Henry Caswall And The Psalter Trick

[Pahoran]

The story is told that Joseph Smith once pronounced a Greek Psalter to be a "Dictionary of Egyptian Hieroglyphics." This story is triumphantly appealed to by those who think that every time someone tried to deceive Joseph, his willingness to take them on trust somehow proves that he was dishonest. I propose to defer discussion of that point until a little later on. The first question for us to examine is this: did Joseph actually identify a Greek Psalter as an Egyptian dictionary?

The resolution of that question will require some detective work. To introduce the story, I cite an article from the Warsaw Signal, a monument of journalistic excellence. Run by Thomas C. Sharp, it was as impartial and scholarly about Mormon things as Kevin Graham himself now is. I cannot claim credit for finding it however; credit for that goes to the deceitfully misnamed "Mormonthink" website.

Vol. I. Warsaw, Illinois, November 15, 1843. No. 45.

THE MORMON PROPHET AND THE GREEK PSALTER.

We lately heard a story, which while it may make us mourn over the depravity of Human Nature, serves to show, among many similar facts, the low artifices and cunning tricks, to which the Mormon Prophet will resort, in order to impose upon the gullibility of his followers. The story is in this wise; and can be substantiated by respectable witnesses.

Some time since, Professor Caswell, late of Kemper College, near St. Louis, an Episcopal Clergyman of reputation, being about to leave this country for England, paid a visit to Smith and the Saints, in order that he might be better able to represent the imposture to the British people. It so happened that the Professor had in his possession a Greek Psalter, of great age -- one that had been in the family for several hundred years. This book, as a relic of antiquity, was a curiosity to any one -- but to some of the Saints, who happened to see it, it was a marvel and wonder. Supposing its origin to have been as ancient, at least, as the Prophet's Egyptian Mummy, and not knowing but the Professor had dug it from the bowels of the same sacred hill in Western New York whence sprung the holy Book of Mormon, they importuned him to allow 'brother Joseph' an opportunity of translating it!

The Professor reluctantly assented to the proposal; and accompanied by a number of the anxious brethren, repaired to the residence of the Prophet. The remarkable book was handed him. Joe took it -- examined its old and worn leaves -- and turned over its musty pages. Expectation was now upon tip-toe. brethren looked at one another -- at the book -- then at the Prophet. It was a most interesting scene!

Presently the spirit of prophecy began to arise within him; and he opened his mouth and spoke. That wonderful power, which enables him to see as far through a mill-stone as could Moses or Elijah of old, had already in the twinkling of an eye, made those rough and uncouth characters as plain to him as the nose on the face of the Professor. 'This Book,' said he, 'I pronounce to be a Dictionary of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphics!'

The brethren present were greatly astonished at this exhibition of their Prophet's power of revealing hidden things. After their exaltation had somewhat subsided, the Professor coolly told them that their Prophet was a base impostor! -- and that the book before them was but a plain Greek Psalter! -- Joe 'stepped out.'

Such is the manner in which this arrant knave imposes upon his followers! and such is the manner in which his knavery is sometimes exposed! Yet, strange that people continue to believe him!

Professor Caswell, since his sojourn in England, has published a work entitled 'Three Days at Nauvoo,' in which this rich scene is represented in an engraving.

Is this how it happened?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Is this how it happened?

Regards,

Pahoran

Is there any other sources that corroborate this story? Or is this the sole source of this tale?

[Pahoran]

Is there any other sources that corroborate this story? Or is this the sole source of this tale?

Caswall himself described his visit in several books. Whether his account(s) actually corroborate the version published in the Signal is another matter.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Kevin Christensen]

Is there any other sources that corroborate this story? Or is this the sole source of this tale?

Nibley talks about Caswall's accounts here:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=77&chapid=969

And I think Nibley brings in another LDS account in Since Cumorah.

Kevin Christensen

Vacationing in Utah

[Chris Smith]

Is this sort of like the First Vision, where it didn't happen because the accounts don't agree on the details?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Is this sort of like the First Vision, where it didn't happen because the accounts don't agree on the details?

How is this any way analogous to the Caswall incident? If Caswall claims that all of these fellows are present and no one records this in a journal and there is no other evidence that from Caswall, that it even took place this is an entirely different matter. I know you would like it to be similar but it is not.

At first glance this appears to be a tall tail. Do you believe the story Chris?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Caswall himself described his visit in several books. Whether his account(s) actually corroborate the version published in the Signal is another matter.

Regards,

Pahoran

Of course. So the only source is from Caswall?

[Pahoran]

Is this sort of like the First Vision, where it didn't happen because the accounts don't agree on the details?

Nice attempt at smearing by association, Chris.

No, it is nothing like the First Vision, where every version can be easily reconciled to every other without doing violence to any of them. It is like the Psalter Trick, where the different accounts contradict each other in essentials.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

Of course. So the only source is from Caswall?

Caswall is the sole primary source for his version(s) of the event. There are two other LDS sources which we will look at in the course of this thread.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Caswall is the sole primary source for his version(s) of the event. There are two other LDS sources which we will look at in the course of this thread.

Regards,

Pahoran

K, I am just going to grab some corn and watch the show.

[Zakuska]

Some more details in Caswells book...

In order to test the scholarship of the prophet, I had further provided myself with an ancient Greek manuscript of the Psalter written upon parchment, and probably about six hundred years old.

On the following morning (Monday, April 18th), I took my venerable Greek manuscript of the Psalter, and proceeded to the ferry to obtain a passage.

Perceiving a respectable-looking store (or shop), I entered it, and began to converse with the storekeeper. I mentioned that I had been informed that Mr. Smith possessed some remarkable Egyptian curiosities, which I wished to see. I added that, if Mr. Smith could be induced to show me his treasures, I would show him in return a very wonderful book which had lately come into my possession.

The storekeeper informed me that Mr. Smith was absent, having gone to Carthage that morning; but that he would return about nine o'clock in the evening. He promised to obtain for me admission to the curiosities, and begged to be permitted to see the wonderful book. I accordingly unfolded it from the many wrappers in which I had enveloped it, and, in the presence of the storekeeper and many astonished spectators, whom the rumour of the arrival of a strange book had collected, I produced to view its covers of worm-eaten oak, its discoloured parchments, and its mysterious characters. Surprise was depicted on the countenances of all present, and, after a long silence, one person wiser than his fellows, declared that he knew it to be a revelation from the Lord, and that probably it was one of the lost books of the Bible providentially recovered.

Looking at me with a patronizing air, he assured me that I had brought it to the right place to get it interpreted, for that none on earth but the Lord's Prophet could explain it, or unfold its real antiquity and value. "Oh," I replied, "I am going to England next week, and doubtless I shall find some learned man in one of the universities who can expound it." To this he answered with a sneer, that the Lord had chosen the weak things of the world to confound the mighty; that he had made foolish the wisdom of this world; and that I ought to thank Providence for having brought me to Nauvoo, where the hidden things of darkness could be revealed by divine power. All expressed the utmost anxiety that I should remain in the city until the prophet's return. The storekeeper offered immediately to send an express eighteen miles to Carthage, to hasten the return of Joseph.

At length I yielded to their importunities, and promised that if they would bring me over from Montrose on the following morning, I would exhibit the book to the prophet.

The storekeeper now proceeded to redeem his promise of obtaining for me access to the curiosities. He led the way to a room behind his store, on the door of which was an inscription to the following effect: "Office of Joseph Smith, President of the Church of Latter Day Saints." Having introduced me, together with several Mormons, to this sanctum sanctorum, he locked the door behind him, and proceeded to what appeared to be a small chest of drawers. From this he drew forth a number of glazed slides, like picture frames, containing sheets of papyrus, with Egyptian inscriptions and hieroglyphics. These had been unrolled from four mummies, which the prophet had purchased at a cost of twenty-four hundred dollars. By some inexplicable mode, as the storekeeper informed me, Mr. Smith had discovered that these sheets contained the writings of Abraham, written with his own hand while in Egypt. Pointing to the figure of a man lying on a table, he said, "That is the picture of Abraham on the point of being sacrificed. That man standing by him with a drawn knife is an idolatrous priest of the Egyptians. Abraham prayed to God, who immediately unloosed his bands, and delivered him." Turning to another of the drawers, and pointing to a hieroglyphic representation, one of the Mormons said, "Mr. Smith informs us that this picture is an emblem of redemption. Do you see those four little figures? Well, those are the four quarters of the earth. And do you see that big dog looking at the four figures? That is the old Devil desiring to devour the four quarters of the earth. Look at this person keeping back the big dog. That is Christ keeping the devil from devouring the four quarters of the earth. Look down this way. This figure near the side is Jacob, and those are his two wives. Now do you see those steps?" "What," I replied, "do you mean those stripes across the dress of one of Jacob's wives?" "Yes," he said, "that is Jacob's ladder." "That," I remarked, "is indeed curious."

Seems to me... that who ever showed Caswell the BOA papyrus, it wasn't Joseph Smith. If it were... why would he be speaking about himself in the third person?

That directly contradicts what was printed in the Warsaw Signal...

The Professor reluctantly assented to the proposal; and accompanied by a number of the anxious brethren, repaired to the residence of the Prophet. The remarkable book was handed him. Joe took it -- examined its old and worn leaves -- and turned over its musty pages. Expectation was now upon tip-toe. brethren looked at one another -- at the book -- then at the Prophet. It was a most interesting scene!

Edited August 15, 2011 by Zakuska

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Some more details in Caswells book...

Seems to me... that who ever showed Caswell the POGP papyrus, it wasn't Joseph Smith.

Either that or he made up the last part.

Do you see those four little figures? Well, those are the four quarters of the earth. And do you see that big dog looking at the four figures? That is the old Devil desiring to devour the four quarters of the earth. Look at this person keeping back the big dog. That is Christ keeping the devil from devouring the four quarters of the earth. Look down this way. This figure near the side is Jacob, and those are his two wives. Now do you see those steps?" "What," I replied, "do you mean those stripes across the dress of one of Jacob's wives?" "Yes," he said, "that is Jacob's ladder." "That," I remarked, "is indeed curious."

This is new to me. I have never heard of this before.

[Zakuska]

Either that or he made up the last part.

This is new to me. I have never heard of this before.

Me neither... I'd like to compare that to what Egytpologists say.

[Chris Smith]

This is new to me. I have never heard of this before.

See here.

[Pahoran]

Some more details in Caswells book...

Seems to me... that who ever showed Caswell the BOA papyrus, it wasn't Joseph Smith. If it were... why would he be speaking about himself in the third person?

That directly contradicts what was printed in the Warsaw...

While Caswall's account has various problems (and contradictions by the Signal are actually the least of them) this isn't one of them. He actually reports that Joseph showed him the papyri in person the next day, when he returned with his "wonderful book."

However, there is a contradiction there. Did you spot it? The Signal said:

It so happened that the Professor had in his possession a Greek Psalter, of great age -- one that had been in the family for several hundred years.

But Caswall himself said:

I added that, if Mr. Smith could be induced to show me his treasures, I would show him in return a very wonderful book which had lately come into my possession.

There are other contradictions, incidentally. But the good professor cannot reasonably be held responsible for what others say about him. Even though he is almost certainly the ultimate source for the Signal account, the possibility that that splendid journal took some liberties with his story is one that must be taken into account. (Unlike the dogmatic insistence by "scum people" that William Clayton's diary entry must be perfectly Joseph-breathed.)

Regards,

Pahoran

You can't refer to others as scum people and stay in a thread.

Edited August 15, 2011 by Minos
removed for name calling

[Chris Smith]

Seems to me... that who ever showed Caswell the BOA papyrus, it wasn't Joseph Smith. If it were... why would he be speaking about himself in the third person?

That directly contradicts what was printed in the Warsaw Signal...

Actually, these were two separate incidents that occurred on different days. Caswall was shown the papyrus on Monday, April 18, and showed Joseph the Psalter on Tuesday, April 19. Caswall reports seeing the papyri in City of the Mormons, page 23, and later reports showing Smith the psalter on page 35 of the same book.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Me neither... I'd like to compare that to what Egytpologists say.

I am just saying that that appears to be Caswall adding to the story. I am not aware of any other source but Caswall that claimed the previously quoted stuff.

It appears that Chris does not think Caswall made anything up but was just quoting JS having looked at the blog entry. I could be wrong on that though.

[Pahoran]

I am just saying that that appears to be Caswall adding to the story. I am not aware of any other source but Caswall that claimed the previously quoted stuff.

It appears that Chris does not think Caswall made anything up but was just quoting JS having looked at the blog entry. I could be wrong on that though.

That's pretty much par for the course. Caswall reporting what an anonymous storekeeper told him can be nothing more or less than Joseph Smith's own thoughts, exactly transmitted as if from his own mouth. Nauvoo in 1842 was a "hive mind" and every word spoken by any Mormon about anything to do with Joseph Smith or the Church was Joseph-breathed.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Xander]

Is this sort of like the First Vision, where it didn't happen because the accounts don't agree on the details?

Precisely. Although we have yet to see the discrepancies Pahoran has in mind, I suspect we're in for another trip down double-standard lane. Last time I checked, we only have Joseph Smith's account of his first vision, second vision, third vision, etc.. And yes, his first vision accounts have discrepancies too. His story about the First Vision changed as he needed it to corroborate his theological shifts.

In any event, I see Mola and Zak trying to come up with a "lie" based on their own unfamiliarity with the source document. If he'd read further in his book he would see that Caswall was shown the papyri on two separate occasions, the second time by Joseph Smith:

Having exhibited the book to the prophet, I requested him in return to show me his papyrus, and to give me his own explanation, which I had hitherto received only at second hand. He proceeded with me to his office, accompanied by the multitude. He produced the glass frames which I had seen on the previous day

But this is really irrelevant.. I asked Pahoran to be sure to address the points I made that undermine his thesis, and of course, he failed to do so as usual.

My take is pretty much the same that has been made on the Mormon Think website which runs through reasons why to believe or disbelieve this incident occurred:

Did this event even happen?

When researching this incident we can't help but wonder if the event actually occurred as there is so little corroborating evidence of the event and the primary source is professor Caswall himself. We list the following things that support and do not support the event:

Evidence against the event

• Grant Palmer's admission that we only have professor Caswall's view of the event.
• Professor Caswall was a Reverend and critic of the Church and was looking to find information to disprove Mormonism and its founder.

Evidence supporting the event

• Professor Caswall's account as shown. As a church we put a lot of stock in the testimony of others so why dismiss someone else's testimony of events so easily merely because it is critical of the church.
• As pointed out by Grant Palmer, it is consistent with Joseph's pattern of rather quickly determining the value and content of unknown documents that were presented to him.
• The newspaper account published the following year.
• The book published by Caswall called Three Days in Nauvoo.
• The artist's depiction of the event published in Three Days in Nauvoo.
• The articles or accounts of the event were never disputed by apostle Dr. Willard Richards or Joseph Smith or by any other church member after the event was published. Surely if Caswall never even talked to Richards, the apostle would have disputed it. And if Caswall did tell apostle Richards about the incident, surely the apostle would have mentioned it to Joseph and if the event never occurred Joseph would have refuted it but he never did.
• The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, formerly known as the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), which is located at Brigham Young University's campus and controlled by the LDS Church, is the largest, most respected pro-LDS apologist organization there is. Although their answers to church historical issues are not gospel doctrine they are often cited in The Ensign and other church publications as highly respected and probable responses to troubling church issues. As mentioned above, the article on the FARMS' website does not question that the event took place but merely agrees with apostle Richards about the significance of Joseph's analysis of the Greek Psalter.

Our conclusion is that the event likely happened in some form as this seems like a lot of trouble for professor Caswall to go to i.e. publishing the story, getting a cartoonist to sketch the event, fabricating a follow-up discussion with an apostle about the incident, etc. Also, if even FARMS does not dispute the event took place then why should we?

Professor Caswall likely exaggerated and perhaps embellished some details like Joseph's grammar to make Joseph seem even more ignorant but based on the above it seems likely that the event probably happened pretty much as Caswall related.

---------------------------------

I think it is funny the double standard folks like Pahoran employ. They use Caswall's testimony for apologetic purposes when they think they can use him to establish a missing papyrus scroll, but anything negative he says must be thrown out the window because he was a critic trying to prove Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Yes, that is what critics tend to do, otherwise they wouldn't be critics. That doesn't make their perfectly legitimate and scientific experiments invalid, just because they happen to yield results that corroborate a hypothesis.

Here are some excerpts from his book detailing the event, along with his experiences with some of the other Mormons in the area:

In order to test the scholarship of the prophet, I had further provided myself with an ancient Greek manuscript of the Psalter written upon parchment, and probably about six hundred years old...

I handed the book to the prophet, and begged him to explain its contents. He asked me if I had any idea of its meaning. I replied, that I believed it to be a Greek Psalter; but that I should like to hear his opinion. "No he said; "it ain't Greek at all, except, perhaps, a few words. What ain't Greek, is Egyptian; and what ain't Egyptian, is Greek. This book is very valuable. It is a dictionary of Egyptian Hieroglyphics." Pointing to the capital letters at the commencement of each verse, he said: Them figures is Egyptian hieroglyphics; and them which follows, is the interpretation of the hieroglyphics, written in the reformed Egyptian. Them characters is like the letters that was engraved on the golden plates." Upon this, the Mormons around began to congratulate me on the information I was receiving. "There," they said; "we told you so -- we told you that our prophet would give you satisfaction. None but our prophet can explain these mysteries." The prophet now turned to me, and said, "This book ain't of no use to you, you don't understand it." "Oh yes," I replied; "it is of some use; for if I were in want of money, I could sell it for something handsome."

"But what will you sell it for?" said the prophet and his dignitaries. "My price," I answered, "is higher than you would be willing to give." "What price is that?" they eagerly demanded. I replied, that I would not sell it to them for many hundred dollars. They then repeated their request that I should lend it to them until the prophet should have time to translate it, and promised me the most ample security; but I declined all their proposals. I placed the book in several envelopes, and as I deliberately tied knot after knot, the countenances of several among them gradually sunk into an expression of great despondency. Having exhibited the book to the prophet, I requested him in return to show me his papyrus, and to give me his own explanation, which I had hitherto received only at second hand. He proceeded with me to his office, accompanied by the multitude. He produced the glass frames which I had seen on the previous day; but he did not appear very forward to explain the figures. I pointed to a particular hieroglyphic, and requested him to expound its meaning. No answer being returned, I looked up, and behold! the prophet had disappeared. The Mormons told me that he had just stepped out, and would probably soon return. I waited some time, but in vain: and at length descended to the street in front of the store. Here I heard the noise of wheels, and presently I saw the prophet in a light waggon, flourishing his whip and driving away as fast as two fine horses could draw him. As he disappeared from view, enveloped in a cloud of dust, I felt that I had turned over another page in the great book of human nature...

An old American in a blue home-spun suit, and with a disagreeable expression in his face, now entered the lists against me. He told me that I was in great darkness and unbelief, and that I ought to repent, obey the gospel, and be baptized. I replied, that as for repentance, I hoped I repented every day; as for obedience, without boasting, I believed I might claim to be equal to the "Latter-day Saints;" and as for baptism, I had been lawfully baptized by one having authority. He said that Church of England baptism possessed only the authority derived from Acts of Parliament, and that the English Church was merely a Parliament Church. I replied, that the English Church had a double sanction: first, that of Christ -- who founded the Catholic Church, of which the English Church is a portion; and secondly, that of Parliament, by which, long after its foundation, it was acknowledged as the National Religion.

"But," I proceeded, "it is now my turn to say something about your religion, since you have spoken freely of mine. It is easy for you to argue as you do about the descent of the Indians from Israel, the existence of miraculous powers in the Church, and the supposed errors and inconsistencies of professed Christians. In regard however to the real question at issue, on which your religion depends, namely, the inspiration of your prophet, you have not given me the slightest satisfaction." They requested me to state what evidence I should consider satisfactory. I replied, "When the Jewish dispensation was to be introduced, God enabled Moses to work great wonders with his rod. God smote a mighty nation with miraculous plagues. He divided the Red Sea and the River Jordan. He came down on Mount Sinai amid clouds and lightnings and the terrific sound of the trumpet of heaven. He caused Moses to strike the rock and the waters gushed forth. He rained down manna for the space of forty years in the wilderness. Again, when the Christian dispensation was to be established, Christ walked upon the waters; He controlled the winds and the waves; He fed assembled thousands with a few loaves and fishes; He healed the sick; He opened the eyes of the blind; He brought the dead to life: and finally. He raised Himself from the grave.

"You maintain that your prophet is sent to establish a third dispensation. I demand, therefore, what signs are given to prove his commission?"

The old man replied, that the healing of the sick, the casting out of devils, and the speaking of unknown tongues, were very frequent in the "Latter-day Church." I said that signs of that kind were of a very doubtful description, since the imagination possessed great power over the nervous system. I inquired whether Smith had ever walked across the Mississippi, or brought a dead man to life. He replied in the negative; but said, that among them the blind received their sight, and the ears of the deaf were opened. I then observed, "You perceive that I am rather deaf, and you say that I have no faith. Now can you open my ears so that I may hear your arguments more distinctly?"

Immediately the old man stepped forward, and before I was aware of his object, thrust his fore fingers into my ears, and lifting up his eyes, uttered for about a minute in a loud voice some unintelligible gibberish. " There," he said finally, "the Holy Ghost prompted me to do that, and now you have heard the unknown tongue." "But my hearing is not improved," I said.

"That," he replied, "is because you have no faith. If ever you believe the Book of Mormon, you will immediately recover perfect hearing, through the gift of the Holy Ghost." I looked at him somewhat severely and said, "Take care, old man, what you say. When you employ holy names, you should speak with awe and reverence; but you and other Mormons here, as far as I have observed, employ the most sacred terms with the most disgusting levity. How miserable were your services on last Sunday; how cold your worship, how unedifying and farcical your preaching. The Holy Ghost was manifestly absent from your assembly, which resembled a Jewish Synagogue more than a Christian congregation. There was no Bible, there was no Lord's Prayer, there were no motives presented to humiliation, self-examination, or any branch of devotion; there was little besides senseless speculations on the character of God, idle assertions of special revelations and miraculous gifts, and disgraceful advertisements of stolen goods." Here they interrupted me and said that their preachers did not need the Bible, being immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost. "No," I said, "it is not inspiration, it is a Satanic delusion. Your prophet himself has proved to me that he is not inspired, and I will make the fact known to the world. Would you believe a man calling himself a prophet, who should say that black is white?" "No," they replied "Would you believe him if he should say that English is French?" "Certainly not." "But you heard your prophet declare, that this book of mine is a dictionary of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and, farther, that it is written in characters like those of the original Book of Mormon. I know it most positively to be the Psalms of David, written in ancient Greek. Now what shall I think of your prophet?

They appeared confounded for a while; but at length the Mormon doctor said, "Sometimes Mr. Smith speaks as a prophet, and sometimes as a mere man. If he gave a wrong opinion respecting the book, he spoke as a mere man." I said, "Whether he spoke as a prophet or as a mere man he has committed himself; for he has said what is not true. If he spoke as a prophet, therefore, he is a false prophet. If he spoke as a mere man, he cannot be trusted, for he spoke positively and like an oracle respecting that of which he knew nothing. You have spoken severely; without regard to my feelings, respecting the Church to which I belong, but I hardly like to tell you all that I think respecting your prophet and yourselves." "Speak out," said some. "Go on," said others. "We are above prejudice," said the old man. "If Smith be not a true prophet," I proceeded, "you must admit that he is a gross impostor." "We must," they replied. "Then I will freely tell you my opinion, so that yon may not think that I intend to say at a distance what I would not say in Nauvoo itself. I think it likely that most of you are credulous and ignorant, but well-meaning persons, and that the time at least has been when you desired to do the will of God. A knot of designing persons, of whom Smith is the centre, have imposed upon your credulity and ignorance, and you have been most thoroughly hoaxed by their artful devices.

Edited August 15, 2011 by Xander

[Chris Smith]

duplicate

Edited August 15, 2011 by Chris Smith

[Xander]

Is this sort of like the First Vision, where it didn't happen because the accounts don't agree on the details?

Precisely. Although we have yet to see the discrepancies Pahoran has in mine, I suspect we're in for another trip down double-standard lane. Last time I checked, we only have Joseph Smith's account of his first vision, second vision, third vision, etc.. And yes, his first vision accounts have discrepancies too. His story about the First Vision changed as he needed it to corroborate his theological shifts.\

In any event, I see Mola and Zak trying to come up with a "lie" based on their own unfamiliarity with the source document. If he'd read further in his book he would see that Caswall was shown the papyri on two separate occasions, the second time by Joseph Smith:

Having exhibited the book to the prophet, I requested him in return to show me his papyrus, and to give me his own explanation, which I had hitherto received only at second hand. He proceeded with me to his office, accompanied by the multitude. He produced the glass frames which I had seen on the previous day

But this is really irrelevant.. I asked Pahoran to be sure to address the points I made that undermine his thesis, and of course, he failed to do so as usual.

My take is pretty much the same that has been made on the Mormon Think website which runs through reasons why to believe or disbelieve this incident occurred:

Did this event even happen?

When researching this incident we can't help but wonder if the event actually occurred as there is so little corroborating evidence of the event and the primary source is professor Caswall himself. We list the following things that support and do not support the event:

Evidence against the event

• Grant Palmer's admission that we only have professor Caswall's view of the event.
• Professor Caswall was a Reverend and critic of the Church and was looking to find information to disprove Mormonism and its founder.

Evidence supporting the event

• Professor Caswall's account as shown. As a church we put a lot of stock in the testimony of others so why dismiss someone else's testimony of events so easily merely because it is critical of the church.
• As pointed out by Grant Palmer, it is consistent with Joseph's pattern of rather quickly determining the value and content of unknown documents that were presented to him.
• The newspaper account published the following year.
• The book published by Caswall called Three Days in Nauvoo.
• The artist's depiction of the event published in Three Days in Nauvoo.
• The articles or accounts of the event were never disputed by apostle Dr. Willard Richards or Joseph Smith or by any other church member after the event was published. Surely if Caswall never even talked to Richards, the apostle would have disputed it. And if Caswall did tell apostle Richards about the incident, surely the apostle would have mentioned it to Joseph and if the event never occurred Joseph would have refuted it but he never did.
• The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, formerly known as the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), which is located at Brigham Young University's campus and controlled by the LDS Church, is the largest, most respected pro-LDS apologist organization there is. Although their answers to church historical issues are not gospel doctrine they are often cited in The Ensign and other church publications as highly respected and probable responses to troubling church issues. As mentioned above, the article on the FARMS' website does not question that the event took place but merely agrees with apostle Richards about the significance of Joseph's analysis of the Greek Psalter.

Our conclusion is that the event likely happened in some form as this seems like a lot of trouble for professor Caswall to go to i.e. publishing the story, getting a cartoonist to sketch the event, fabricating a follow-up discussion with an apostle about the incident, etc. Also, if even FARMS does not dispute the event took place then why should we?

Professor Caswall likely exaggerated and perhaps embellished some details like Joseph's grammar to make Joseph seem even more ignorant but based on the above it seems likely that the event probably happened pretty much as Caswall related.

---------------------------------

I think it is funny the double standard folks like Pahoran employ. They use Caswall's testimony for apologetic purposes when they think they can use him to establish a missing papyrus scroll, but anything negative he says must be thrown out the window because he was a critic trying to prove Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Yes, that is what critics tend to do, otherwise they wouldn't be critics. That doesn't make their perfectly legitimate and scientific experiments invalid, just because they happen to yield results that corroborate a hypothesis.

Here are some excerpts from his book detailing the event, along with his experiences with some of the other Mormons in the area:

In order to test the scholarship of the prophet, I had further provided myself with an ancient Greek manuscript of the Psalter written upon parchment, and probably about six hundred years old...

I handed the book to the prophet, and begged him to explain its contents. He asked me if I had any idea of its meaning. I replied, that I believed it to be a Greek Psalter; but that I should like to hear his opinion. "No he said; "it ain't Greek at all, except, perhaps, a few words. What ain't Greek, is Egyptian; and what ain't Egyptian, is Greek. This book is very valuable. It is a dictionary of Egyptian Hieroglyphics." Pointing to the capital letters at the commencement of each verse, he said: Them figures is Egyptian hieroglyphics; and them which follows, is the interpretation of the hieroglyphics, written in the reformed Egyptian. Them characters is like the letters that was engraved on the golden plates." Upon this, the Mormons around began to congratulate me on the information I was receiving. "There," they said; "we told you so -- we told you that our prophet would give you satisfaction. None but our prophet can explain these mysteries." The prophet now turned to me, and said, "This book ain't of no use to you, you don't understand it." "Oh yes," I replied; "it is of some use; for if I were in want of money, I could sell it for something handsome."

"But what will you sell it for?" said the prophet and his dignitaries. "My price," I answered, "is higher than you would be willing to give." "What price is that?" they eagerly demanded. I replied, that I would not sell it to them for many hundred dollars. They then repeated their request that I should lend it to them until the prophet should have time to translate it, and promised me the most ample security; but I declined all their proposals. I placed the book in several envelopes, and as I deliberately tied knot after knot, the countenances of several among them gradually sunk into an expression of great despondency. Having exhibited the book to the prophet, I requested him in return to show me his papyrus, and to give me his own explanation, which I had hitherto received only at second hand. He proceeded with me to his office, accompanied by the multitude. He produced the glass frames which I had seen on the previous day; but he did not appear very forward to explain the figures. I pointed to a particular hieroglyphic, and requested him to expound its meaning. No answer being returned, I looked up, and behold! the prophet had disappeared. The Mormons told me that he had just stepped out, and would probably soon return. I waited some time, but in vain: and at length descended to the street in front of the store. Here I heard the noise of wheels, and presently I saw the prophet in a light waggon, flourishing his whip and driving away as fast as two fine horses could draw him. As he disappeared from view, enveloped in a cloud of dust, I felt that I had turned over another page in the great book of human nature...

An old American in a blue home-spun suit, and with a disagreeable expression in his face, now entered the lists against me. He told me that I was in great darkness and unbelief, and that I ought to repent, obey the gospel, and be baptized. I replied, that as for repentance, I hoped I repented every day; as for obedience, without boasting, I believed I might claim to be equal to the "Latter-day Saints;" and as for baptism, I had been lawfully baptized by one having authority. He said that Church of England baptism possessed only the authority derived from Acts of Parliament, and that the English Church was merely a Parliament Church. I replied, that the English Church had a double sanction: first, that of Christ -- who founded the Catholic Church, of which the English Church is a portion; and secondly, that of Parliament, by which, long after its foundation, it was acknowledged as the National Religion.

"But," I proceeded, "it is now my turn to say something about your religion, since you have spoken freely of mine. It is easy for you to argue as you do about the descent of the Indians from Israel, the existence of miraculous powers in the Church, and the supposed errors and inconsistencies of professed Christians. In regard however to the real question at issue, on which your religion depends, namely, the inspiration of your prophet, you have not given me the slightest satisfaction." They requested me to state what evidence I should consider satisfactory. I replied, "When the Jewish dispensation was to be introduced, God enabled Moses to work great wonders with his rod. God smote a mighty nation with miraculous plagues. He divided the Red Sea and the River Jordan. He came down on Mount Sinai amid clouds and lightnings and the terrific sound of the trumpet of heaven. He caused Moses to strike the rock and the waters gushed forth. He rained down manna for the space of forty years in the wilderness. Again, when the Christian dispensation was to be established, Christ walked upon the waters; He controlled the winds and the waves; He fed assembled thousands with a few loaves and fishes; He healed the sick; He opened the eyes of the blind; He brought the dead to life: and finally. He raised Himself from the grave.

"You maintain that your prophet is sent to establish a third dispensation. I demand, therefore, what signs are given to prove his commission?"

The old man replied, that the healing of the sick, the casting out of devils, and the speaking of unknown tongues, were very frequent in the "Latter-day Church." I said that signs of that kind were of a very doubtful description, since the imagination possessed great power over the nervous system. I inquired whether Smith had ever walked across the Mississippi, or brought a dead man to life. He replied in the negative; but said, that among them the blind received their sight, and the ears of the deaf were opened. I then observed, "You perceive that I am rather deaf, and you say that I have no faith. Now can you open my ears so that I may hear your arguments more distinctly?"

Immediately the old man stepped forward, and before I was aware of his object, thrust his fore fingers into my ears, and lifting up his eyes, uttered for about a minute in a loud voice some unintelligible gibberish. " There," he said finally, "the Holy Ghost prompted me to do that, and now you have heard the unknown tongue." "But my hearing is not improved," I said.

"That," he replied, "is because you have no faith. If ever you believe the Book of Mormon, you will immediately recover perfect hearing, through the gift of the Holy Ghost." I looked at him somewhat severely and said, "Take care, old man, what you say. When you employ holy names, you should speak with awe and reverence; but you and other Mormons here, as far as I have observed, employ the most sacred terms with the most disgusting levity. How miserable were your services on last Sunday; how cold your worship, how unedifying and farcical your preaching. The Holy Ghost was manifestly absent from your assembly, which resembled a Jewish Synagogue more than a Christian congregation. There was no Bible, there was no Lord's Prayer, there were no motives presented to humiliation, self-examination, or any branch of devotion; there was little besides senseless speculations on the character of God, idle assertions of special revelations and miraculous gifts, and disgraceful advertisements of stolen goods." Here they interrupted me and said that their preachers did not need the Bible, being immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost. "No," I said, "it is not inspiration, it is a Satanic delusion. Your prophet himself has proved to me that he is not inspired, and I will make the fact known to the world. Would you believe a man calling himself a prophet, who should say that black is white?" "No," they replied "Would you believe him if he should say that English is French?" "Certainly not." "But you heard your prophet declare, that this book of mine is a dictionary of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and, farther, that it is written in characters like those of the original Book of Mormon. I know it most positively to be the Psalms of David, written in ancient Greek. Now what shall I think of your prophet?

They appeared confounded for a while; but at length the Mormon doctor said, "Sometimes Mr. Smith speaks as a prophet, and sometimes as a mere man. If he gave a wrong opinion respecting the book, he spoke as a mere man." I said, "Whether he spoke as a prophet or as a mere man he has committed himself; for he has said what is not true. If he spoke as a prophet, therefore, he is a false prophet. If he spoke as a mere man, he cannot be trusted, for he spoke positively and like an oracle respecting that of which he knew nothing. You have spoken severely; without regard to my feelings, respecting the Church to which I belong, but I hardly like to tell you all that I think respecting your prophet and yourselves." "Speak out," said some. "Go on," said others. "We are above prejudice," said the old man. "If Smith be not a true prophet," I proceeded, "you must admit that he is a gross impostor." "We must," they replied. "Then I will freely tell you my opinion, so that yon may not think that I intend to say at a distance what I would not say in Nauvoo itself. I think it likely that most of you are credulous and ignorant, but well-meaning persons, and that the time at least has been when you desired to do the will of God. A knot of designing persons, of whom Smith is the centre, have imposed upon your credulity and ignorance, and you have been most thoroughly hoaxed by their artful devices.

[Chris Smith]

It appears that Chris does not think Caswall made anything up but was just quoting JS having looked at the blog entry. I could be wrong on that though.

Caswall's description of the vignette matches the image on the papyrus. And there is another account (Sarah Sturdevant, IIRC) that confirms that one of the vignettes was interpreted as "Jacob's ladder".

In other words, Caswall doesn't appear to be making this up.

I also think this description is quite plausible, though obviously exaggerated:

"It is a dictionary of Egyptian hieroglyphics." Pointing to the capital letters at the commencement of each verse, he [smith] said: "Them figures is Egyptian hieroglyphics; and them which follows, is the interpretation of the hieroglyphics, written in the reformed Egyptian. Them characters is like the letters that was engraven on the golden plates."

The format of the psalter as described here is very similar to the format of the GAEL. Comparing the characters on the psalter to the characters on the golden plates also fits Smith's pattern of behavior when he was first shown the papyri and Kinderhook Plates.

Whether there was any revelation involved in Smith's interpretation of the Greek Psalter I don't know, but it does seem that he at least made an assessment based on certain physical similarities to other documents he'd worked with in the past.

Peace,

-Chris

[Chris Smith]

That's pretty much par for the course. Caswall reporting what an anonymous storekeeper told him can be nothing more or less than Joseph Smith's own thoughts, exactly transmitted as if from his own mouth. Nauvoo in 1842 was a "hive mind" and every word spoken by any Mormon about anything to do with Joseph Smith or the Church was Joseph-breathed.

That's pretty much par for the course. Any early Mormon who reports an interpretation of an ancient document must just be speculating rather than reporting something Joseph said, because who needs a prophet when you can just make stuff up?

Edited August 15, 2011 by Chris Smith

[Pahoran]

Precisely. Although we have yet to see the discrepancies Pahoran has in mine, I suspect we're in for another trip down double-standard lane. Last time I checked, we only have Joseph Smith's account of his first vision, second vision, third vision, etc.. And yes, his first vision accounts have discrepancies too. His story about the First Vision changed as he needed it to corroborate his theological shifts.

That is the standard anti-Mormon propaganda, yes. The fact that it is utter rubbish is one that we do not need to explore here, since it is off-topic for this thread.

In any event, I see Mola and Zak trying to come up with a "lie" based on their own unfamiliarity with the source document. If he'd read further in his book he would see that Caswall was shown the papyri on two separate occasions, teh second time by Joseph Smith:

Which I have already addressed, but without the condescending sneers.

But this is really irrelevant.. I asked Pahoran to be sure to address the points I made that undermine his thesis, and of course, he failed to do so as usual.

Your arrogance is only exceeded by your impatience. I am by no means finished with this thread.

My take is pretty much the same that has been made on the Mormon Think website which runs through reasons why to believe or disbelieve this incident occurred:

Hence the expression, "a herd of independent thinkers."

Snip long cut and paste from the deceitfully misnamed website.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

That's pretty much par for the course. Any early Mormon who reports an interpretation of an ancient document must just be speculating rather than reporting something Joseph said, because who needs a prophet when you can just make stuff up?

Apart from your snippy tone, Chris, you are also introducing a textbook example of the fallacy of the false dilemma. A third-hand account will almost invariably contain some inaccuracies in transmission even if all the parties to the process are doing their best to report everything honestly -- and that is not an assumption that it would be safe to make of the Reverend Mr. Caswall.

Regards,

Pahoran