canard78 Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 Trying to avoid getting carried by a rumour mill so am asking the question. Who wrote D&C 110?The intro references Joseph Smith's history (most of which wasn't written by him. Was section 110 also not dictated by Joseph?http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/110A friend who works for the church had heard that the josephsmithpapers project had found an account of the vision in Joseph's personal writings that was very different and was a bit troubled by the implications. Any foundation to this or is this a foundless church rumour?
canard78 Posted October 15, 2013 Author Posted October 15, 2013 Interesting, the original hand written version is in the third person:http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/revelation-3-april-1836-dc-110But the source notes don't say who wrote it.
canard78 Posted October 15, 2013 Author Posted October 15, 2013 (edited) A BYU article suggests it's Willard Richards' handwriting: The earliest handwritten copy of section 110, written before November 1843, is in Willard Richards’s handwriting.https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/days-never-be-forgotten-oliver-cowdery/5-oliver-cowdery-doctrine-and-covenants Edited October 15, 2013 by canard78
Duncan Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 This MA thesis might be of help http://www.templestudies.org/home/abstract-of-anderson-trever-r-doctrine-and-covenants-section-110-from-vision-to-canonization/ 2
Dontro_Lutz Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 In my church group, they say it was Jesus' son Remus who wrote it,
Whinnie Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 This MA thesis might be of help http://www.templestudies.org/home/abstract-of-anderson-trever-r-doctrine-and-covenants-section-110-from-vision-to-canonization/ I really enjoyed reading this. When did you write it?
Duncan Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 I really enjoyed reading this. When did you write it? haha x100,000! no, I didn't write it! wish I did
pmccombs1 Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 Trying to avoid getting carried by a rumour mill so am asking the question. Who wrote D&C 110? Denver Snuffer claims it was Warren Cowdery. I believe Snuffer is presently under church disciplinary action for the book mentioned in the article, however; and there has been some concern that he is simply putting these ideas forward in order to get personal gain. So... grain of salt. But the claims are interesting, nevertheless. I'm personally very skeptical of religious "authority" of any sort, being an anarchist and all, so there is my bias & disclaimer for you.
pmccombs1 Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 That is correct. Joseph Smith's Journal, 1835–1836, contains the following editorial note: So Warren Cowdery wrote D&C 110, but he likely relied on firsthand information originating from Joseph Smith and/or Oliver Cowdery. The editorial note, of course, is from a faithful perspective that gives Warren Cowdery the benefit of any doubt. The other option is that Warren Cowdery, and others in the early LDS tradition, were all engaged in the creation of a new religious genre in which it mattered little who imagined what, so long as a coherent movement could arise from it. The stories could become relevant, edited, and called upon in moments of need, such as to consolidate authority or to discredit other movements. We see parallels in the development of the early Christian canon during the 1st-4th centuries, as stories emerged to establish authenticity in the face of numerous alternatives. When given a great secret, perhaps even the servants of God might go to great lengths in an effort to secure it. Only to the faithful is the original source of section 100 evident or likely, because the faithful already assume the texts to be just what they say they are. The skeptic is aware that no source for section 110, other than Warren Cowdery, can yet be ascertained. The man was telling a story about others who themselves never said anything about it, at least, not much that has survived in any written memory. In what ways is that story true? History, at least, cannot tell us... yet. 2
canard78 Posted October 15, 2013 Author Posted October 15, 2013 This MA thesis might be of helphttp://www.templestudies.org/home/abstract-of-anderson-trever-r-doctrine-and-covenants-section-110-from-vision-to-canonization/Fascinating. its first publications in the Deseret News and Millennial Star, to its eventual inclusion in the 1876 D&C and its canonization in the 1880 D&C. The study continues to trace how the section was used by leaders of the Church in the forty years between these two dates. Interestingly, it was not mentioned by Joseph Smith during his life time, though he taught much about Moses, Elias, and Elijah. In fact, it was not used a great deal, even after it was published in the Deseret News (November 1852) and Millennial Star (November 1853). Orson Pratt was the first to directly teach from and about Section 110, on 28 August 1859. Anderson points out that several factors may have led to the production of the 1876 and 1880 editions of the D&C, which included Section 110. 1
canard78 Posted October 15, 2013 Author Posted October 15, 2013 The current intro to the section says:The Prophet prefaces his record of the manifestations with these words: “In the afternoon, I assisted the other Presidents in distributing the Lord’s Supper to the Church, receiving it from the Twelve, whose privilege it was to officiate at the sacred desk this day. After having performed this service to my brethren, I retired to the pulpit, the veils being dropped, and bowed myself, with Oliver Cowdery, in solemn and silent prayer. After rising from prayer, the following vision was opened to both of us” (History of the Church, 2:435). (Doctrine and Covenants, Doctrine and Covenants, Section 110)But that's not entirely accurate is it? Joseph didn't say that. The journal keeper (Cowdery) said/deacribed that.So do we have any other contemporary journal accounts of this vision or did it only emerge several years later?Are there any other sermons or documents where Joseph refers to the visions on 3rd April 1836 in the temple?
David T Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 (edited) Actually, the current (2013) intro says: Visions manifested to Joseph Smith the Prophet and Oliver Cowdery in the temple at Kirtland, Ohio, April 3, 1836. The occasion was that of a Sabbath day meeting. Joseph Smith’s history states: “In the afternoon, I assisted the other Presidents in distributing the Lord’s Supper to the Church, receiving it from the Twelve, whose privilege it was to officiate at the sacred desk this day. After having performed this service to my brethren, I retired to the pulpit, the veils being dropped, and bowed myself, with Oliver Cowdery, in solemn and silent prayer. After rising from prayer, the following vision was opened to both of us.” Edited October 15, 2013 by David T
Duncan Posted October 15, 2013 Posted October 15, 2013 The current intro to the section says:(Doctrine and Covenants, Doctrine and Covenants, Section 110)But that's not entirely accurate is it? Joseph didn't say that. The journal keeper (Cowdery) said/deacribed that.So do we have any other contemporary journal accounts of this vision or did it only emerge several years later?Are there any other sermons or documents where Joseph refers to the visions on 3rd April 1836 in the temple? one or two contemporary documents, I forget which though
canard78 Posted October 16, 2013 Author Posted October 16, 2013 Actually, the current (2013) intro says:Joseph Smith’s history states: “In the afternoon, I assisted..."Must update my iPod. It's marginally more accurate but to the uninformed reader is there any noticeable difference?Question also still stands of what other references we have from around 1836. 1
canard78 Posted October 16, 2013 Author Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Have FAIRmormon addressed this one anywhere? Edited October 16, 2013 by canard78
Calm Posted October 16, 2013 Posted October 16, 2013 Have FAIRmormon addressed this one anywhere?Couldn't find anything so I asked the List about it. Will report anything of value that turns up. And perhaps we will get a new wiki article out of it. I hope you feel free to ask the List yourself when we don't have stuff easily found or at all. BTW, it is not FAIRmormon, but FairMormon. I haven't been paying close enough attention to relay the reasoning for the change, but I do what my masters tell me even if I don't understand.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 16, 2013 Posted October 16, 2013 Trying to avoid getting carried by a rumour mill so am asking the question. Who wrote D&C 110?The intro references Joseph Smith's history (most of which wasn't written by him. Was section 110 also not dictated by Joseph?http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/110A friend who works for the church had heard that the josephsmithpapers project had found an account of the vision in Joseph's personal writings that was very different and was a bit troubled by the implications. Any foundation to this or is this a foundless church rumour?I have written many things that came from God....poems (still have a copy of my first check ) I used to sell them in some LDS Bookstores. Before I finished them and most came to me as an answer to a prayer. I would go through them to remove me or the words I wanted and return them too what was revealed. Joseph used to do the same thing. Poetry even when revealed do not come with punctuation . So I have asked a friend here many time to help with this...I did not look at D&C 110, but I think it is a prayer for the Kirtland Temple or D&C 101...very wonderful prayer.
Calm Posted October 16, 2013 Posted October 16, 2013 Trying to avoid getting carried by a rumour mill so am asking the question. Who wrote D&C 110?The intro references Joseph Smith's history (most of which wasn't written by him. Was section 110 also not dictated by Joseph?http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/110A friend who works for the church had heard that the josephsmithpapers project had found an account of the vision in Joseph's personal writings that was very different and was a bit troubled by the implications. Any foundation to this or is this a foundless church rumour?Questions from FairMormon list for you... What are the troublesome implications specifically? And are you saying that your friend said there is a different version that isn't being published along with the other stuff? or that the one that was published is very different from what is currently being used? Or something else?
canard78 Posted October 16, 2013 Author Posted October 16, 2013 I did not look at D&C 110, but I think it is a prayer for the Kirtland Temple... It's not. It's an account written in the first person of the visions in the temple. We are left to presume that it is a transcription of a dictation by Joseph Smith (given the first person). It may well have been a transcription. Perhaps the scribe (Warren Cowdery) was indeed taking down the words of Joseph Smith and simply wrote in third person as a personal style. I'm just asking whether we know this for sure.
canard78 Posted October 16, 2013 Author Posted October 16, 2013 Questions from FairMormon list for you... What are the troublesome implications specifically? And are you saying that your friend said there is a different version that isn't being published along with the other stuff? or that the one that was published is very different from what is currently being used? Or something else? Thanks. I wasn't really too troubled about it - more curious. The question came out of the conversation with the friend. He works for the church in the Family History division and had a 'water cooler' conversation. The essence was "JSP shows that section 110 has been changed and wasn't written down by Joseph Smith. Joseph's own version differs from what we have in the D&C." I didn't say much in reply as I didn't know much about it but it piqued my interest. So some additional thoughts based on the thread comments: - Joseph wrote very little down, most was dictated to scribes or scribes making notes as they went along. So that's no issue for 110.- The "different version" may simply be the distorded mormon rumour mill with people getting the wrong end of the stick. What is simply a case of 'third person' instead of 'first person' in the handwritten document may now be being bandied around as a 'not the original words of Joseph Smith rumour.' So the follow up questions from this would be: - Where/from whom did Warren Cowdery get the account of what happened 'behind the veil?'- Was it a verbatim transcription that he simply used third rather than first person for (based on his style)?- Or, was it WC's summary of an account he heard from someone/somewhere else?- Any thoughts on why Joseph didn't publish this and instead it remained relatively unknown until many years later?
Calm Posted October 16, 2013 Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Might as well use this one rather than post a new one... Check with your friend if you get a chance to see if he has more info because I am curious too. I have sent your list of questions off to the list. We will see what they come up with. Edited October 16, 2013 by calmoriah 1
canard78 Posted October 16, 2013 Author Posted October 16, 2013 No, there aren't. But Greg Prince, in his study of the development of the priesthood, notes that Elijah became an increasingly important figure in Joseph Smith's theology after 1836. "It gradually became apparent that through Elijah’s instrumentality all salvific ordinances for the living and the dead were made both possible and essential." Presumably something prompted the shift in the Prophet's attention to Elijah. Prince notes that Joseph's 1838 history "link[ed] for the first time Elijah and priesthood: 'Behold, I will reveal unto you the Priesthood by the hand of Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.'" Then "in the summer of 1839 Smith gave a discourse on priesthood in which he again referred to Elijah, this time making explicit a necessary relationship between living and dead: 'The hearts of the children will have to be turned to the fathers, & the fathers to the children living or dead to prepare them for the coming of the Son of Man. If Elijah did not come the whole earth would be smitten.' The following summer Smith gave form to the relationship between living and dead when he announced that it was the privilege of Latter-day Saints to be baptized in behalf of their deceased kin who had died without baptism." In instituting the ordinance of baptism for the dead, as well as other ordinances associated with the temple, Joseph Smith certainly acted as though the priesthood keys held by Elijah had already been restored. I have a hard time believing that he would have introduced these ordinances if he didn't believe he had the authority to do so. Thanks - useful context. Cal... looks like you have your wiki article written by Nevo
Recommended Posts