This is a continuation of my reactions to the portrayal of church history and the rhetoric employed in the 2021 Come, Follow Me curriculum. These are not meant to be a thorough deep-dive into each lesson, but merely represent my surface level reactions to each week’s lessons from curriculum manuals for Individuals and Families, the Primary, the Sunday School, and the Youth. This being the first year the LDS church has taught the Doctrine and Covenants in Sunday School since I experienced an acute faith crisis in 2018, and also being a brand new curriculum since the roll out of the Come, Follow Me program and the release of the Saints books, I thought it would be interesting to see how the church presents its narrative to members in 2021. Forewarning: this will present a critical perspective.

---

February 2021 Overview

Jump to the sections for each week’s lessons via the links below:

Week 1 | February 7
Week 2 | February 14
Week 3 | February 21
Week 4 | February 28

---

Week 1 | D&C § 10–11

This week’s lessons continue the story of the translation of the Book of Mormon, returning to the loss of the 116-page manuscript and Joseph’s solution regarding retranslating the beginning of the Book of Mormon narrative. We’ll take a brief look at the problems with this story and the rhetoric employed in this lesson that reinforces scrupulous loyalty to the church and adherence to its practices.

The Conspiracy of the Lost Manuscript

As covered in the January | Week 4 lesson, Joseph loaned the 116-page manuscript to Martin Harris, who wanted to show it to his wife and others to convince them that he was not being defrauded by Joseph, who had a reputation as a treasure seer. “Loaned” is perhaps an odd characterization, since Harris was the primary financial backer and principal scribe for the Book of Mormon translation project, so naturally Harris would feel some sense of ownership regarding the manuscript. Regardless, Harris took the manuscript home, and it was subsequently lost—in all likelihood destroyed by Lucy Harris, who wanted to protect her own security by preventing her extremely credulous husband from being defrauded of all their assets. Upon the loss of the manuscript, Joseph did not translate again for another 9 months. When he did, he resumed without Martin Harris as a scribe and carried on from where he left off—rather than restarting from the beginning.

After translating the rest of the Book of Mormon, Joseph did finally return to the beginning of the story—nearly a year after the loss of the original manuscript. Joseph did not retranslate what he had already produced. Rather, he produced an abbreviated version of the previous manuscript, reportedly from a separate part of the gold plates. The rationale for this decision is provided in D&C § 10. The short of it: evil men had conspired to steal the 116-page manuscript, and were waiting for Joseph to reproduce it so they could make changes to their copy and thereby discredit Joseph’s ability to translate by revealing their distorted copy of the original manuscript. There are many problems with this story, and this could be a very lengthy post all unto itself, but I will only highlight a few here briefly. For an in depth discussion, consider these analyses on LDS Discussions or on MormonThink.

---

For my brief summaries of some of these problems, expand the sections below:

---

It is notable that the beginning to the Book of Mormon that Joseph ultimately produced is remarkably sparse in detail, especially when it comes to proper names for people and places. This is exactly what one might if Joseph was trying to reproduce the story of the original manuscript without contradicting himself by misremembering specific details. In his excellent book, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, Dan Vogel explains:

In revisiting the same historical period he had previously covered in the lost manuscript, roughly 600 to 125 B.C., he had to be careful not to contradict his previous writing, not being certain that the manuscript had been destroyed. To avoid discrepancies, he chose to replace Mormon’s abridgement of the “Book of Lehi” with the record of Nephi, which according to Smith’s May 1829 revelation and Nephi’s later statement (Doctrine and Covenants 10; 1 Ne. 9:1-6; 19:1-3; hereafter D&C) was primarily religious in nature and less concerned with political or historical matters. Yet, when Smith begins to dictate the superscription to Nephi’s book, he sketches the historical material but is vague about the religious content. There is no mention of Lehi’s dream or Nephi’s prophecies, both central elements in Nephi’s account. While Nephi would have known what he was going to include in his book, Smith evidently did not know beforehand what he would be inspired to dictate. [...]

In replacing the historical content of the lost manuscript, Smith has Nephi do what Mormon did, which is to prepare an abridgement of the Book of Lehi, comprising the first eight chapters of the modern editions. While this helps solve Smith’s dilemma, it is curious to think that Nephi would include this historical material, especially since he says he recorded it on his “other plates” (19:1-3). Smith’s demand for the lost historical material is greater than Nephi’s expressed need to preserve precious space on his “small” plates. Nevertheless, having Nephi abridge his father’s record was a way to effectively restore some of the material from the lost manuscript without inviting comparisons between the two.

Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, Dan Vogel
Free full text available online at Signature Books.

There is far more that could be said on this topic, and I have already gone into far more detail that I had originally planned, so again I will refer the reader to the more detailed discussions by MormonThink, LDS Discussions, Utah Lighthouse Ministries, Dan Vogel, or Brent Metcalfe. I also recommend this phenomenal interview with Dan Vogel. Consider these in the balance with the presentation provided in these lessons and with apologetic arguments available at sites like FairMormon, the Interpreter Foundation, or Book of Mormon Central.

Scrupulosity Protects Us From Satan

Now that we’ve looked at the problems with the narrative surrounding the loss of the 116-pages and the rationale in D&C § 10 for why Joseph and Oliver did not attempt a reproduction of the original translation, let’s take a look at how the lesson manuals invoke this story to promote fear-based religious devotion to the church. From the materials:

Individuals and Families
Satan would prefer that we forget he exists—or that we at least fail to recognize his attempts to influence us (see 2 Nephi 28:22–23). But the Lord’s words in Doctrine and Covenants 10 reveal that Satan is in constant, active opposition to God’s work. As you read verses 1–33, identify how Satan sought to destroy God’s work in Joseph Smith’s time (see also verses 62–63). What similarities do you see with the ways Satan works today? You could ask the Lord to help you see how Satan may be tempting you. What do you learn from section 10 that can help you resist Satan’s efforts?

Sunday School
Doctrine and Covenants 10 can help class members recognize and resist Satan’s efforts to destroy their faith. What do we learn from these verses about the ways Satan works and why he does these things? (see also verse 63). How is he working in similar ways in our day?

Primary
When I pray always, I can overcome Satan’s temptations. You can help the children understand that consistent prayer gives them the power to overcome temptation.

How can remembering to pray throughout our day help us, especially when we are tempted to do something wrong?

Help the children create a small sign or picture that will remind them to pray always. Invite them to hang their signs in their homes where they will see them regularly.

Come, Follow Me — 7 February 2021

Doctrine and Covenants § 10
5 Pray always, that you may come off conqueror; yea, that you may conquer Satan, and that you may escape the hands of the servants of Satan that do uphold his work.
6 Behold, they have sought to destroy you; yea, even the man in whom you have trusted has sought to destroy you.

12 And, on this wise, the devil has sought to lay a cunning plan, that he may destroy this work;
13 For he hath put into their hearts to do this, that by lying they may say they have caught you in the words which you have pretended to translate.

19 Therefore we will destroy him, and also the work; and we will do this that we may not be ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world.
20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that Satan has great hold upon their hearts; he stirreth them up to iniquity against that which is good;
21 And their hearts are corrupt, and full of wickedness and abominations; and they love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil; therefore they will not ask of me.
22 Satan stirreth them up, that he may lead their souls to destruction.
23 And thus he has laid a cunning plan, thinking to destroy the work of God; but I will require this at their hands, and it shall turn to their shame and condemnation in the day of judgment.
24 Yea, he stirreth up their hearts to anger against this work.
25 Yea, he saith unto them: Deceive and lie in wait to catch, that ye may destroy; behold, this is no harm. And thus he flattereth them, and telleth them that it is no sin to lie that they may catch a man in a lie, that they may destroy him.
26 And thus he flattereth them, and leadeth them along until he draggeth their souls down to hell; and thus he causeth them to catch themselves in their own snare.
27 And thus he goeth up and down, to and fro in the earth, seeking to destroy the souls of men.

32 And, behold, they will publish this, and Satan will harden the hearts of the people to stir them up to anger against you, that they will not believe my words.
33 Thus Satan thinketh to overpower your testimony in this generation, that the work may not come forth in this generation.

37 But as you cannot always judge the righteous, or as you cannot always tell the wicked from the righteous, therefore I say unto you, hold your peace until I shall see fit to make all things known unto the world concerning the matter.

Doctrine and Covenants § 10: 5–6; 12–13; 19–27; 32–33; 37

What stands out to me from these passages is the message that Satan is real, he doesn’t want you to know that he’s real, but that he is constantly striving to destroy you and the work of this church. He’ll even use your trusted friends to do so. You cannot always judge between the wicked and the righteous. You must be constantly vigilant, and any time you feel like Satan might be influencing you, flee and pray. In fact, just always be praying.

As some closing thoughts on this week’s lessons: how does such rhetoric promote a fear of a hostile outside world from which the church is the only refuge? How do these lessons teach members to distrust anyone—including their close friends and relatives—who might cause them to doubt their testimony of the church or the Book of Mormon? How are people who cast doubt on the truth claims of the church portrayed? How does the exhortation to pray always lest you be deceived by an ever-plotting and cunning adversary—who is intent on your destruction—feed into scrupulosity and unhealthy religious devotion?

---

Week 2 | D&C § 12–13; JSH 1:66–75

This week’s lessons center around the priesthood restoration narrative, and specifically the purported visitation of John the Baptist to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on 15 May 1829. There is a lot that can be said about this topic; indeed, scholars of Mormonism have written entire books on the subject. I highly recommend to the reader the books Power from on High, by Gregory Prince, and The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, by D. Michael Quinn. For the present, I will focus merely on a few highlights in an attempt to keep this brief. Indeed, previous entries in this series have been far longer than I initially had planned, so from here on I will attempt to focus on just a couple highlights.

Retroactive Authority

The modern LDS church teaches that it is the “only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” The primary basis for that bold claim is the Restoration of priesthood authority. According to the traditional LDS narrative, the authority to officiate in the essential salvific ordinances of the gospel, and to preside and lead the church, were lost with the deaths of the original apostles. Therefore, all churches are in a state of apostasy (i.e. the Great Apostasy) because they lack the authority to perform God’s work. Fortunately, God saw fit to restore his authority to the earth through Joseph Smith via heavenly messengers: first John the Baptist, then Peter, James, and John, and eventually Elijah and other visitors. Without this restored authority, any ordinances performed would be null and void and the church could not function properly. It would be an apostate church.

This narrative should sound familiar to you if you grew up in the LDS church, or if you’ve been a member for any amount of time. Indeed, the Restoration narrative is central to the missionary discussions (it’s Lesson 1!) in preparing proselytes for baptism, especially when converting members from other Christian faiths. The trouble is, this would have been a somewhat unfamiliar narrative to the earliest members of the church, as the stories of the restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods were apparently not circulated until 1834/5, well after the organization of the church. Indeed, when the church was organized in 1830, the idea of two separate priesthoods, one higher and one lower, was still absent in the church and it would be later introduced (1831) through the influence of Sidney Rigdon.

"I never heard that an Angel had ordained Joseph and Oliver to the Aaronic Priesthood until the year 1834[,] [183]5, or [183]6 – in Ohio…I do not believe that John the Baptist ever ordained Joseph and Oliver…"

David Whitmer, Special Witness to the Book of Mormon

"I joined the church in 1831. For years I never heard of John the Baptist ordaining Joseph and Oliver. I heard not of James, Peter, and John doing so.”

William E. McLellin, Original LDS Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Indeed, the first public announcement that the Aaronic priesthood had been restored at the hand of John the Baptist was made by Oliver Cowdery in the Messenger and Advocate in 1834. This was included in a series of letters composed by Cowdery in response to “anti-Mormon” opposition and to increase the faith of church members. Notably, these letters included many embellishments of church history that were designed to increase faith in the LDS church, which point is acknowledged by LDS apologists. Also noteworthy is that the 1833 Book of Commandments contained no reference to the restoration of the priesthood at the hands of John the Baptist or other angelic visitors, but these details were retrofitted into the revelations for the 1835 publication of the Doctrine and Covenants.

There is ample reason to believe that the narratives of the restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods were created retroactively to bolster the claims to authority of Joseph and Oliver, in the context of challenges to their charismatic authority in connection with the translation of the Book of Mormon. Indeed, even LDS scholar Richard Bushman suggests in his biography of Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling, that “the late appearance of these accounts raises the possibility of later fabrication,” though Bushman rejects this premise for himself. That said, one wonders: if the restoration of the priesthood was such an important and essential event in the early church, why does it appear that no one heard of it until 5 years after the fact, and only then in the response to outside criticism over the church’s origins? We saw parallel problems in last month’s lessons regarding the First Vision narrative and the later appearance of Elijah in the Kirtland Temple.

Joseph Knight and Materially Supporting Zion

With that historical context in mind, let’s turn to what the lesson chooses to present and how it presents it. First, I want to touch on the short anecdote presented in the beginning of the Individuals and Families manual that talks about the faith of Joseph Knight and his desires to “help establish the cause of Zion.” In what has already become a recurring theme this year, the lesson leaves out any indication that Joseph Knight was one of those whom hired Joseph Smith to search for buried treasure on his property by aid of the seer stone that Smith later used to translate the Book of Mormon. Indeed, Knight was a good friend of Josiah Stowell, who also employed Smith as a treasure seer during the time he met Emma Smith, and for which work Smith was tried and convicted as a disorderly person.

As such, when the lesson manual says that Joseph Knight described Smith as “the best worker he ever had,” it’s in the context of Smith working as a treasure seer. Likewise, when the lesson relates that Knight was an immediate believer in the golden plates, it should be noted that he already believed Smith could find buried treasure using the seer stone, despite the fact that Smith never successfully did so. This provides important context in understanding the background heading to D&C § 12, which section is a revelation given for Joseph Knight—at his own request—and who “several times had provided material assistance to Joseph Smith and his scribe.” The content of the revelation should be read as encouragement to Knight to stay the course and continue to provide material assistance to Joseph Smith to “bring forth and establish the cause of Zion.”

The Restoration of Exceptionalism

How is the story of the priesthood restoration used in the 2021 lesson manuals? The same way it was used in 1834—to buoy up the church’s claims to exclusive authority and to reinforce devotion to the LDS church. The central and repeated theme of the lessons is the message of restoration. That should hardly be surprising, as restoration of the gospel and divine authority is the central doctrine of the LDS church and a big piece of what sets it apart from other Christian churches. Of course, in order for something to be “restored” it must have first been lost or taken away. Thus, any and all references to “restoration” in this lesson should be understood to imply the Great Apostasy and the loss of the priesthood authority from the earth. That is, every reference to “restoration” is a reference to the church’s exceptionalism and the inferiority of other churches. It is only through the LDS church that individuals can be saved because all other churches lack authority. This is what makes the LDS church the “only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” This is how members are taught that they need the church, without which they would be helpless.

Importantly, the way the priesthood is organized in the modern LDS church is also noteworthy for the way that it excludes certain classes of people and establishes a hierarchy within the church. Women cannot be ordained to the priesthood, making them dependent upon male leadership for salvation and exaltation. The present-day church tries to obfuscate this fact by publishing apologetic articles about how women can access all the same ordinances of the priesthood as men, but this fails to recognize that they must access those ordinances through a man, and that they are restricted from filling church leadership positions in which they would preside over men. Indeed, a simple thought experiment highlights the inequality between men and women in the church. Consider the two following hypothetical scenarios: 1) all the women of the church suddenly are taken from the earth, or 2) all the men of the church are suddenly taken from the earth. In which of these scenarios would the church continue to exist and be able to perform its functions without the need for a second restoration? Only in the former, as in the latter the priesthood would no longer exist on the earth and would have to be again restored, presumably through another man. By excluding women from the priesthood, patriarchal power is preserved in the church, and given the veneer of divine approval. In a similarly way, white supremacist power structures were formally established and maintained within the church until 1978, because the church excluded Black members from ordination or entering the temple.

The priesthood, in Mormon theology, is therefore a tool of exclusion used to preserve the authority of white men. It is a bit more than that, however, since the priesthood is required for salvation and exaltation in Mormon theology. That is, without the priesthood men cannot become Gods, and women cannot become priestesses unto their exalted husbands. Therefore, the Mormon priesthood is not only about preserving patriarchal power structures in this life, but about the perpetuity of those power structures into the eternities. It is a tool not just of Mormon exceptionalism; it is a tool of male exceptionalism, which defines itself by who it excludes.

---

Week 3 | D&C § 14–17

This week’s lessons introduce David Whitmer to the story of the Restoration and focus on the visionary experience of the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon. Additional themes include the blessings of missionary work and remaining true to the church in the face of opposition. I will react primarily to the testimony of the Three Witnesses by highlighting the problems with their reliability regarding the reality of the gold plates. I will also briefly comment on the rhetoric employed in the presentation of the latter two themes. This will be a longer entry in this series of responses to the Come, Follow Me lessons.

The Witnesses of the Gold Plates

There are twelve official witnesses of the gold plates, whose collective testimonies are featured in three statements presented at the beginning of the Book of Mormon. These statements were composed by Joseph Smith to be accepted and signed by the three and eight men who serve as testators to each statement, and the lattermost witness is the testimony of Joseph Smith himself. Notably, in the astrological/numerological worldview of Hermeticism and Western esotericism, the number twelve is an especially significant number. Briefly, because there are twelve lunar cycles in each solar year, there are twelve months in the year, twelve zodiac signs, twelve Olympians in the Greek pantheon, twelve tribes of Israel, twelve apostles in the New Testament, etc. As mentioned previously, Joseph Smith was steeped in the practices of esoteric culture and invoked them frequently in his performance as a treasure seer. Inasmuch as the Book of Mormon can be viewed as a product of Smith’s treasure-seeking activities, the deliberate selection of twelve witnesses to the Book of Mormon is probably not a coincidence.

Let’s look a little closer at the testimonies signed by these eleven men that Smith recruited to serve as a part of his sacred twelve testators to the Book of Mormon.

The Three Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, his brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvellous [sic] in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Testimony of the Three Witnesses, emphasis my own.
Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, & Martin Harris

I have bolded the phrases above that give the distinct impression that these three men saw the plates in a real and physically tangible way, rather than through a mystical, and noncorporeal, visionary experience. However, one phrase stands out as an exception that bears special attention: “they have been shewn unto us by the power of God, and not of man.” As we will see, there are good reasons to believe that the experience each of these men would later relate on multiple occasions, was a visionary experience and not a physically tangible one. That is, what these men experienced in the woods near Fayette, New York, was something only the participants could have seen—a passerby at the moment would have only seen these men praying in the woods and not an angel or the gold plates. That distinction is imperative, not because it invalidates the experience of these men, but because it contextualizes it within their worldview in contrast to the rational empiricist worldview common in the present day. Importantly, what these men testified to was their subjective experience of an angel and the gold plates, not an objective one.

There are additional reasons to be skeptical regarding the testimony of the Three Witnesses, regardless of where one lands on the validity of subjective experiences as a means to knowing truth. Specifically, the reliability of these men as witnesses is questionable, as is whether their statements should be accepted as affirming the claims to divine authority made by the LDS church. A brief look at each individual should highlight the reasons I make this claim.

Oliver Cowdery

Oliver was a key participant in the translation project that produced the Book of Mormon. Like Joseph, he was also immersed in the magic worldview held my many in 19th-century New England that believed in the power of seer stones, divining rods, and other practices of Western esotericism. Indeed, as we highlighted in a previous lesson, Oliver made a failed attempt to translate the hidden gold plates (i.e. they were not immediately before him) by means of his divining rod. As we noted then, Oliver’s family history is rich in connection to divining rods. Importantly, as a central figure in the production of the Book of Mormon, Oliver had plenty of motivation to affirm its authenticity by testifying to the physical reality of the gold plates.

Also consider the following regarding Oliver’s credibility as witness to the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith as a true prophet:

• Oliver emphatically testified that Joseph Smith engaged in an adulterous relationship with Fanny Alger in Kirtland, Ohio. This testimony was denied by Joseph Smith before the high council the excommunicated Oliver in 1838. The present day LDS church affirms the relationship with Alger by claiming it was an early plural marriage.
• Oliver Cowdery (and David Whitmer) believed in the revelations received by Hiram Page through his seer stone. Joseph Smith received a subsequent revelation that denounced those of Hiram Page as being inspired by the devil and ordered his seer stone destroyed.
• Church leaders claimed that Cowdery had “united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive, cheat and defraud,” and that he “had been engaged in extensive frauds” in the failed Kirtland Safety Society.

David Whitmer

David Whitmer as an early supporter of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, with much of the latter part of the translation project taking place in his father’s home. Indeed, Whitmer believed in the gold plates after only a conversation with Oliver Cowdery and before he had ever met Joseph Smith. Notably, the plates were largely absent from the scene during the translation efforts in the Whitmer home. Whitmer also has the most to say among the Three Witnesses, having been interviewed on the subject more than the others, and having outlived them both by 13 years. A look at Whitmer’s statements sheds a lot of light on his experience:

In 1880, David Whitmer was asked for a description of the angel who showed him the plates. Whitmer responded that the angel ‘had no appearance or shape.’ When asked by the interviewer how he then could bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied, ‘Have you never had impressions?’ To which the interviewer responded, ‘Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a feeling?’ ‘Just so,’ replied Whitmer.

Interview w/ John Murphey, June 1880
Early Mormon Documents (Vogel) 5:63

This statement is confusing because Whitmer describes the angel as having “no appearance or shape” and describes the experience as similar to having impressions. This departs significantly from the narrative of physically seeing an embodied angel and the tangible gold plates.

In regards to my testimony to the visitation of the angel, who declared to us Three Witnesses that the Book of Mormon is true, I have this to say: Of course we were in the spirit when we had the view, for no man can behold the face of an angel, except in a spiritual view, but we were in the body also, and everything was as natural to us, as it is at any time. Martin Harris, you say, called it 'being in vision.' We read in the Scriptures, Cornelius saw, in a vision, an angel of God. Daniel saw an angel in a vision, also in other places it states they saw an angel in the spirit. A bright light enveloped us where we were, that filled at noon day, and there in a vision, or in the spirit, we saw and heard just as it is stated in my testimony in the Book of Mormon.

Letter of David Whitmer to Anthony Metcalf, March 1887

Again, Whitmer affirms that his experience with the angel and the plates was spiritual in nature, but mixes elements of the physical and the spiritual in his retelling. He makes an appeal to visionary experiences in the Bible to suggest that his experience was similar. Similarly, after hearing Whitmer’s retelling of his experience, James Moyle recorded in his diary in 1885: “I was not fully satisfied with the explanation. It was more spiritual than I anticipated.” Later, Moyle would explain:

"There was only one thing that did not fully satisfy me. I had difficulty then as I have now to describe just what was unsatisfactory. I wrote in my diary immediately on my return home, that in describing the scene in the woods he was 'somewhat spiritual in his explanations and not as materialistic as I wished.' That was my description then and I cannot make it any clearer now. He said, 'It was indescribable; that it was through the power of God.' He then spoke of Paul hearing and seeing Christ, and his associates did not, because it is only seen in the spirit."

James Henry Moyle, address, 18 March 1945
Early Mormon Documents (Vogel), 5:149

These statements confirm that David Whitmer reported his experience as a purely subjective and visionary one that was personal to him and the other witnesses, but that would not have been available to anyone else had they happened upon the scene. That is, it was a purely visionary experience.

Finally, while David Whitmer remained an emphatic supporter of the Book of Mormon, he was no less emphatic in his testimony against the LDS church:

If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens and told me to ‘separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so it should be done unto them.’

An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer

Whitmer strongly believed Joseph Smith to be a fallen prophet and had left the church in the late 1830s. He came to lead his own rival organization during the time that this statement was written. Similar to Cowdery, Whitmer left the church in the wake of the falling out in Kirtland and militarization of the church in Missouri. Of Whitmer, Joseph Smith said that “such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them.” Also like Cowdery, church leaders besmirched the character of Whitmer after his disaffection by claiming he participated in the “bogus money business.”

Martin Harris

As we covered for earlier lessons, Martin Harris was a financial supporter of the Book of Mormon translation project and its publication, representing a significant conflict of interest as a testator to its authenticity. Furthermore, Harris was a strong believer in Smith’s abilities as a treasure seer. Many have characterized Harris as exceptionally gullible and superstitious. Brigham Young claimed Harris “possessed a wild, speculative brain” and was prone to teaching false doctrines. Others spoke of his tendency to have abnormal and incredulous experiences:

No matter where he went, he saw visions and supernatural appearances all around him. He told a gentleman in Palmyra, after one of his excursions to Pennsylvania, while the translation of the Book of Mormon was going on, that on the way he met the Lord Jesus Christ, who walked along by the side of him in the shape of a deer for two or three miles, talking with him as familiarly as one man talks with another.

John A. Clark, letter, 32 August 1840
Early Mormon Documents (Vogel), 2:271

Once while reading scripture, he reportedly mistook a candle’s sputtering as a sign that the devil desired him to stop. Another time he excitedly awoke from his sleep believing that a creature as large as a dog had been upon his chest, though a nearby associate could find nothing to confirm his fears. Several hostile and perhaps unreliable accounts told of visionary experiences with Satan and Christ, Harris once reporting that Christ had been poised on a roof beam.

Martin Harris: Mormonism's Early Convert, Ronald W. Walker
Dialogue, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp 29–43

Harris is quoted by many as having related his experience with the angel and the plates as purely a spiritual and visionary experience, affirming similar statements by David Whitmer. Consider the following:

I never saw the golden plates, only in a visionary or entranced state. ... When the time came for the three witnesses to see the plates, Joseph Smith, myself, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery, went into the woods to pray. When they had all engaged in prayer, they failed at that time to see the plates or the angel who should have been on hand to exhibit them. They all believed it was because I was not good enough, or, in other words, not sufficiently sanctified. I withdrew. As soon as I had gone away, the three others saw the angel and the plates. In about three days I went into the woods to pray that I might see the plates. While praying I passed into a state of entrancement, and in that state I saw the angel and the plates.

Martin Harris Interview with Anthony Metcalf, Circa 1873-1874
Early Mormon Documents (Vogel), 2:346-347.
Emphasis my own.

Martin was in the office when I finished setting up the testimony of the three witnesses, — (Harris — Cowdery and Whitmer) I said to him, — "Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?" Martin looked down for an instant, raise his eyes up, and said, "No, I saw them with a spiritual eye."

John H. Gilbert, 8 September 1892
LDS Millennial Star, 29 October 1942
Early Mormon Documents (Vogel), 2:548

...when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundation was sapped & the entire superstructure fell in heap of ruins, I therefore three week since in the Stone Chapel...renounced the Book of Mormon...after we were done speaking M Harris arose & said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or a handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city throught [sic] a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of—–— [him/me?] but should have let it passed as it was...

Stephen Burnett to Lyman Johnson, letter, 15 April 1838
Joseph Smith Letterbook 2, p. 64

There is much, much more we could talk about Martin Harris and the other witnesses, but instead I will refer the reader to others who have already thoroughly done so. Specifically, consider this two-part essay by Joel Groat, this related article on MormonThink, or the associated page on Mormon Stories. I especially recommend the following informative video produced by Dan Vogel:

The Eight Witnesses

In addition to the Three Witnesses discussed above, eight additional served as witnesses to the reality of the gold plates. Their statement follows below:

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Testimony of the Eight Witnesses
Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer Jr., John Whitmer
Hiram Page, Joseph Smith Sr., Hyrum Smith, Samuel H. Smith

These eight men fit into two groups: those belonging to the Whitmer family (or married into it as did Hiram Page), or those directly related to Joseph Smith Jr. (his father and two most loyal brothers). Notably, Oliver Cowdery also had marital ties to the Whitmer family through Elizabeth Whitmer, making Martin Harris the only of the 12 witnesses not related to either Joseph Smith Jr or the Whitmer family. For this reason, Mark Twain once quipped: “I couldn’t feel more satisfied and at rest if the entire Whitmer family had testified.”

What happened during these experiences with the plates is not entirely clear. As quoted above, Stephen Burnett recorded that he heard Martin Harris publicly assert that “the eight witnesses never saw [the plates] and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it.” In reference to his own experience, Harris asserted that he “never saw the plates with his natural eyes, only in vision or imagination” and that he “had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain.” This parallels a similar statement made by William Smith, brother to Joseph, who claimed to also have handled the gold plates. In this interview, William described:

William: I did not see them uncovered, but I handled them and hefted them while wrapped in a tow frock and judged them to have weighed about sixty pounds. ... Father and my brother Samuel saw them as I did while in the frock. So did Hyrum and others of the family.

Q: Didn't you want to remove the cloth and see the bare plates?

William: No, for father had just asked if he might not be permitted to do so, and Joseph, putting his hand on them said; 'No, I am instructed not to show them to any one. If I do, I will transgress and lose them again.' Besides, we did not care to have him break the commandment and suffer as he did before.

Interview with William Smith
13 January 1894, Zion's Ensign, p. 6

Additionally, John Whitmer was quoted by Theodore Turley as affirming that “they were shown to me by a supernatural power,” suggesting something different than a ordinary, matter-of-fact handling of the physical plates as described in the official statement and routinely portrayed by in church materials. For these reasons, it appears that like the Three Witnesses, the experiences of the Eight Witnesses was not one of physically seeing and handling of the unobstructed gold plates, but rather an experience that was at least partly visionary and may have included the handing of plates through a cloth.

For a more detailed analysis of the testimony of the Eight Witnesses, I again refer the reader to Dan Vogel:

Proselytize as an Immovable Witness

The other major theme of this week’s lessons is encapsulated by the section headings entitled I Can Participate in God’s “Great and Marvelous Work” and Bringing Souls Unto Christ is of Great Worth. It seems that the aim of the lessons after introducing the importance of the testimonies of the Three and Eight Witnesses is to encourage the members to “Stand as a Witness” by engaging in missionary work. As is often the case, this effort is most transparent in the Primary lesson:

I can help others come closer to Jesus Christ.
John Whitmer and Peter Whitmer Jr. were David Whitmer’s brothers. Like David, they wanted to know how they could help the Lord. He asked them to help “bring souls unto” Him.

Ask the children to describe something that is important or valuable to them (such as a toy, book, or game). Read Doctrine and Covenants 15:6 or 16:6, and ask the children to raise their hands when they hear what the Lord said is of “most worth.”

With the children, make a list of ways they can help someone follow Jesus Christ, such as being friends to others, sharing the scriptures with a friend, or praying for someone in need. To give the children ideas, you could display some relevant pictures from Church magazines or the Gospel Art Book. Or the children could draw their own pictures. Invite them to try something on their list during the week.

Tell the children how you know the Book of Mormon is true. Invite the children to become witnesses of the Book of Mormon by reading it and praying to know if it is true and then sharing their testimony with others.

Come, Follow Me — Primary Manual, 21 February 2021

The Sunday School lesson manual also drives this point home by emphasizing a quote from Book of Mormon enthusiast, President Ezra Taft Benson:

The Book of Mormon is the instrument that God designed to ‘sweep the earth as with a flood, to gather out [His] elect.’ … In this age of the electronic media and the mass distribution of the printed word, God will hold us accountable if we do not now move the Book of Mormon in a monumental way. We have the Book of Mormon, we have the members, we have the missionaries, we have the resources, and the world has the need. The time is now!

Ezra Taft Benson, 1988
Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Ezra Taft Benson, 143–44

Also included only in the Sunday School manual is a section entitled We Can Remain True to What We Know, Even if Others Reject Us. This section stands out to me as reflecting what the church desires to instill above all else in the membership: a loyalty to the church and the Book of Mormon that is resilient to counter-narratives or critical perspectives. Consider the following passages from this section of the lesson manual:

We can remain true to what we know, even if others reject us.
Why did the Lord provide witnesses of the Book of Mormon? ... How has the testimony of the Three Witnesses influenced our testimonies of the Book of Mormon?

Even if we have not seen angels or handled the gold plates, we can still bear witness of the Book of Mormon. ... If someone asked why we believe the Book of Mormon is true, what would we say?

Come, Follow Me — Sunday School Manual, 21 February 2021

These are incredible questions given that the church presents a very whitewashed and misleading account of the experiences of the witnesses to the Book of Mormon. Given all that we’ve discussed above regarding the experiences of the Three and Eight Witnesses, I encourage you to ponder those same questions. Perhaps do so as you consider how the church has decided to portray that history in their 2021 curriculum via the video below, included in the online lesson materials:

---

Week 4 | D&C § 18–19

This week’s lessons cover the story of the printing of the Book of Mormon and the sacrifices made by Martin Harris to fund its publication. Additionally, the lessons discuss the “worth of souls” to God and focus on the importance of repentance in relation to personal worthiness. Let’s take a closer look at these themes.

Troublesome Book of Mormon Finances

The printing of the Book of Mormon was not cheap, and Joseph did not have the money himself. Martin Harris was Joseph’s best bet for financing the publication, but it would require some additional convincing. Harris had already committed substantial financial support to Joseph during the translation project, but now he would be asked for more to pay for the printing. To afford this, Harris would have to mortgage his farm. Martin’s wife, Lucy, was already displeased with her husband’s support of the project, believing Joseph was swindling her husband out of their property. Additionally, there were doubts that the Book of Mormon would even sell, and financing its publication was a significantly risky investment. Martin knew all of this, and was thus reluctant to commit more funds to the project that he had already invested so much into with no returns to show for it. He likely also knew that mortgaging his farm to pay for the publication would mean the end of his marriage and the loss of the respect of his neighbors. However, Harris was eventually persuaded to finance the publication, and the lessons portray this story as a sign of Martin’s faith and the blessings that are obtained through sacrifice.

The Canadian Copyright Controversy

Before we look at Martin’s story in greater detail, let’s first turn to another part of this story that often goes untold, as it does in the current lesson manuals. While Martin Harris was dithering on whether to mortgage his farm and finance the rest of the publication, Hyrum Smith suggested that they might try to sell the copyright to the Book of Mormon in order to raise the funds for its publication. According to several witnesses, including Hiram Page and David Whitmer, Joseph received a revelation through the seer stone instructing Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Knight, Hiram Page, and Josiah Stowell to travel to Canada in an effort to sell the copyright. The language of this revelation expressed confidence in their success, but these men were unable to find a willing buyer for the copyright.

Here is how David Whitmer related this event:

Joseph looked into the hat in which he placed the stone, and received a revelation that some of the brethren should go to Toronto, Canada, and that they would sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon. Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery went to Toronto on this mission, but they failed entirely to sell the copyright, returning without any money. Joseph was at my father’s house when they returned. I was there also, and am an eye witness to these facts. Jacob Whitmer and John Whitmer were also present when Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery returned from Canada.

Well, we were all in great trouble; and we asked Joseph how it was that he had received a revelation from the Lord for some brethren to go to Toronto and sell the copyright, and the brethren had utterly failed in their undertaking. Joseph did not know how it was, so he enquired of the Lord about it, and behold the following revelation came through the stone: “Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of men: and some revelations are of the devil.” So we see that the revelation to go to Toronto and sell the copyright was not of God, but was of the devil or of the heart of man.

David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ (p. 30–31).

The notion that not all revelations received by the prophet are of God provides a significant challenge to the idea that those who follow the prophet will never be lead astray. The church frequently espouses rhetoric affirming that members can do no wrong in following the prophet and President of the Church. At the same time, the teachings of former prophets that no longer agree with present-day positions on doctrine are often excused as instances of these individuals “speaking as a man” rather than as the prophet. This is rooted in another quote by Joseph Smith, in which he stated that “a prophet was a prophet only when he was acting as such.” This creates an odd dilemma in which members are instructed to always follow the prophet, but how does one know when the prophet “is acting as such” or if “some revelations are of men” or “of the devil?”

For an apologetic counter perspective regarding the attempt to sell the copyright to the Book of Mormon, consider this article on Book of Mormon Central.

The Extortion of Martin Harris

Returning to Martin Harris’s indecision regarding whether to finance the publication by mortgaging his farm and jeopardizing his marriage, let’s turn to D&C § 19. This revelation was addressed to Martin Harris after the failed attempt to sell the copyright in Canada. This revelation begins with dire warnings of the exquisite suffering and eternal punishment awaiting the wicked, referencing the bleeding from every pore endured by Christ, and threatening that similar suffering lies in store for those who do not repent. It then transitions immediately into instructions directed toward Martin Harris:

20 Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I humble you with my almighty power; and that you confess your sins, lest you suffer these punishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have tasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit.
21 And I command you that you preach naught but repentance, and show not these things unto the world until it is wisdom in me.

25 And again, I command thee that thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife; nor seek thy neighbor’s life.
26 And again, I command thee that thou shalt not covet thine own property, but impart it freely to the printing of the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and the word of God.

33 And misery thou shalt receive if thou wilt slight these counsels, yea, even the destruction of thyself and property.
34 Impart a portion of thy property, yea, even part of thy lands, and all save the support of thy family.
35 Pay the debt thou hast contracted with the printer. Release thyself from bondage.

38 Pray always, and I will pour out my Spirit upon you, and great shall be your blessing—yea, even more than if you should obtain treasures of earth and corruptibleness to the extent thereof.
39 Behold, canst thou read this without rejoicing and lifting up thy heart for gladness?
40 Or canst thou run about longer as a blind guide?
41 Or canst thou be humble and meek, and conduct thyself wisely before me? Yea, come unto me thy Savior. Amen.

Doctrine and Covenants § 19: 20–21, 25–26, 33–35, 38–41

When read in its historical context, it’s hard not to see how this “revelation” was a blatant extortion of Harris to secure the funds for the publication of the Book of Mormon. A few of the passages in particular stand out as interesting. Verse 25 instructs Harris not to “covet thy neighbor’s wife; nor seek thy neighbor’s life.” Lucy Harris claimed that her husband was having an affair with a neighbor, and also reported that Martin had a violent temper. Martin is also warned not to “covet thine own property” and threatened with “the destruction of thyself and property” should he refuse the counsel given to finance the publication effort. However, if he does come through with the money, he is promised blessings “even more than if you should obtain treasures of earth.” Martin was convinced.

How did Martin Harris’s decision to mortgage his farm in support of the Book of Mormon work out for him? The Book of Mormon did not sell well in New York, and Harris lost his farm. His marriage ended. He lost whatever respect he had remaining from his neighbors. By all rights, Harris’s investment in the Book of Mormon was an utter failure on a personal level. However, Harris would remain loyal to the prophet and follow the church to Ohio. Having lost all that he had, what else could he do? He may have felt considerable “sunk cost” regarding seeing things through, and he still believing in his charismatic prophet. However, in the long run, this didn’t work in Harris’s favor either. The Kirtland Safety Society failed and the leaders of the church fled Ohio to escape their debts and the wrath of their defrauded neighbors. Harris left the church in the wake of these events, and wandered listlessly between multiple faith communities for years afterward.

One has to ask: how would Martin Harris’s life have been different had he never gotten involved with Joseph Smith in the first place? There’s a good chance that he would have remained a wealthy and successful farmer in New York, with the respect of his neighbors, assuming his own tendencies to credulity and superstition did not otherwise get the better of him.

Sacrifice Brings Forth the Blessings of Heaven

The story of Martin Harris’s mortgaging of his farm to support the printing of the Book of Mormon is intended to be a faith-promoting one. The lessons ask what blessings members have experienced because of Martin’s decision to sacrifice his possessions so that we could have the Book of Mormon, and encourages members to think about ways that they can sacrifice for the gospel. The Law of Sacrifice—and the related Law of Consecration—are prominent features of the modern LDS temple ceremony that originated in Nauvoo. Members are repeatedly taught that they ought to be willing to sacrifice all for the sake of the church, and are promised that they will be blessed for doing so. Often, this discourse takes on the tones of transactional faith and the prosperity gospel.

For instance, members are taught that if they sacrifice 10% of their income to the church through paying tithing, that the Lord will “open the windows of heaven, and pour out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” Stories abound of members, who worrying they will not have money to make ends meet, pay their tithing only to find miraculous sources of money in their bank account or elsewhere just when they need it. Similarly, members are taught that even though their time and resources are strapped, they will be blessed if they sacrifice their time and talents in service of the church. These promised blessings will often take the form enhanced productivity at work or in school, better home life, and a mysterious abundance of the very resources that members previous considered in short supply.

What these teachings (including those in the present lessons) have in common are a rhetoric that glorifies sacrifice for the church and promises of special blessings that will more than compensate for that sacrifice. Absent is any consideration of whether all sacrifices are necessary, or how constant sacrifice can be an act of devotion or a sign of oppression.

It’s important to evaluate the types of sacrifices that we’re asked to make, and to ask why we are being asked to make them. Some things are worth the sacrifice, but many things are simply not. It’s important to ask, what kind of relationship am I investing in here? What am I being asked to sacrifice and who benefits in this relationship? So often we’re asked to sacrifice things that primarily benefit those requesting the sacrifice, even when they have more than enough resources to make such a request unnecessary. Sometimes those sacrifices are about extorting resources; sometimes they are about power and control. Many toxic relationships are obtaining power and control by convincing another to surrender it freely under false pretenses. But there are also healthy relationships in which sacrifice is an act of love for another. It’s important to recognize who benefits, and how, in order to distinguish between sacrifices made in a healthy, loving relationship, and those extorted through a coercive and toxic one.

Personal Worthiness and Repentance

The other major theme in the lessons is the combined message that the worth of individual souls is great in the eyes of God, and that repentance is necessary for realizing that worth. The first part of this message is empowering and beautiful; the latter is toxic and demoralizing. The lessons do a great job at conveying that every individual is precious and loved by God. The lessons express that God so loves every individual that Christ personally suffered on their behalf to save them from suffering for their own sins. There are issues with this penal substitution model of substitutionary atonement which go well beyond what I wish to discuss here at present, but despite those issues, the message that God loves each individual intensely and personally is a powerful one.

However, the lessons take that notion of individual worth and weaponize it as a vehicle for shame. That is, individuals are portrayed as of infinite worth, but constantly undermining that worth by disobeying God and wasting their potential. Through sinful disobedience, individuals become unworthy of God’s love, but He will make it available to them if they repent. The message here quickly becomes not one of empowerment, but of failure, unworthiness, indebtedness, and shame. This is all to drive the narrative that only through repentance—as prescribed by the church—can individuals defend their worthiness before God and retain access to His love. Otherwise, they must suffer even as Christ suffered on their behalf.

This is a toxic message, despite the oft repeated assertion that repentance is a blessing and a joy. Indeed, the lesson conveys this notion repeatedly. However, the joy of repentance is always portrayed as the relief from one’s shame for their unworthiness through sin. It is the shame that makes repentance a joyous relief—the more intense the shame, the more profound the relief. This is found throughout Mormon scripture; Alma 36 being a prominent example. The central premise of penal substitution is rooted in the depravity and unworthiness of humanity, and that Christ delivers us from the punishment and eternal damnation that we truly deserve.

Within the present lessons, these messages of shame and conditional worthiness—which can only be overcome through repentance as prescribed by the church—are most poignant in the lesson for the youth. That is noteworthy, as adolescence and young adulthood are the period in which issues of self-worth and acceptance are typically most profound. Are these the messages we want to be emphasizing to our youth especially? Consider the rhetoric employed in the following videos directed toward the youth, included in the lesson materials.

Here are some of the messages directed at the youth in this video:

• You shouldn’t take the sacrament if you feel unworthy.
• Simple youthful mistakes can make you unworthy.
• If you refrain from taking the sacrament, your community will know you are unworthy. Everyone probably knows already.
• You need a bishop’s authorization to take the sacrament when you’ve made a mistake.
• You let God down when you make mistakes.
• Repentance requires confession.
• Jesus will choose to forgive your mistakes, if you choose to repent.

Here are some of the ideas taught to the youth in this video:

• You have problems you don’t want to admit need confessing.
• You think that if you just don’t ever do it again, you don’t need to confess.
• Without confession, you won’t feel obligated to fix anything.
• You are accountable to the bishop through confession. You’re accountable to Christ because he died for you.
• Sin wracks us with guilt. Relying on Jesus relieves us from that guilt.
• The way we rely on Jesus and repent is through the assistance of the ecclesiastical leadership of the church. You shouldn’t try to do it on your own.

What effects does such messaging have on the self-esteem and confidence of the youth? What kind of relationship are the youth being taught to have with their church leaders? What kind of relationship are the youth being taught to have with their god? What emotions are being evoked to convey these messages? Are there healthier ways to raise our youth?