Did Joseph Smith Jr. ever lie?

[_I have a question]

P.S. What does "Original manuscript in CHL" mean, and is "The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text and Commentary (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999)" a reliable source?

CHL = Church History Library

[_searcher]

P.S. What does "Original manuscript in CHL" mean, and is "The Joseph Smith Revelations: Text and Commentary (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999)" a reliable source?

CHL = Church History Library

Thank you.

[_searcher]

Can it be demonstrated, from his own writings or public statements, that he lied, contradicted himself, or was less than truthful?

His statements on the first vision change over time with his changing view on the Godhead. He tired to hide his treasure seeking or glass looking. Treasure seeking by glass looking was a practice of manipulating and deceiving people. He pretended to have gold plates about a story shown to be fiction. He made other claims about being able to translate Egyptian and now we know he never did.

I've looked at the accounts of the first vision, and (aside from a second hand account written by Oliver Cowdary, which really contradicts every other account) the only clear contradiction I've seen is on his saying he was 16 in the earliest account, and 15 in the official version.

Saying he saw Jesus, God, and both the Father and the Son in different accounts might not be contradictory, if he realized how controversial saying he saw The Father would be (and left that detail out of the early accounts to avoid controversy.)

The way his views on the Godhead seemed to change, and the way those changes seem to coincide with the different accounts is interesting though.

I'm not trying to be an apologist for Joseph Smith here, but when I look at these things myself I try to take their arguments into account.

What I am very interested in here is what you said about the glass looking.

I found this.

Question 10. Was not Jo Smith a money digger.
Answer. Yes, but it was never a very prof itable job to him, as he only got fourteen dol lars a month for it.

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paperS ... y%20digger

But it talks about money digging, not glass looking, and I think he somewhere blamed that fourteen dollar a month affair on a Mr. Stowell, who paid him, insisted he and others dig, and who he said he tried to talk out of the folly.

Of course, if he had actually talked Mr. Stowell into the venture by glass looking (or claiming he could locate the treasure by using a seer stone, this would be evidence of lying.

I know there's proof he was charged with glass looking, and that a bill for court charges was found, but did he or anyone close to him (like his mother, Lucy Mack Smith, who I understand wrote a book) admit to him doing this?

[_Themis]

Saying he saw Jesus, God, and both the Father and the Son in different accounts might not be contradictory, if he realized how controversial saying he saw The Father would be (and left that detail out of the early accounts to avoid controversy.)

I don't think I would leave out such an important detail, and it would be hard to forget. His reasons for going to prayer also change.

The way his views on the Godhead seemed to change, and the way those changes seem to coincide with the different accounts is interesting though.

That's what I find most interesting about the different accounts. I don't think by 1832 he would leave out that that God and Jesus came to visit, and certainly would not be teaching a trinitarian view of the Godhead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Vision

What I am very interested in here is what you said about the glass looking.

But it talks about money digging, not glass looking, and I think he somewhere blamed that fourteen dollar a month affair on a Mr. Stowell, who paid him, insisted he and others dig, and who he said he tried to talk out of the folly.

Joseph wasn't hired to dig, but to do the glass looking. He used the same rock and hat to look for treasure that he used t supposedly translate the Book of Mormon. Stowel heard about him and went and hired him to use supposed supernatural means to find the treasure. There are other accounts of Joseph using the rock and hat bit to look for missing things. Joseph's father went with him and they stayed at his future FIL's where he meet Emma.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Smith

I know there's proof he was charged with glass looking, and that a bill for court charges was found, but did he or anyone close to him (like his mother, Lucy Mack Smith, who I understand wrote a book) admit to him doing this?

Plenty close to him bring up his glass looking abilities. It's well established that he worked for Stowel as a glass looker. Stowel had plenty of muscle and would not have needed to seek out Joseph for hire just to dig.

[_I have a question]

Searcher, you may like this...

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/ ... seph-smith

[_searcher]

Searcher, you may like this...

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/ ... seph-smith

Thank you, but I can't read it.

Part of the text seems to be cut off.

It seems to say that Stowell looked Joseph up and hired him because he had heard something - but I can't see what it was he heard.

[_Quasimodo]

Searcher, you may like this...

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/ ... seph-smith

Thank you, but I can't read it.

Part of the text seems to be cut off.

It seems to say that Stowell looked Joseph up and hired him because he had heard something - but I can't see what it was he heard.

In the spring of 1825 Josiah Stowell visited with Joseph Smith “on account of having heard that he possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye.”3 Josiah Stowell wanted Joseph to help him in his quest to find treasure in an ancient silver mine. Joseph was reluctant, but Stowell persuaded Joseph to come by offering high wages. According to trial documents, Stowell says Joseph, using a seer stone, “Looked through stone and described Josiah Stowell’s house and out houses, while at Palmyra at Sampson Stowell’s correctly, that he had told about a painted tree with a man’s hand painted upon it by means of said stone.”4

Joseph and his father traveled to southern New York in November of 1825. This was after the crops were harvested and Joseph had finished his visit to the Hill Cumorah that year. They participated with Stowell and the company of workers in digging for the mine for less than a month. Finally Joseph persuaded him to stop. “After laboring for the old gentleman about a month, without success, Joseph prevailed upon him to cease his operations.”5

Joseph continued to work in the area for Stowell and others. He boarded at the home of Isaac Hale and met Emma Hale, who was one “treasure” he got out of the enterprise.

[_deacon blues]

Joseph's failure to own up to the translating process, particularly seer stones is a definite lie of omission. If he was honest he would have been completely forthright about his treasure seeking days, and how he used the seer stone(s).

[_Roger]

Whether or not Joseph lied in any given situation often comes down to one's view of Joseph Smith going into the question. If you view Joseph as a con-man, then much of what he does and says makes sense as being deceptive in order to further that agenda. On the other hand, if you view him as a true prophet of God, then the seemingly problematic things he does are all blamed, in one way or another, on someone else - anti-Mormons, former Mormons, even faithful Mormons and God himself. One classic example of this is the missing manuscript episode.

Most here are probably familiar with this, but for those who may not be, here is a summation.

In 1828, during the beginning of Book of Mormon "translation," Martin Harris served as Joseph's scribe. 116 pages were produced in Harmony, Pennsylvania from April to June and Harris was so excited about the story that was emerging that he begged Joseph to allow him to take the manuscript pages back to his home in Palmyra, New York in order to show his skeptical wife. Joseph needed Harris's support because Harris was a reasonably wealthy farmer. Joseph "inquired of the Lord" whether Harris could take the pages and God responded "no" two times. But Harris persisted and upon the third inquiry, God relented with the condition that Harris could only show the manuscript to immediate family. Harris agreed and took manuscript to New York.

Long story short, the pages disappear. Rumor has it that Harris's wife, Lucy, burned them. In the meantime, back in Harmony, Joseph and Emma had been producing additional pages, so the story had continued from where the 116 pages left off.

When Joseph finds out, he goes ballistic, exclaiming that "all is lost!" Now certainly, even if Joseph is a true prophet, one can understand the disappointment of losing 116 hand-written manuscript pages. But if Joseph actually was a true prophet who had actually been receiving a legitimate translation from God, then how big of a deal is it to simply re-translate the missing pages? Sure, some time would have been lost, but you still have the plates and you still have God's ability to translate, so what's the problem?

This is where things really get interesting. Instead of re-translating, we get an elaborate story. Even though God acknowledges that Joseph could re-translate, he forbids it. Why, you ask? Because God reveals that "evil men" have stolen the pages with the intent of altering the words so that when the Book of Mormon is published, they will then produce the altered original manuscript, which will not agree with the published Book of Mormon text, and use said discrepancies to suggest that Joseph is not a true prophet.

Luckily, God knew all of this was going to happen. In fact, God had known this was going to be a problem hundreds of years earlier, back when the original Book of Mormon authors were engraving their experiences on Golden plates and it just so happens that God had prompted one of them to produce a special smaller set of plates for a "wise purpose." This smaller set of plates would still contain a history of the Nephites, but it would contain less historical details and have a greater emphasis on religion. Joseph was now commanded to go back to the Hill Cumorah and obtain these smaller plates and use the resulting translation as a replacement for the pages that were lost. In this way, the evil plan of the evil men would be thwarted. (See D & C 10: https://www.LDS.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/10, and Words of Mormon: https://www.LDS.org/scriptures/Book of Mormon/w-of-m/1?lang=eng)

Now if one accepts that Joseph Smith is a true prophet, one simply accepts that God works in mysterious ways and there's no deception going on here except the thwarted attempt by the evil men who stole the manuscript. But if you don't accept that Joseph was a true prophet, then this whole episode is one elaborate lie.

In my humble opinion, the evidence clearly points to Joseph lying because that's really the only explanation that makes sense.

If Joseph had been a true prophet then:

1. He could have easily re-translated. Even he and the Mormon God acknowledge this.
2. God knew that evil men had stolen the manuscript, so why couldn't he have simply revealed who those men were and where they were hiding the manuscript?
3. God says the evil intent was to alter the words in order to falsely catch Joseph in a pretended translation. Great! This prediction was made well before the Book of Mormon was published. So all Joseph has to do is keep a record of the prediction and then when the original (but altered) 116 pages are produced he is shown to be a true prophet. (This, I believe, is why we get this story. It's classic Joseph Smith covering his bases.)

So the most reasonable conclusion is: If Joseph was a true prophet then there is no need whatsoever to produce a different translation. He could easily re-translate and any discrepancies between the published Book of Mormon and the 116 pages could not only be explained, but would also demonstrate that Joseph was indeed a true prophet.

But if Joseph was not a true prophet then:

1. He knew he could not duplicate the missing pages, but he could come up with a similar account. He knew the details, such as the numbers of men in an army or the names of Kings, cities, etc. would be problematic, but he could reproduce the general outline.

2. But that raises the problem of how to explain a replacement story that follows the same general outline but disagrees when it comes to details? This is where the "altering by evil men" explanation becomes ingenious. Although it does have the downside of being vulnerable to my critique above (no need to re-translate when you've already predicted that evil men will alter the original) it has a huge advantage of covering both problems. The inevitable discrepancies are explained since the new translation comes from a different set of plates while at the same time, if the original 116 pages resurface at some point, their condition can be explained either way. If they are pristine, then the evil men obviously did not alter them because God had thwarted their plan. If they are full of changes, then, obviously the evil men made the changes Joseph had predicted. Either way, he's proven to be a true prophet while still not re-translating.

To me, this whole episode demonstrates Joseph's ability not just to lie, but to create a lie that would save him from a situation in which "all is lost."

[_Fence Sitter]

Interesting post Roger. If you don't mind, I would like to add a couple of points and a question.

....
Long story short, the pages disappear. Rumor has it that Harris's wife, Lucy, burned them. In the meantime, back in Harmony, Joseph and Emma had been producing additional pages, so the story had continued from where the 116 pages left off.

I have never heard that Emma and Joseph produced more of the lost parts. Can you provide more information on this?

Luckily, God knew all of this was going to happen. In fact, God had known this was going to be a problem hundreds of years earlier, back when the original Book of Mormon authors were engraving their experiences on Golden plates and it just so happens that God had prompted one of them to produce a special smaller set of plates for a "wise purpose."

When one thinks of the time and effort it would have actually taken to produce this small set of plate vs how long reproducing the 116 pages would have taken, this story goes from far fetched to simply unbelievable. So God knew hundreds of years before that the paper copy of one small portion of the large plates was going to be stolen, so He had the prophets back then inscribe on other metal plates a similar story just to thwart the future plans of evil men? Why not just have an angel with a flaming sword appear to force Joseph Smith to not loan out the copy or stop Lucy from burning it, or a dozen or so other possible ways to prevent this loss? But no, God has scribes hundreds of years before go to the herculean effort in time and priceless resources (think about how valuable those blank gold sheets must of been back then since seem to be the only ones of their type that ever existed in the Americas!) of inscribing on another set of metal plates a similar story as a back up! You know God must have really loved Joseph Smith a lot more than ancient Book of Mormon prophets because He allowed Joseph Smith the use of an seer stone along with paper and pencil to reproduce the same documents He made Book of Mormon prophets inscribe twice on metal plates. These stories really boggle the mind. God can send Moroni to take back the plates two different times, when Joseph Smith loses the 116 pages and when he finishes the Book of Mormon, but God cannot simply provide Joseph Smith with a full paper copy of the document to begin with?

God makes ancient prophets inscribe similar stories twice on metal plates so Joseph Smith can avoid evil men altering words on the 116 pages. Even harder to believe when one considers Joseph Smith wasn't directly using those precious plates to translate anyways! Why couldn't God simply have made the U&T produce a similar version on the 116 pages if the "evil men" story was actually a realty?

Any examination of this story show it is clearly a lie and a lie that would have only been necessary if Joseph Smith lost the only copy of a document he was making up.

In my humble opinion, the evidence clearly points to Joseph lying because that's really the only explanation that makes sense.

If Joseph had been a true prophet then:

1. He could have easily re-translated. Even he and the Mormon God acknowledge this.
2. God knew that evil men had stolen the manuscript, so why couldn't he have simply revealed who those men were and where they were hiding the manuscript?
3. God says the evil intent was to alter the words in order to falsely catch Joseph in a pretended translation. Great! This prediction was made well before the Book of Mormon was published. So all Joseph has to do is keep a record of the prediction and then when the original (but altered) 116 pages are produced he is shown to be a true prophet. (This, I believe, is why we get this story. It's classic Joseph Smith covering his bases.)

4. If you have ever spent any time looking at the Joseph Smith Papers, this claim about men being able to alter the words is obviously a lie. See here for an example of a written manuscript back then. It is obvious to the naked eye where changes were made on this document and whether or not they are in the same writing as the original scribe. There is no possibility that the original could have been altered without it being obvious such alterations occurred, especially if Joseph Smith could have reproduced an accurate copy the 116 pages. In fact, has Joseph Smith done so and these purported men then produced the altered original, two things would have been obvious.
1. The evil men had altered it, and
2. Joseph Smith was capable of reproducing an accurate version of the original.

So the most reasonable conclusion is: If Joseph was a true prophet then there is no need whatsoever to produce a different translation. He could easily re-translate and any discrepancies between the published Book of Mormon and the 116 pages could not only be explained, but would also demonstrate that Joseph was indeed a true prophet.

Spot on.