A Thread Dedicated to Rectified History

[_honorentheos]

A past favorite claim of apologetists has been to deny that whitewashing of LDS history has taken place, or currently takes place. With that in mind, I wish to dedicate a thread to examples of written statements or scripture that have been rectified through the Ministry of Truth and scraps of history sent down the Memory Hole:

Winston dialled 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify. For example, it appeared from The Times of the seventeenth of March that Big Brother, in his speech of the previous day, had predicted that the South Indian front would remain quiet but that a Eurasian offensive would shortly be launched in North Africa. As it happened, the Eurasian Higher Command had launched its offensive in South India and left North Africa alone. It was therefore necessary to rewrite a paragraph of Big Brother's speech, in such a way as to make him predict the thing that had actually happened. Or again, The Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today's issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston's job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones. As for the third message, it referred to a very simple error which could be set right in a couple of minutes. As short a time ago as February, the Ministry of Plenty had issued a promise (a 'categorical pledge' were the official words) that there would be no reduction of the chocolate ration during 1984. Actually, as Winston was aware, the chocolate ration was to be reduced from thirty grammes to twenty at the end of the present week. All that was needed was to substitute for the original promise a warning that it would probably be necessary to reduce the ration at some time in April.

As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames.

I'll post two of my personal favorite examples, below. One past, another fairly recent.

[_honorentheos]

Joseph Smith - History (….such was never in my nature.)

A very well known verse regarding Joseph Smith’s character can be found in the official version of his history. In part it reads,

“…I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God. In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. A disposition to commit such was never in my nature. But I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company, etc., not consistent with that character which ought to be maintained by one who was called of God as I had been. But this will not seem very strange to any one who recollects my youth, and is acquainted with my native cheery temperament.”


However, this statement included in every Pearl of Great Price, reflects a major change from the original words of Joseph Smith. When Joseph Smith’s History was first published in the Times and Seasons , it appeared as follows:

"… I was left to all kinds of temptations, and mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors and displayed the weakness of youth and the corruption of human nature, which I am sorry to say led me into divers temptations, to the gratification of many appetites offensive in the sight of God."

The edit, supposedly conducted by Willard Richards acting as Joseph’s biographer, occurred while Joseph was still alive. It’s possible, maybe probable that Joseph knew of this change. Yet it is hard to read the phrase, “to the gratification of many appetites offensive in the sight of God” and feel it is only a slight editorial change to arrive at “I was guilty of levity, and sometimes associated with jovial company.”

[_honorentheos]

Teachings for Our Times - the Joseph Smith Manual Lesson 38 - “The Wentworth Letter”

In the RS/PH manual, Teachings for Our Times - Joseph Smith, an entire lesson was devoted to the Wentworth Letter. The manual includes this explanation regarding the purpose and origin of the Wentworth Letter:

In the Times and Seasons issue dated March 1, 1842, the Prophet published what has come to be known as the Wentworth Letter. Describing his reasons for producing this document, the Prophet explained: “At the request of Mr. John Wentworth, Editor and Proprietor of the Chicago Democrat, I have written the following sketch of the rise, progress, persecution, and faith of the Latter-day Saints, of which I have the honor, under God, of being the founder. Mr. Wentworth says that he wishes to furnish Mr. [George] Barstow, a friend of his, who is writing the history of New Hampshire, with this document. As Mr. Barstow has taken the proper steps to obtain correct information, all that I shall ask at his hands, is, that he publish the account entire, ungarnished, and without misrepresentation.”

George Barstow ultimately did not include the Prophet’s account in his history because he decided to cover events only through the year 1819 in his book. But the Wentworth Letter has immense value to Latter-day Saints. It is an original account by Joseph Smith testifying of his sacred call from God, his visions, and his ministry and teachings. It recounts the rise and growth of the Church and the persecutions of the Saints. It contains a prophetic declaration of the Church’s future success in the earth under the protective hand of the Great Jehovah. It also contains several important details not found elsewhere in the Prophet’s teachings, including a description of the gold plates and a sketch of the contents of the Book of Mormon. Significantly, it is the first time that Joseph Smith himself published an account of his First Vision.

Concluding with the 13 declarations of Church doctrine now called the Articles of Faith, it stands as a powerful witness of the divine calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

In this lesson, the entire Wentworth Letter was quoted with the exception of the following:

"In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem, about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.”

It seems fairly clear why, in 2007, the church may have been uncomfortable with this statement and wished to see knowledge of it fade from history - To the memory hole with ye.

[_Chap]

In the RS/PH manual, Teachings for Our Times - Joseph Smith, an entire lesson was devoted to the Wentworth Letter. The manual includes this explanation regarding the purpose and origin of the Wentworth Letter:

In the Times and Seasons issue dated March 1, 1842, the Prophet published what has come to be known as the Wentworth Letter. ... the Wentworth Letter has immense value to Latter-day Saints. ... it stands as a powerful witness of the divine calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

In this lesson, the entire Wentworth Letter was quoted with the exception of the following:

"In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem, about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.”

It seems fairly clear why, in 2007, the church may have been uncomfortable with this statement and wished to see knowledge of it fade from history - To the memory hole with ye.

Yup. It has immense value, apart from the parts which do not, and which are better forgotten.

[Guest]

This is an older one I was reminded of recently.

In an issue of the Friend from 1989 they did a piece on Zina Diantha Huntington Young.

First off her polyandrous marriage to Joseph Smith is not mentioned.
Second is this, "After Henry deserted Zina and the two little boys, Zebulon and Chariton, she married Brigham Young and crossed the plains to the Salt Lake Valley with his family." The problem is the use of the word deserted.

Even in the apologist explanation it is clear that Henry and Zina were still together even after the marriage to Brigham until Mt. Pisgah. Henry also stood as a witness to the Marriage to Brigham.
http://www.fairlds.org/fair-conferences/2006-fair-conference/2006-zina-and-her-men-an-examination-of-the-changing-marital-state-of-zina-diantha-huntington-jacobs-smith-young

If there were any evidence for desertion by Henry I imagine the apologists would be more than happy to use it as an explanation for the polyandrous situation. Saying that a man deserted his wife and kids is an awful thing to say. To me I already view Henry as someone who had his wife and kids taken from him, so to have this insult added on top of all that... it's unbelievable.

Edited to Add:
After doing some more searching on http://www.lds.org I found another article about Zina in the Ensign.
http://www.lds.org/ensign/1984/03/great-grandmother-zina-a-more-personal-portrait?lang=eng. It also completely omits the marriage to Joseph, and deals with Henry/Brigham situation like this.
"Zina was first married to Henry Bailey Jacobs, and gave birth to two sons. Later, she married Brigham Young and gave birth to his daughter, Zina Presendia. She also reared Brigham Young’s four children by his wife Clarissa Chase when Clarissa died. “They were never anything but my own,” she lovingly declared." Omitting the whole polyandrous circumstance.
If there is a more accurate version of events found on lds.org I am unable to find it. If anyone is able to locate one please post it here.

[_honorentheos]

This is an older one I was reminded of recently.

In an issue of the Friend from 1989 they did a piece on Zina Diantha Huntington Young.

First off her polyandrous marriage to Joseph Smith is not mentioned.
Second is this, "After Henry deserted Zina and the two little boys, Zebulon and Chariton, she married Brigham Young and crossed the plains to the Salt Lake Valley with his family." The problem is the use of the word deserted.

Even in the apologist explanation it is clear that Henry and Zina were still together even after the marriage to Brigham. Henry also stood as a witness to the Marriage to Brigham.
http://www.fairlds.org/fair-conferences/2006-fair-conference/2006-zina-and-her-men-an-examination-of-the-changing-marital-state-of-zina-diantha-huntington-jacobs-smith-young

If there were any evidence for desertion I imagine the apologists would be more than happy to use it as an explanation for the situation. How this church magazine manages to get it so wrong I don't know.

Very nice example!

Another personal favorite is related to yours.

http://www.josephsmith.net

During the 2005 celebration of Joseph Smith's birth, the church unveiled a website dedicated to the life and significance of Joseph Smith, Jr. Noteable to critics of the church was the absence of many subjects pivotal to understanding Joseph's life and his lasting influence on the church. For example, try a search for "Fanny", "Fanny Alger", "Polygamy" - Zero results.

But regarding his marriage to Emma (without any note of their elopement or her father's opposition to the marriage), it tells us, "Joseph and Emma Smith centered their marriage and family in the gospel of Jesus Christ—an example to all."

[_honorentheos]

Book of Commandments 10:2/D&C 5:4

In March 1829, Martin Harris was the recipient of a revelation included in the 1833 Book of Commandments. In part, it read as follows:

"2 And now behold, this shall you say unto him - I the Lord am God, and I have given these things unto my servant Joseph, and I have commanded him that he should stand as a witness of these things, nevertheless I have caused him that he should enter into a covenant with me that he should not show them except I command him, and he has no power over them except I grant it unto him: and he has a gift to translate the book, and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift."

Despite this revelation stating Joseph would have no other gift but to translate the Book of Mormon, he would go on to give the world other texts such as his inspired translation of the Bible (including the Book of Moses), the translation of the papyri (The Book of Abraham), and to become the president of the church holding all the keys and powers of the priesthood.

The Ministry of Truth made sure that history was rectified, and in the Doctrine and Covenants this was changed to read as follows:

"2 And now, behold, this shall you say unto him—he who spake unto you, said unto you: I, the Lord, am God, and have given these things unto you, my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and have commanded you that you should stand as a witness of these things;

3 And I have caused you that you should enter into a covenant with me, that you should not show them except to those persons to whom I commanded you; and you have no power over them except I grant it unto you.

4 And you have a gift to translate the plates; and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished."

Off topic, but related to the above: I've wondered how the original revelations were recorded. It's interesting to notice the change in language between the March 1829 revelation and it's redacted form. I've wondered how much of this is a reflection on the changing tides of influence Oliver Cowdery had in the church? We know that Oliver wrote portions of what is now Section 20 of the D&C prior to the organization of the church. (see this Ensign article, for one explaination, including the origin of D&C 20.) As Oliver's star waned and Rigdon's ascended, I wonder if the language of the 1835 D&C reflects aspects of this shift in the balance of power in Church leadership?

[_Fence Sitter]

Off topic, but related to the above: I've wondered how the original revelations were recorded. It's interesting to notice the change in language between the March 1829 revelation and it's redacted form. I've wondered how much of this is a reflection on the changing tides of influence Oliver Cowdery had in the church? We know that Oliver wrote portions of what is now Section 20 of the D&C prior to the organization of the church. (see this Ensign article, for one explaination, including the origin of D&C 20.) As Oliver's star waned and Rigdon's ascended, I wonder if the language of the 1835 D&C reflects aspects of this shift in the balance of power in Church leadership?

Maybe it was also influenced by Joseph Smith's movement away from using seer stones and divining rods.

At the same time we have the revisions in D&C 8 where Oliver Cowdery's gift was revised from working with a sprout to a rod of nature to the gift of Aaron.

[_honorentheos]

Off topic, but related to the above: I've wondered how the original revelations were recorded. It's interesting to notice the change in language between the March 1829 revelation and it's redacted form. I've wondered how much of this is a reflection on the changing tides of influence Oliver Cowdery had in the church? We know that Oliver wrote portions of what is now Section 20 of the D&C prior to the organization of the church. (see this Ensign article, for one explaination, including the origin of D&C 20.) As Oliver's star waned and Rigdon's ascended, I wonder if the language of the 1835 D&C reflects aspects of this shift in the balance of power in Church leadership?

Maybe it was also influenced by Joseph Smith's movement away from using seer stones and divining rods.

At the same time we have the revisions in D&C 8 where Oliver Cowdery's gift was revised from working with a sprout to a rod of nature to the gift of Aaron.

That's an interesting thought, Fence Sitter.

One thing that's struck me about Joseph is that he always seemed to need a right-hand-man: an Aaron to his Moses. But I hesitate to call him a Moses in the full sense. It's almost like he is a medium and his partner both muse and puppetmaster...yet the strings worked both ways. Maybe a Pinocchio who was clever enough to know when to dance with the pulls of the strings, and when it was in his interest to dance without them? The mistake of the #2 being they let Joseph hold the stage, so all eyes and hearts were with him?

Anyway, whether it was Emma, Oliver, Rigdon, Bennett, or Hyrum, he never seems to have stood alone. And one can practically taste the different periods of Mormonism as each new muse/#2 moved into position. It's something that I find interesting since church history was originally conveyed to me as something smooth and consistent - vanilla flavored. Or clear water free from a pure protected source.

But it's not, it's a wine tasting of varied vintages, regions, and times.

[_sock puppet]

'What? a whole thread devoted to useless truths? Better just leave it alone.'
-BKP's expected reaction if he came across this thread