Authoritative Factual Corrections Emanating From The Joseph Smith Papers

[Scott Lloyd]

Item: For generations it was the common understanding that John the Baptist visited Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and gave them the priesthood on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Harmony, Pa. It is now known that the visitation occurred in the "sugar bush," or a grove of maple trees adjacent to the log home where Joseph and Emma were living. Afterward, in accordance with the angel's instructions, Joseph and Oliver went down to the river and baptized each other. In the latest edition of the scriptures, the header to D&C 13 has been altered to accord with the new understanding.

 

 

 

That's really interesting. Do you have a link to the site with this, so I can look at it? I don't dispute what you say, I'm just interested in the source.

 

This is a link to a Deseret News story I wrote last year covering a news media briefing and on-set film production glimpse regarding the development that is currently underway for the Priesthood Restoration Site at Harmony, Pa. In the story, I quote representatives of the Church History Department and Missionary Department.

 

Research for the site development has brought about a change in traditional understanding about the priesthood restoration narrative. Previously it was believed the angel came to the two men on the riverbank, followed immediately by the baptisms. Now, historians have concluded that the visitation happened on a hillside near the Smith and Hale homes in the “sugar maple bush,” a grove where sap was tapped for making sugar.

“We looked at some of the records of Oliver Cowdery, and we thought about what he was really trying to say about where the priesthood restoration took place,” Neilson explained. “In addition, we were able to look at old newspapers and find out how many boats were going up and down the river and about how busy the site was.”

Researchers determined that in May 1829, extensive river flooding would have precluded the angel’s visitation happening on the spot where it was previously understood to be, Neilson said. “It changed our understanding of what went on. So Joseph and Oliver went up the hillside, received the Aaronic Priesthood and went back down where the water was to do the baptizing.”

“That will be news to many people,” said Allen of the missionary department. “They will be surprised to see that the priesthood restoration took place up in the sugar grove.”

He added, “I walked that grove this summer, just before we started building the visitors center, and I can tell you this site is every bit as pristine and beautiful — and has a spirit about it — as the Sacred Grove (in Palmyra, N.Y., where Joseph Smith’s vision of the Father and the Son occurred).”

 

The site with its new improvements will be dedicated in late fall.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[cinepro]

This is a link to a Deseret News story I wrote last year covering a news media briefing and on-set film production glimpse regarding the development that is currently underway for the Priesthood Restoration Site at Harmony, Pa. In the story, I quote representatives of the Church History Department and Missionary Department.

 

The site with its new improvements will be dedicated in late fall.

My first area on my mission in the early 90s was in northeast PA, and we were very close to restoration site. It was common for missionaries in our mission to try and persuade investigators to request to be baptized in the river near that spot, but of course the investigators didn't care (and didn't want to drive a long way to get baptized in a cold river). Eventually the MP had to tell us that no more baptisms would be done there for investigators.  But my first "baptism" on my mission was for a nine-year old girl from an active family in our branch who did request to be baptized there (I can't remember why she waited until she was nine).  Her father did it so the closest I ever got was standing on the bank and watching, but since she was nine, it counted as a convert baptism. 

Edited June 19, 2015 by cinepro

[theplains]

1.  The factual correction came about through scholarly research and study, either facilitated through the Joseph Smith Papers project or carried out in some other venue.

 

2.  The factual correction was authoritatively recognized by the Church with a revision in the study aids of the latest edition of the scriptures.

 

I'm still unclear about the premise then.  Was Joseph Smith factually wrong when he wrote

that it was Nephi who appeared to him and identified himself by name?

 

Who changed it to Moroni, when, and why?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[cinepro]

I'm still unclear about the premise then.  Was Joseph Smith factually wrong when he wrote

that it was Nephi who appeared to him and identified himself by name?

 

Who changed it to Moroni, when, and why?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

I think in order to answer your question, we would first have to clarify who actually wrote the word "Nephi" on that page in 1841.

 

Do you know?

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm still unclear about the premise then.  Was Joseph Smith factually wrong when he wrote

that it was Nephi who appeared to him and identified himself by name?

 

Who changed it to Moroni, when, and why?

 

Thanks,

Jim

It was Moroni from the beginning. Sources giving it as Nephi are in error.

 

It's explained here.

 

The Church teaches that Moroni was the heavenly messenger which appeared to Joseph Smith and directed him to the gold plates. Yet, some Church sources give the identity of this messenger as Nephi. Some claim that this shows that Joseph was 'making it up as he went along.' One critic even claims that if the angel spoke about the plates being "engraven by Moroni," then he couldn't have been Moroni himself.

The identity of the angel that appeared to Joseph Smith in his room in 1823 and over the next four years was known and published as "Moroni" for many years prior to the publication of the first identification of the angel as "Nephi" in the Times and Seasons in 1842. Even an anti-Mormon publication, Mormonism Unvailed, identified the angel's name as "Moroni" in 1834—a full eight years earlier. All identifications of the angel as "Nephi" subsequent to the 1842 Times and Seasons article were using the T&S article as a source. These facts have not been hidden; they are readily acknowledged in the History of the Church:

Joseph F. Smith and Orson Pratt understood the problem more than a century ago, when they wrote in 1877 to John Taylor:

In the original publication of the history in the Times and Seasons at Nauvoo, this name appears as "Nephi," and the Millennial Star perpetuated the error in its republication of the History. That it is an error is evident, and it is so noted in the manuscripts to which access has been had in the preparation of this work. ^[3]

 

"The contradictions in regard to the name of the angelic messenger who appeared to Joseph Smith occurred probably through the mistakes of clerks in making or copying documents and we think should be corrected. . . . From careful research we are fully convinced that Moroni is the correct name. This also was the decision of the former historian, George A. Smith." ^[4]

 

And if you continue to push this, I'll request your removal from the thread for deliberate efforts to derail it. Failing that, I will close the thread.

[theplains]

It was Moroni from the beginning. Sources giving it as Nephi are in error.

 

It's explained here.

 

 

Thanks.  I appreciate that link. It thoroughly explained it.  

 

Jim

[Scott Lloyd]

Thanks.  I appreciate that link. It thoroughly explained it.  

 

Jim

This, by the way, is an interesting illustration that in some cases, the Joseph Smith Papers project confirms what had been previously known but had been called into question.

 

So the papers are useful in either direction: confirming traditional understanding or correcting it.

 

As Elder D. Todd Christofferson explained:

 

Recording mistakes, for example, have sometimes been seized on as evidence of misrepresentations or bumbling by the Prophet. For example, the Book of Commandments initially referred to Joseph Smith as “an elder” and Oliver Cowdery the same, rather than “First Elder” and “Second Elder” as found in the text of Doctrine and Covenants Section 20. The 1833 Book of Commandments suggested that the Church was organized in Manchester rather than Fayette, New York. The June 1839 Manuscript History of the Church says it was Nephi who appeared to Joseph Smith in 1823 rather than Moroni. Now, however, with original manuscripts contained in the Book of Commandments and Revelations, published as part of the Joseph Smith Papers Project, and other early sources we can “peel back the onion” a little further. And we find that the supposed problems are nothing more sinister than clerical errors sometimes repeated by others.

 (See footnote 14 in the link)

Edited June 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[tonie]

Here is the Church position on the ordination of Jospeh Smith and Oliver Cowdrey:

"In contrast, there was a grove of sugar maples on Joseph Smith’s property some distance from the river. This is where the ordination likely occurred"

This suggests the Church is not to claim "this is the place" concerning the event. It is a clear indication that the Church does not subcribe to "along the banks of the river"

Section Heading changes are discussed on the Joseph Smith Papers website

[Scott Lloyd]

Here is the Church position on the ordination of Jospeh Smith and Oliver Cowdrey:

"In contrast, there was a grove of sugar maples on Joseph Smith’s property some distance from the river. This is where the ordination likely occurred"

This suggests the Church is not to claim "this is the place" concerning the event. It is a clear indication that the Church does not subcribe to "along the banks of the river"

Section Heading changes are discussed on the Joseph Smith Papers website

I think it useful and informative to quote the entire explanatory paragraph:

 

In identifying the location where Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood, the revised heading in the 2013 edition deletes the mention of “along the bank of the Susquehanna River.” This change is based on recent research by the historic sites group of the Church History Department of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery described this ordination as occurring in a “woods” some distance from the river. Nineteenth-century Latter-day Saint descriptions of this ordination consistently noted that the event occurred in the “woods.” Evidence indicates that the land near the river had been cleared of trees at the time of the ordination. In contrast, there was a grove of sugar maples on Joseph Smith’s property some distance from the river. This is where the ordination likely occurred. In the early twentieth century, some Latter-day Saint sources began erroneously introducing the notion that the ordination occurred along the banks of the Susquehanna River, evidently in large part because of an unsourced statement made in a caption of a photograph of the river. For more information, see Mark Lyman Staker, “Where Was the Aaronic Priesthood Restored? Identifying the Location of John the Baptist’s Appearance, May 15, 1829,” Mormon Historical Studies 12 (Fall 2011): 143–159.

 

Edited to add:

 

Here is the article by Mark Lyman Staker in Mormon Historical Quaterly that makes a compelling case that the appearance of John the Baptist was in the sugar maple grove near the farmhouse and log cabin. In addition to making the case, it traces the origin of the assumption that persisted for so long that the visitation occurred at water's edge.

 

It's worth a read and a look at the photo and diagram of the property.

 

Staker summarizes:

 

 

When Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery “retired” in the “woods” away

from the “abodes of men” to pray, and then “repaired” to the river to perform

baptisms as commanded by an angel, the evidence suggests they elected to

go in the sugar bush on the north end of Joseph’s property where he kept the

golden plates hidden from his neighbors. While there they heard the voice

of Jesus Christ, saw John the Baptist and heard his instructions, and knelt as

John restored priesthood to them. John the Baptist’s ordination marked the

beginning of the process. Baptism in the river, confirmation, and ordination

to priesthood afterward, and restoration of additional priesthood authority and

keys at other times and in other locations, continued the process.

 

Edited June 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Bob Crockett]

The Joseph Smith papers said the angel Nephi, nor Moroni, visited Joseph Smith.  When

will the LDS Church make a correction in subsequent teachings?

 

Thanks,

Jim

Perhaps because the Book of Mormon says that all subsequent leaders of the Nephites shall bear the name "Nephi," the old material isn't inconsistent.

[HappyJackWagon]

Russel, since you don't know how to play well with others I've blocked you from from being able to PM me. I guess you'll either need to say what you want in public and risk moderation or maybe you'll learn to be nicer, or simply hold your tongue. Good luck

[Scott Lloyd]

Perhaps because the Book of Mormon says that all subsequent leaders of the Nephites shall bear the name "Nephi," the old material isn't inconsistent.

Perhaps. But I doubt that's the case.

 

I'm quite certain it was an unintentional error that was perpetuated either through carelessness or ignorance.

 

We must bear in mind that people who lived in the first generation of this gospel dispensation were not as well acquainted with the Book of Mormon or the standard Church history narrative as we are today.

Edited June 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[ed2276]

Perhaps because the Book of Mormon says that all subsequent leaders of the Nephites shall bear the name "Nephi," the old material isn't inconsistent.

 

  This would tend to mean that Nephi was merely a name-title that applied to Moroni as a "leader" of the Nephites. However, the BOM seems to show that only kings were to bear the name, Nephi, not all leaders of the Nephites.

 

  Jacob writes in the first chapter: 

 

 

9 Now Nephi began to be old, and he saw that he must soon die; wherefore, he anointed a man to be a king and a ruler over his people now, according to the reigns of the kings

10 The people having loved Nephi exceedingly, he having been a great protector for them, having wielded the sword of Laban in their defence, and having labored in all his days for their welfare—

11 Wherefore, the people were desirous to retain in remembrance his name. And whoso should reign in his stead were called by the people, second Nephi, third Nephi, and so forth, according to the reigns of the kings; and thus they were called by the people, let them be of whatever name they would.

 

 

  Moroni wasn't a king, so it is doubtful that he would have had the name-title Nephi, as well as his personal name.

 Because of this, it appears more likely that Nephi was used in error when naming the angel who visited Joseph, and that it was Moroni who visited him.