"When Joseph Smith Saw a Vision of Heavenly Mother" Corrected

LDS Living posted an article claiming that Joseph Smith saw a vision of Heavenly Mother. The same problematic information was related by Fiona Givens (as posted by Jana Riess) at Flunking Sainthood (with Religion News Service). I worry that this little "discovery" will make its rounds throughout the Bloggernacle and be received uncritically. The problem with the assertion, at least in the evidence provided, is that it simply isn't true...not without some unwanted baggage anyways. Both articles provide a quotation from the journal of Abraham H. Cannon (of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles: 1889-1896). Both articles neglect to provide the context for the quotation provided and both authors were apparently unaware of the other accounts of the same event that contradict the details in Cannon's journal. The event described is provided from Zebedee Coltrin, that took place following a conference in New Portage, Ohio, on May 7, 1834 (see HC 2:64). 

Book of Mormon Geography - Benjamin Winchester Part 3

The previous Times and Seasons editorial provided a lengthy extract from Stephens and Catherwood's Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. The author of that editorial believed that the structures found in Palenque provided incontrovertible evidence in support of the Book of Mormon. In the same volume and issue of the Church-owned newspaper as the last editorial, this conclusion is continued in three additional paragraphs. I'm not primarily concerned with authorship of the editorials as of yet, so much as I'm concerned as to what the editorials actually assert regarding Book of Mormon geography, and specifically whether any limitations are imposed upon that geography. The previous two editorials allowed for the region from Central America up to Ohio to be considered Book of Mormon lands, with the last editorial providing emphasis upon the area of Palenque as being uniquely in support of Book of Mormon events (specifically citing 2 Nephi 5 as a corroborating text). The editorial below is further assessed for clarification and elaboration upon these previous assertions.

Book of Mormon Geography - Benjamin Winchester Part 2

In the previous post I discussed the first editorial in the Times and Seasons wherein Stephens and Catherwood's book was referenced as supporting the Book of Mormon. It was noted that the writer of the editorial actually understood Ohio, Tennessee, and Central America as locations supporting the Book of Mormon. Each of these locations seemed to contribute to the general term "this continent" used in describing Book of Mormon geography.  Additionally, if Benjamin Winchester wrote the editorial as asserted by Neville, then Winchester would have viewed both the "heartland" and Central America as providing corroborating evidence in support of the Book of Mormon. This post continues the exploration of the Times and Seasons editorials wherein Stephens and Catherwood's book is discussed. In this particular editorial, a lengthy quotation is provided, followed by some editorial commentary.

Book of Mormon Geography - Benjamin Winchester

I've read the first several chapters in Moroni's America and there are several points raised that I'd like to address; however, I will be returning to most of those points in a separate post. In the meantime, I wanted to comment on the Times and Seasons editorials regarding John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood's book, Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. Neville refers to these editorials multiple times in Moroni's America and asserts that Benjamin Winchester conspired with William Smith to print these editorials in the Times and Seasons with the intent to change Mormon and non-Mormon conceptions of Book of Mormon geography. According to Neville, Winchester succeeded in this endeavor and the Church (including the prophets and apostles) have been off course regarding Book of Mormon geography for the last 170+ years. He argues that the collective Church has falsely believed Mesoamerica to be the location of the events described in the Book of Mormon,1 and refers the reader to his other book The Lost City of Zarahemla for a full discussion of the matter. Matt Roper has thoroughly responded to these issues, including Benjamin Winchester's personal geographic views,2 but I want to explore the editorials here further. I'm uncomfortable simply 'taking his [Neville's] word for it' and would rather explore whether his assertions have feasible plausibility based on the actual editorials in question.

Book of Mormon Geography - Entering the Discussion

I've never cared that much about Book of Mormon geography. I do care about Book of Mormon historicity though, and the concern about where the narrative in the Book of Mormon took place has immediate relevance to the concern that it did take place. Nevertheless, geography has always been tangential to my primary interests, and like many others I've been comfortable with the assumption that the narrative in the Book of Mormon described events that took place in Central America. I presume that most members in the Church have made similar assumptions. In recent years these assumptions have been challenged though. The assertion that Central America was the location of BoM activities has been denounced in strong terms by a small group of Latter-day Saints who advocate that the American "heartland" is where the Book of Mormon narrative really took place. I've sat on the sidelines for the past several years while these discussions have progressed, and probably would have happily stayed there, but a friend recently handed me a book written by Jonathan Neville, entitled Moroni's America, and I feel inclined to address some of the content of this book as I read through it.

Richard Bennett on Oliver Cowdery's Return

"It is not without consequence that Oliver Cowdery, "the second elder" of the Church (D&C 20:3), fell away and was excommunicated from the Church during the dark and troubling days of Kirtland, Ohio, and Far West, Missouri, in 1838. The details of his disaffection and excommunication are perhaps not as important to this study as are his return and rebaptism. Thanks to the intrepid efforts of Phineas Young, brother to Brigham Young, Oliver was kept conversant with the affairs of the Saints. As a lawyer first in Ohio and then in Wisconsin, Oliver even offered his services to the Prophet Joseph Smith when he was incarcerated in Carthage Jail in June 1844. Plagued with tuberculosis and sensing that his health was declining, Oliver returned to the Saints at Kanesville, Iowa, in November 1848. When Brigham Young, then in the valley of the Great Salt Lake, heard of his return, he penned these memorable lines of sincere gratitude and earnest invitation:

Richard Bennett on Joseph Smith's "First Vision" Environment

"A close examination into the nature of the revivals near Palmyra in 1820 does reveal "a strife of words" and "a contest about opinions" (Joseph Smith-History 1:8); however, not all the revivals were of the circus variety, full of zealous sermonizing, converts barking up trees or baying like dogs, and women swooning in trancelike devotion. Most of the revivals took on the personality and character of the dominant minister. And in the spring of 1820, one such prominent Presbyterian divine was the respected Reverend Asahel Nettleton of Connecticut (assisted by the Reverend Halsey A. Wood), whose travels through the areas west of Albany in late 1819 took the form of a quiet religious reformation.

"Preaching in Albany, Schenectady, Saratoga Springs, Ballston, West Galway, Cooperstown, Utica, and rural areas perhaps as far west as Rochester, Nettleton directed his listeners to nearby groves to pray in faith and find hope of salvation. His revivals lasted several weeks and were also characterized by Sabbath sermon meetings in which he taught the awful condition of the fallen and unrepentant soul...."All the meetings were crowded and solemn. There was no tumult, no noise. Everything was still, though every mind seemed filled with the magnitude of the work....So profound was the stillness, that a recent death could have added nothing to it, in many families. Common conversation was rarely engaged in, and every ear was open to hear the gospel....The people seemed never weary of attending....They would flock together during all the inclemencies of the season, and listen, when met, with so deep and profound an attention, that in a room crowded to overflowing, it would almost seem you might hear a pin drop or the beating of a watch. The stillness, at times, seemed to have something like mystery about it; it was sublime, it was awful; you almost seemed to be in eternity....Some of the most signal convictions seem to have been wrought by the Spirit in these circumstances....Our evening meetings [February 1820] were still more thronged, and in the coldest evenings of an unusually severe winter, many assembled who were not able to obtain admittance to our school houses, and have been seen to raise the windows and stand without in devout attention to the word of God."

Richard Bennett on the Book of Mormon Translation

"It would appear that the process was less one of decoding or deciphering the precise meaning of the individual characters and inscriptions found on the plates, as Champollion had so painstakingly done with the Rosetta Stone, and more one of discerning the meanings conveyed thereon and then, in addition, transforming such meanings into acceptable King James Bible literary English. Consequently, the interpreters seem to have functioned on two levels: conveying meaning from the ancient text while simultaneously suggesting wording in biblical-sounding English beyond Joseph's limited ability at the time. Thus it would appear that Joseph Smith was not a decoder of ancient signs and symbols or a translator in the Champollion sense but rather a transmitter, translator, and writer who, with the aid of the interpreters, transcribed what he saw into exquisite English prose and poetry."1

____________________
1 Richard E. Bennett, School of the Prophet: Joseph Smith Learns the First Principles, 1820-1830 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2010), 56

Witnesses of the Book of Mormon - Preston Nibley

Preston Nibley's Witnesses of the Book of Mormon is primarily a compilation of information about the witnesses to the Book of Mormon plates. The book contains minimal narrative, thus its value is based on the depth of resources providing biographical and other information about the witnesses. Since scholarship over the last several decades has produced numerous sources on the witnesses, the value of this compilation has been somewhat relegated. Nevertheless, for reference purposes, the sources used in Nibley's compilation is provided below.

Hugh Nibley - "A Stage Without A Play"

"MIDGLEY: What book or books have influenced you the most?"

"NIBLEY: Well, actually the scriptures. And I do like Shakespeare, 

things like Homer's Odyssey, and so forth."1 

Hugh Nibley was a fan of William Shakespeare. In his youth he memorized MacBeth and a portion of Hamlet.2 In Nibley's writings and lectures Shakespearean quotations aren't difficult to find. One particular theme from Shakespeare's writings, however, finds a fair amount of recurrence in Nibley's works, and that is the adopted and adapted idea that "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women are merely players."3  This quotation comes from the character Jacques in As You Like It, who goes on to say that "They [the players] have their exits and their entrances, And one man in his time plays many parts..." The whole speech is one of Shakespeare's more quoted scenes and it seeks to address, to a limited extent, what happens in the play, but it doesn't address the nature of the play. Shakespeare's writings show an immense interest in searching for the plot - the meaning of life. The puzzling nature of our very existence, echoed in Hamlet's famous line, "To be, or not to be: that is the question,"4 illustrates Shakespeare's search for this missing piece of his metaphor. Nibley summarizes:

The Wheat and the Tares - Reactions to the First Vision

"A discerning reader responds to a text by breaking it apart . . . 

and separating the divine wheat from the worldly chaff."1 

Why do we respond the way that we do? 

I don't remember when I first realized that there was more than one account of Joseph Smith's First Vision, even though I actually learned of the fact that more than one account existed when I first watched BYU's 1976 production, The First Vision: The Visitation of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith (starring Stewart Petersen):

In all likeliness, most members of the Church living today probably learned that there was more than one account of the First Vision from this video as well, even if this observation generally hasn't been recognized. While the typical Latter-day Saint is familiar with the canonical account of the First Vision in Joseph Smith-History, some events are depicted in this video that are not in the canonical account. For example, the 1835 account of the First Vision (transcribed by Warren Parrish, and related by Joseph Smith to Robert Matthews, "Joshua, the Jewish Minister"), includes the following details (spelling and punctuation standardized):

President Hinckley - The Keys of the Kingdom

When the Mark Hofmann drama took place I was too young to appreciate how the church handled the situation and responded to his confrontational documents. While I had heard of the counterfeit artist in my youth, it wasn't until the mission field when I first encountered issues surrounding his forgeries. A friend from home had actually written me a letter wanting to know about the "white salamander" that Joseph Smith allegedly saw. This supposed vision was based on a letter from Martin Harris to W.W. Phelps that Mark Hofmann had forged in 1984, intimating Joseph's occult practices (money digging, etc.), and included a replacement of Moroni with a white salamander. Of course the letter was fraudulent with no basis in history or reality and should have been buried years previous, but of course these types of absurdities occasionally rear their ugly heads. The letter was the forger's attempt to tie Joseph Smith more closely with the occult, since a salamander in the 1820's could refer to a "mythical being thought to be able to live in fire." This was one of a number of documents that Hofmann concocted.

The Date of the First Vision

"It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day,

early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty" (JS-H 1:14).

Joseph Smith's "first vision," the foundational event of the restoration, may have been in April 1820.  We do not have any contemporary documentation regarding this event, or any subsequent documentation from Joseph regarding the date of this event.  We do, however, have Orson Pratt stating almost fifty years later that it occurred in April of 1820:1

The 1824 First Vision Reference - Joseph Smith, Sr. and Martin Harris

April 30, 2012
by Tim Barker

In my post, The First Vision in the Formative Years of the Church, I discussed the various accounts of the First Vision related by the Prophet Joseph Smith, as well as by his contemporaries (such as Orson Pratt and Orson Hyde).  In addition to these accounts there were other early Latter-day Saints, as well as non-Latter-day Saints, who made reference to the First Vision during the prophet's life.  Later reminiscences were also recorded by those who knew the Prophet and were familiar with this foundational event.  My post was an overview of these various references and accounts of the First Vision and provided a summary of research that has been available through various resources, such as BYU Studies, Dialogue, Sunstone, and FAIR.  I added some additional information discovered through my own efforts in researching this topic as well.1  The purpose of this post is to further discuss one of these particular accounts in greater detail.

1824 - Martin Harris and Joseph Smith, Sr.

The chronologically latest published account refers to the chronologically earliest discussion of the First Vision in Willard Bean's 1938 book, A.B.C. History of Palmyra and the Beginning of Mormonism.  This is the earliest published source for the 1824 account between Martin Harris and Joseph Smith, Sr.  The relevant excerpt from Bean's book is provided below:2

The Fake Death of Martin Harris

February 16, 2012
by Tim Barker

Martin Harris died in Clarkston, Utah, in 1875, as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. In 1837 he had been excommunicated from the Church and spent most of his life in Kirtland, Ohio, until he was rebaptized in 1870, after which he moved to Utah where he spent the remainder of his life.  As one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon (having seen the plates with the engravings thereon, and having heard the voice of God testify that it was translated by His gift and power), Martin's life was often under spotlight.  He had been given considerable attention during the early days of the Church because he mortgaged his farm to pay for the publication of the Book of Mormon.  Pomeroy Tucker, a resident of Palmyra, stated that "nothing could be done in the way of printing [The Book of Mormon] without his aid..."1  In 1841, Reverend John Clark, also of Palmyra, recalled a conversation with Harris after he had returned from meeting with Charles Anthon in 1828.  Clark noted that Harris was willing to "take the spoiling of his goods" in support of Joseph Smith and the publication of the Book of Mormon.  He insisted that Martin, "was determined that the book be published, though it consume all his worldly substance."2 

The First Vision in the Formative Years of the Church

July 4, 2011
by Tim Barker

Joseph Smith's First Vision (per wiki commons)

In studying the restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the significance of Joseph Smith's "First Vision" can hardly be overstated.  Initially, however, the importance of this event appears to have been less appreciated for its profound significance and relevance.  Terryl Givens has noted that the "timing and the naming of the event assign it absolute primacy in the founding of Mormonism, [yet] the vision was described by the young Joseph and apparently interpreted by him at the time as a private experience with no greater implications for the world at large or for Christian believers generally."1  After all, while Joseph was forgiven of his sins and instructed to remain detached from all of the existing churches, the Lord promised that at some future time the fullness of the gospel would be made known to him.  When Moroni visited him three years later he learned that the time was nigh for the gospel to be preached to the world, preparatory to the second coming of the Messiah, and that he would be instrumental in translating a record containing the fullness of the everlasting gospel.  Accordingly, the angelic ministration of Moroni seems to have been initially understood as the catalyst for providing Joseph with a course of direction and a specific commission, rather than his sacred experience in the grove.2  It was only with hindsight that the importance of the First Vision began to take its rightful place in restorational theology.  For example, Joseph didn't publish an account of the vision until 1842, two years before his martyrdom; however, this sacred experience was documented and shared in a number of instances prior to this time. 

The Proclamation, President Packer, and Revelation

December 27, 2010
by Tim Barker

I had a conversation with a friend a month or two ago, regarding the subject of continuing revelation, which is, perhaps, the most distinguishing characteristic of Mormonism.  Among other issues discussed, questions arose as to what qualifies as a revelation, and how Latter-day Saints are to recognize or distinguish a revelation from an opinion.  This subject arose because of a change in wording from the discourse delivered by President Boyd K. Packer in General Conference entitled Cleansing the Inner Vessel, compared to the subsequently released printed version.  In his talk, President Packer stated that The Family: A Proclamation to the World, "qualifies according to definition, as a revelation..."  The printed version states that the proclamation "is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow."  The assumption was that President Packer's change in wording was an apparent correction, indicating that the proclamation was not a revelation, and this would be disconcerting to members who believed that it was.  Other changes in the printed version have received a degree of publicity and criticism, and there has been no shortage of speculation as to President Packer's motives.1  

When was Section 132 First Revealed to Joseph Smith Jr.?

by Adam J. Christensen

It will be my attempt to provide evidence that Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants, the revelation on plural marriage, was first made known to Joseph Smith in 1833, rather than in 1831, as previously believed. A general observation of the opening verse in this section indicates that this revelation was in answer to a query most likely springing from the translation of the Bible.1

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David, and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines--

If indeed this revelation was received during the process of the translation of the Bible, it appears reasonable that it would have been later than May 6 1833, but before July 7, 1833. This two month window places Joseph in Kirtland during this time. This theory is based on 1) the revelation and how it compares against other revelations of its era, and 2) the basis that the Bible translation timeline shows that scriptures used to formulate revelatory questions were lightly handled in 1831, but that the strength of Old Testament scriptures referencing plural wives and concubines came at a later date.

Lucy Harris vs. Joseph Smith: The 1829 Proceedings - Courts in Context

September 29, 2010
by Tim Barker

PART ONE

In my original posting on this subject, I stated that the circumstantial evidence available had led me to preliminarily conclude that Judge Alexander R. Tiffany was the magistrate who dismissed the Lucy Harris case against Joseph Smith, and that the case was held on Tuesday, May 26, 1829.  The purpose of this post is to explore the New York legal environment in 1829, and identify pertinent laws, as well as identities of judicial characters from this period that may be relevant to this case.  Additionally, the motives behind Lucy's suit will be explored and her explanation of the case will be assessed in light of relevant New York Statutes. In assessing this history, we will better understand the context of the Lucy Harris case. My preliminary conclusion will be revised where necessary based on the results of any pertinent findings.

Lucy Harris vs. Joseph Smith: The 1829 Proceedings - Lucy Smith's Narrative

PART TWO

Sketch of Lucy Smith.46

The Lucy Mack Smith Account

The only known source to discuss these proceedings was Lucy Mack Smith's family biography. She records that Lucy Harris' purpose in pursuing the case was to prevent her husband Martin from visiting Joseph Smith, and to "bring Joseph into difficulty, which would perhaps hinder him from ever accomplishing the work in which he was engaged." Her method for achieving these results consisted of proving that "Joseph never had the Record which he professed to have, and that he pretended to have in his possession certain gold plates, for the express purpose of obtaining money." To prove that Joseph did not have the plates and that he was trying to obtain money, Lucy went from house to house until she obtained a sufficient number of witnesses to serve her purposes. "Having ascertained the number and strength of her adherents, she entered a complaint against Joseph, before a certain magistrate of Lyons." Additionally, she had "made affidavit to many things herself, and directed the officers whom to subpoena," including her husband Martin. Lastly, she "sent word to Lyman Cowdery, requesting him to come thither, prepared to go post haste to Pennsylvania, (provided the decision should be given against Joseph), to assist the officers in securing and confining him in prison." Lucy Smith indicates that Lyman Cowdery answered the call immediately.47