)

Spirit of GodOT (14) NT (12) BM (20) DC (3) PGP (4) JE (100s)

born againNT (3) BM (4) PGP (1) JE (140)

E.g., "if ye are not born again ye cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven. (Alma 7:14)

raised fromOT (1) NT (9) BM (4) JE (100)

being dead: NT (4) BM (1) JE (60)

altogether: OT (25) NT (4) BM (1) DC (5) PGP (1) JE (700)

in the hands: OT (2) [hands of Aaron and his sons] BM (10) [hands of God, the Lord] DC (5) [hands of the church, the bishop, Christ, the Saints, of the people] JE (200) [hands of God, the Lord, Christ]

angry: OT (37) NT (7) BM (69) DC (6) PGP (4) JE (600)

E.g., "For it is not written that Zenos alone spake of these things, but Zenock also spake of these things— For behold, he said: Thou art angry, O Lord, with this people, because they will not understand thy mercies which thou hast bestowed upon them because of thy Son. (Alma 33:15–16)

I, the Lord, was angry with you yesterday, but today mine anger is turned away. (Doctrine and Covenants 61:20)

nothing but: OT (7) NT (13) BM (3) DC (3) JE (100s)

pleasure: OT (43) NT (18) BM (17) DC (5) JE (100s)

E.g., O then, why not able to command the earth, or the workmanship of his hands upon the face of it, according to his will and pleasure(Jacob 4:9)

Fear not thine enemies, for they are in mine hands and I will do my pleasure with them.
(Doctrine and Covenants 136:30)

from being: OT (14) NT (1) BM (3) JE (100s)

swallowed up: OT (11) NT (4) BM (15) (200)

Note: "swallowed up in" NT (1) BM (12)

everlasting destruction: NT (1) BM (9) JE (40)

And behold I say unto you all that this was a snare of the adversary, which he has laid to catch this people, that he might bring you into subjection unto him, that he might encircle you about with his chains, that he might chain you down to everlasting destruction, according to the power of his captivity. (Alma 12:6)

Nonbiblical Book of Mormon terminology

change of heart: BM (2) JE (25)

I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart (Alma 5:26)

which leadeth them to faith on the Lord, and unto repentance, which faith and repentance bringeth a change of heart unto them— (Helaman 15:7)

upon your souls: BM (1) DC (2) JE (3)

Why have ye transfigured the holy word of God, that ye might bring damnation upon your souls(Mormon 8:33)

These words are given unto you, and they are pure before me; wherefore, beware how you hold them, for they are to be answered upon your souls in the day of judgment. (Doctrine and Covenants 41:12)

Be not ashamed, neither confounded; but be admonished in all your high-mindedness and pride, for it bringeth a snare upon your souls. (Doctrine and Covenants 90:17)

new creatures: BM (1) JE (30)

And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. (Mosiah 27:26)

Note: "new creature" appears in 2 Cor. 5:17 and Gal. 6:15.

a state of: BM (24) JE (100s)

Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; (Alma 40:14)

this moment: PGP (1) JE (45)

just at this moment of great alarm (Joseph Smith—History 1:16)




Monday, February 24, 2025

2025 improvements: The Seminary manual

The current version of the Seminary manual includes "lesson 8--the Translation of the Book of Mormon."

Here's the link:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-seminary-teacher-manual-2025/062-the-translation-of-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng

The manual does a good job focusing on the content and purpose of the Book of Mormon. It also helps students respond to a common question they might face from non-LDS friends. To that extent, it is helpful. 

But for students who seek clarity and understanding about the topic, the manual omits important, relevant references and blurs rather than clarifies the issues about the translation of the Book of Mormon.

This post offers some suggestions for improvement in the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding.

_____

The lesson appropriately focuses more on the content and purpose of the Book of Mormon instead of the book's origins. It may be beneficial for some students to emphasize that "it doesn't matter how the book was produced; all that matters is that it is authentic scripture."

But other students may seek a deeper or clearer understanding, especially when they are confronted with specific questions. By largely ignoring what Joseph and Oliver taught and instead emphasizing what others taught, along with the speculation of certain scholars, the lesson leaves students with a confusing narrative that aligns with the critics instead of the prophets.

Students should be empowered by learning what Joseph, Oliver and the other prophets have taught about the translation so they can make informed decisions and respond to critics with a firm foundation of the teachings of the prophets. It is far better for students to learn what Joseph and Oliver taught in seminary than for them to learn about this from others who are challenging their faith.

My comments in red, suggested quotations in green.

Lesson 18: Doctrine and Covenants 6-9

The Translation of the Book of Mormon

“The Gift and Power of God”

translating the Book of Mormon


This image presents the SITH narrative that contradicts the explicit teachings of both Oliver and Joseph. A more "neutral" (ambiguous) image would better fit the point of this lesson.


With Oliver Cowdery serving as his scribe, Joseph Smith made miraculous progress on the translation of the Book of Mormon during the spring of 1829. While we don’t know specific details about how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, we do know he did it by the gift and power of God. 


This excerpt--"by the gift and power of God"--is misdirection. When Joseph said he translated it by the gift and power of God, he always said also that he used the Urim and Thummim and/or took the translation from the record itself. It's always better to quote what Joseph actually taught instead of paraphrasing or truncating what he taught.


This lesson is intended to help students strengthen their testimony that God provided means and power for Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon for us.


Possible Learning Activities

Origin of the Book of Mormon


Consider beginning class by sharing the following scenario. You could give students an opportunity to role-play with a partner or in front of the class.


Imagine one day you shared with one of your good friends your belief that the Book of Mormon is scripture like the Bible. Your friend seems a little surprised and says she was taught that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon from his imagination.


  • What are some ways you might respond in this situation? 


Role-play is effective, and some people might be taught that Joseph composed the text, but by far the more common teaching from critics is that Joseph used a seer stone (a "peep stone" according to Mormonism Unvailed), which is an occult device, and didn't even use the plates after all. Students would benefit from addressing that point the way Joseph and Oliver did, by refuting the SITH narrative by emphasizing that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates.

Now that prominent LDS scholars have publicly announced their conclusion that Joseph and Oliver intentionally misled everyone about the translation, this may become an even more common objection that students will encounter. The current version of this lesson leaves them unprepared to discuss that objection.

Explain that this lesson will help students learn about some of the details related to Joseph Smith’s translation of the Book of Mormon. Invite students to look for truths as they study that can help them in situations like this and strengthen their testimony that the Book of Mormon is from God.


As we'll see, the lesson largely ignores what Joseph and Oliver taught and instead focuses on the SITH narrative. This leads to more confusion than to clarity.


Oliver Cowdery assists in the translation


Consider asking the students what they remember about the circumstances related to Oliver Cowdery assisting Joseph Smith with the translation of the Book of Mormon. If needed, refer to the “Doctrine and Covenants 6” lesson or Saints, vol. 1, The Standard of Truth58–60.


The Saints book goes on to say this:


Sometimes Joseph translated by looking through the interpreters and reading in English the characters on the plates.

Often he found a single seer stone to be more convenient. He would put the seer stone in his hat, place his face into the hat to block out the light, and peer at the stone. Light from the stone would shine in the darkness, revealing words that Joseph dictated as Oliver rapidly copied them down.


Of course, nothing Joseph or Oliver ever said supports that narrative. This SITH narrative was published in 1834 in Mormonism Unvailed as an alternative to the Urim and Thummim narrative. Joseph's contemporaries and successors in Church leadership always testified of the Urim and Thummim narrative, but critics and  certain modern LDS scholars promote the SITH narrative instead. 


It would be less confusing for students to learn what Joseph and Oliver taught instead of the rationalizations of modern scholars.


Oliver Cowdery

Within two days of coming to Harmony, Pennsylvania, to meet Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery started working as Joseph’s scribe. Joseph and Oliver soon made miraculous progress on the translation of the Book of Mormon. It is estimated that, with Oliver as his scribe, Joseph Smith completed the translation of the Book of Mormon in approximately 65 working days (see Russell M. Nelson, “A Treasured Testament,” Ensign, July 1993, 61).


The passive voice here--"it is estimated"-- avoids reference to the assumptions made to come up with 65 days, but students should know that Joseph said he resumed translation in the fall of 1828 and thus had completed at least some portion of Mosiah, if not all of it, before Oliver arrived.


Joseph Smith’s descriptions of the translation


Consider asking students what they know about how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon in such a miraculous way.


The following excerpt from the Gospel Topics essay titled “Book of Mormon Translation” can help students understand what Joseph Smith wanted the world to know about the translation.


In the preface to the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith wrote: “I would inform you that I translated [the book], by the gift and power of God.” When pressed for specifics about the process of translation, Joseph repeated on several occasions that it had been done “by the gift and power of God” and once added, “It was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon.” (Gospel Topics Essays, “Book of Mormon Translation,” ChurchofJesusChrist.org)

The Gospel Topics Essay has lots of problems on its own (see https://www.ldshistoricalnarratives.com/p/gospel-topics-essay-on-translation.html), but here we can observe two of them.

1.  The quoted excerpt from the Preface is misleading because it omits the rest of the sentence, in which Joseph explains:

"I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon."

In this passage, Joseph explained that he translated 116 pages that he "took from the Book of Lehi." By declaring the source of the translation--the Book of Lehi which was on the plates--Joseph contradicted rumors that he had not used the plates or that he had merely read words that appeared on a stone in a hat.

2. Anyone who looks at the reference can see that Joseph was not asked "to relate how this record was translated."  

Note 2 cites Minutes, 25–26 October 1831,” Minute Book 2, 13, josephsmithpapers.org.

Br.  said that he thought best that the information of the coming forth of the book of Mormon be related by Joseph himself to the  present that all might know for themselves.
Br. Joseph Smith jr. said that it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon, & also said that it was not expedient for him to relate these things &c.


Hyrum asked Joseph to relate "The coming forth of the book of Mormon," a topic that is far broader than the translation and may not have even included the translation anyway. Some of those present in the meeting did later discuss their own thoughts about the translation, which indicates they did not interpret Joseph's response to pertain to the translation per se.

The "coming forth" would include the visits of Moroni, Joseph's interaction with other divine messengers including the Three Nephites (one of whom introduced himself to Mary Whitmer as "Brother Nephi), the visits to the repository in Cumorah, the two sets of plates, and much more.


At any rate, Joseph (and Oliver) were specific about one thing. They claimed that Joseph translated the plates by means of the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates, which refutes the claims that he used another "instrument."


  • What truths can we learn from Joseph Smith’s statement about the translation of the Book of Mormon?


First, as we just was, the minutes from this meeting were not a statement about the translation. More importantly, the manual does not tell students what Joseph actually said about the translation. At a minimum, the manual should give students the quotations from what Joseph taught in the Elders' Journal and the Wentworth letter.

Here are some examples that every Latter-day Saint should be familiar with.

1832. An article in the Boston Investigator 2 (August 10, 1832), reported on the missionary efforts of Orson Hyde and Samuel Smith (Joseph's younger brother). They had been called on a mission to the "eastern countries" in January 1832 (D&C 75:13). 

The article included this exchange:

Q.-In what manner was the interpretation, or translation made known, and by whom was it written?

A.-It was made known by the spirit of the Lord through the medium of the Urim and Thummim; and was written partly by Oliver Cowdery, and partly by Martin Harris.

Q.-What do you mean by Urim and Thummim?

A.-The same as were used by the prophets of old, which were two crystal stones, placed in bows something in the form of spectacles, which were found with the plates.

In 1838, Joseph set out several oft-asked questions in the Elders' Journal. Joseph answered the question about the Book of Mormon directly, clearly, and unambiguously. This should be the starting place for any discussion of the translation, but the SITH scholars never quote it.

Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the Book of Mormon?

Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the Book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me and told me where they were and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/10 


1842. In the 1842 Wentworth letter, Joseph reiterated the point. This, too, is missing from the GTE.

With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/church-history-1-march-1842/2 


  • Help students identify the truth that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God.



Why is it important to know the Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God rather than by Joseph Smith?

This is an odd framing. Joseph himself claimed that he translated the book. The question seems designed to lead students to think that the seer stone translated the book instead of Joseph Smith. This compounds the confusion students are facing.

Translation instruments

The following can help students understand a little about the instruments God made available to Joseph Smith to help in his efforts to translate the Book of Mormon.



When the angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith in 1823, he gave instructions to the Prophet about how the Book of Mormon would come forth.

Read Joseph Smith—History 1:34–35 and look for what instruments God had prepared for the translation of the Book of Mormon.


This reference refers only to the Urim and Thummim. Students should also read verse 62 which explains how Joseph used the Urim and Thummim to translate specific characters. Also, students should read this: "you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim." (Doctrine and Covenants 10:1) Nowhere in the scriptures does the Lord give Joseph power to translate by the means of a stone he found in a well.



If desired, you could also invite students to read Mormon 9:34 and Ether 3:23–24 to help them understand that Book of Mormon prophets understood that God would prepare a way for their words to be translated.


Also helpful is another account of Moroni's visit from the Joseph Smith Papers that was published more often than JS-History during Joseph's lifetime.


He said this history was written and deposited not far from that place, and that it was our brother’s privilege, if obedient to the commandments of the Lord, to obtain and translate the same by the means of the Urim and Thummim, which were deposited for that purpose with the record.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/69 


  • In what ways did the Lord prepare the Book of Mormon for translation?


To help students better understand details about Joseph Smith’s use of physical instruments to translate the Book of Mormon, consider showing the video “Seer Stone” (3:47), available at ChurchofJesusChrist.org. Alternatively, you could summarize the following information or invite a student to read it to the class.


The video confuses viewers the same way the Gospel Topics essay does.


3:47

Seer Stone

Later historical accounts indicate that in addition to using the Urim and Thummim (sometimes called the Nephite interpreters or spectacles) to translate the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith used another instrument called a seer stone. The Prophet had discovered this instrument several years before he obtained the gold plates.


This is an inaccurate paragraph because the 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed described SITH as an alternative to the Urim and Thummim. Joseph and Oliver responded to Mormonism Unvailed on several occasions by emphasizing that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates.


Students don't need to read the account in Mormonism Unvailed, but they should know that this was the origin of the SITH narrative.


The translation finally commenced. They were found to contain a language not now known upon the earth, which they termed "reformed Egyptian characters." The plates, therefore, which had been so much talked of, were found to be of no manner of use. After all, the Lord showed and communicated to him every word and letter of the Book. Instead of looking at the characters inscribed upon the plates, the prophet was obliged to resort to the old *''pecp stone," which he formerly used in money-digging. This he placed in a hat, or box, into which he also thrust his face. Through the stone he could then discover a single word at a time, which he repeated aloud to his amanuensis, who committed it to paper, when another word would immediately appear, and thus the performance continued to the end of the book.


Another account they give of the transaction, is, that it v/as performed with the big spectacles before mentioned, and which were in fact, the identical Urim and Thummim...

https://archive.org/details/mormonismunvaile00howe/page/18/mode/2up?q=Urim+ 


We do not know many details about how Joseph used these instruments God had prepared.


Students should know that Joseph translated individual characters with the U&T, that he applied them to his eyes to look on the plates, and that he never once stated, impied, or even suggested that he read words off a stone in the hat.


 But witnesses said Joseph would sometimes place either the Urim and Thummim or the seer stone into a hat to block out light, which allowed him to better see the words that appeared on the physical instruments (see Gospel Topics Essays, “Book of Mormon Translation,” ChurchofJesusChrist.org).


The credibility, reliability and motivations of these witnesses has been discussed elsewhere, but basically these witnesses promoted the SITH narrative from Mormonism Unvailed, which Joseph and Oliver refuted repeatedly.


This can be easily handled by explaining to students that while there were dual, competing narratives, the scriptures and the teachings of the prophets consistently supported what Joseph and Oliver said all along.


Help students understand that while we know some details related to Joseph Smith’s translation of the Book of Mormon, there is much we do not know about the translation process. The most important truth is that God’s power enabled His word to be brought to His children.


Good conclusion that is made stronger by accepting what Joseph and Oliver taught instead of the alternative SITH narrative favored by their critics.


Consider using one or more of the following resources to help students feel that the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God.


Students can all see that Oliver referred to the Urim and Thummim and not a seer stone in a hat.

  • You may want to invite students to discuss the following questions in small groups or pairs before inviting them to share their responses with the class.


  • What words or phrases from Emma or Oliver support Joseph Smith’s testimony that the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God?


  • What do you learn or feel about God after learning how Joseph Smith was an instrument in His hands to translate the Book of Mormon?


The power of the Book of Mormon in your life


Explain that one of the best ways we can know the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God is by studying it and experiencing God’s power through living its teachings.


This is the correct emphasis of the lesson, made all the more powerful by clarity about the origin of the book.


Give students time to find a verse or story from the Book of Mormon that has impacted their lives. If students struggle to find something, consider providing help or guidance, such as inviting them to study some of the Book of Mormon doctrinal mastery passages. You could also suggest a few verses they might study.

  • What is a verse or story from the Book of Mormon that has impacted your life?

  • How has this verse or story influenced your feelings toward Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ?

Consider testifying to students that the strength they can receive from studying the Book of Mormon is confirmation of God’s power in bringing about the Book of Mormon.


Dartmouth and the FAITH model

A well-known paper titled "Dartmouth Arminianism And Its Impact on Hyrum Smith And the Smith Family" was published in 2006 by the ...