Bureaucrats say,"Confuse them with piles of paper."

Thank you for all the hard work. I anxiously await the first volume by the end of the year.
Elder Jensen has turned a department, often criticized, into a world class library with open access and scholarly projects that will bless many lives.

It would be nice if we could see all the original documents, unedited. That should silence the critics.

Old documents don't hold up to being merely "copied" for us to see. Spelling is problematic, there is often damage to the document.

Historians spend much time analyzing the documents, proving the provenance, and authenticating documents.

I'm thankful for the work they do. On this project noted historians both in and out of the Church are involved.

Great job!

This project was announced more than a decade ago by Elder Oaks with promises that the first volumes would be out shortly. To date they have produced NOTHING except more promises that we will see something soon.

Then the project was moved to SLC from BYU and a couple of heads rolled but we still have no firm publication date for anything.

I have some questions for Elder Jensen: How much has been spent on this so far and why is there nothing to show for it?

This is fabulous.

No one is trying to confuse anyone with a lot of documents. Wouldn't you know that someone would make a misguided remark like that. These people always acuse the Church of secrecy (which isn't true). Now that they are making everything available, they are trying to "confuse" everyone with "piles of paper."

The Church and these scholars are making every single known document available so that ANYONE can see them, analyze them, study them, comment on them, etc. They are laying it all out and let the chips fall where they may.

The Church has nothing to be afraid of and they are proving it by making these documents available.

The LDS Church keeps re-editing and revising its own scriptures to adopt to its changing doctrines (so much for God's own words). What makes anyone think these Joseph Smith papers will be any more accurate?

How about the Golden Plates? Show us those unedited documents and that would silence the critics. But we all know that is not going to happen.

"Skeptical" is spelled with a "k".

Cheers.

No, it won't. Those who don't want to believe the Church is what it claims to be; the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, won't believe the truthfulness of the Church even after all of these documents are published. A few might.

I think the majority will say, "Well, I've got "copies" of the documents right here in this book I bought, but I want to see the real thing". And then after you show them the real documents upon which the volums are based, they say "Well, how do I know these ARE the real documents?"

And so it goes....

Which is why mankind needs to understand that while doing our own "homework", reading, studying, asking questions, pondering, etc is a great and neccesary place to start one's spiritual education, the only way to REALLY know if something is true or real or correct is to do what so many people often overlook these days.....to just ask God himself. Ask with humility, ask with faith, be prepared to follow His answer, no matter how unexpected it might be (if that's the case) and He will tell you the truth of the matter.

He did for me. Twice.

For all of the talk that the LDS Church is trying to "hide" the truth about it's early history, I believe these volumes will prove just the opposite.

The people who have analyzed these records have done a fantastic job of objectively publishing both the good and the bad of early Mormonism.

It is now up to the reader to find the "truth" by reading and studying these great works.

Even if the LDS Church had the Golden Plates, nobody would believe they were the real thing. Critics would say that the (rich) LDS Church bought a bunch of gold and created their own plates, complete with Egyptian characters written by FARMS employees.

If the Angel Moroni descended from Heaven and spoke at General Conference saying this was the true church, critics would say it was just a hoax from BYU's video editing department.

You see, you look for more and more evidence, but you will never find the truth because the truth doesn't come from what you can see, hear or touch.

Dear Darrel and Skeptical,

You may object, but in the scholarly world this is how it's done. Not everyone can handle every piece of paper: over-handling (even by the faithful) would damage originals, or there might be some who would try to steal or destroy them.

A similar project documenting the works of Jonathan Edwards, the 16th Century American Calvinist Preacher, is 25 huge volumes. The church is committed to the same high scholarly standards. The advisory board of this project includes three scholars who have worked on similar (non-LDS) projects--including the Edward's project. They will not edit these documents, except to convert handwritten texts to typesetting. And there are rules for how to do that so nothing is lost.

As to confusing people with piles of paper, Darrel: disorganized piles of paper are one thing; published books, with tables of contents, page numbers, indexes, etc., and available for electronic search on the Internet, are quite another.

I think that the real fear of this project is that it may disrupt important methods of some of the church’s enemies--misattribution, innuendo, and falsehood--with documented, hard-to-dispute facts.

The Church has not changed the scriptures. It has changed a handful of words (about eight)in the Book of Mormon for better clarification in English since the Book was originally written in a semitic language. Also the latest version of the scriptures changed one word back to what was in the original manuscript because that word had been changed, in error, in a previous edition. Joseph Smith took a few "it came to passes" out because, although necessary in semitic tongues, it is redundant in English. No substance, doctrine or information in the Book of Mormon has EVER been changed or edited out.

It is so funny the way these detractors always focus on these small and insignificant points instead of focusing on the real point which is that there is a mountain of evidence that the Book of Mormon is a document of ancient origin.

Healtlhy skeptic: You need to do more research before you make such inaccurate and uninformed statements.

It would indeed be nice to see the original un-edited documents. Would it silence the critics? or give them more ammo? Unfortunately, I doubt you'll ever see an original piece of historical work come from the LDS Church "un-edited", the BofM has been edited over 4000 times so why would they release anything else that didn't fit their agenda?

I'll be interested to see if the statements relating to there being people on the moon will show up in one of the volumes.

I am a member who spent hundreds of hours reading literature critical of the Church. I have chosen now to let go of that and focus on the small but meaningful testimony I DO have rather than struggling over what I DON'T. So, I've been there, read that. And yes, there is a boatload of information out there that genuinely makes our history and some doctrines look pretty bad and sometimes downright disturbing. Okay - we admit it. What I don't get is just what some think may still be out there or may have been altered or hidden by the Church? Volumes have been written critical to the Church using the very documents addressed in this article. And yes they are damaging and yes often accurate. So just what more is there supposed to be? Some personal journal entry of JS admitting it was all a hoax? It is time to either move away from the Church if it does not bring you closer to the Savior or focus on the aspects of the Church that do. I believe in the end, the Savior will be okay with either choice as long as it was done honestly.

The History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is important to its' organization just as it is to any organization. This library will allow anyone to learn more about the early history of the church, its' leaders, and its' members.

But this history is all secondary... The scriptures are laid before us. We have the Bible, a history of the people near Jerusalem... and we have the Book of Mormon, a history of the people of the Americas in ancient times, which stands with the Bible as a witness and testament of Jesus Christ. These records are God's words to us through His prophets, and they contain the truth. The Book of Mormon also contains a promise, given by God himself, to those who read it with a "sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ." If anyone will pray in that spirit, asking God if it is true, "he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things."(Moroni 10:4-5)

I have followed the invitation and I know these things are true!

I'm sure if someone saw golden plates they would believe it. There is a feeling one gets about authentic truths. History though, it is always painted a picture in favor of whoever is writing it... TRUTH? Perhaps,and perhaps not.

I wonder how accurate these documents will be. Please don't think that I am attacking this effort. I think that the history of Joseph Smith is very interesting and I am excited to study more.

Does anybody know the Non-LDS scholars that are involved with this?

I study Islam for a hobby, and I have found that things written by Muslims tend to be different than things written by Non-Muslim scholars.
I love that I can read both accounts and make up my own mind.

Actually, if you go back and read the original or printer's manuscript for the BoM you will find that they help prove it's true much better than the one we have in it's current form today.

Some of you act like the original/printer copies are lost forever. Google it, you can easily read large portions of it online.

I worked on the project for a summer a few years ago. I was impressed by the attention to detail. One of my tasks was to check the sources and spelling of entries in Journal 1. I was the fifth person to do this. The Project will be wonderful when published. As I understand it, some of the set backs have been to ensure accuracy so that many of the skeptics would be satisfied. I am excited to have them on my bookshelf eventually!

If Joseph Smith were a perfect person I would expect perfect writings. I welcome the opportunity to see any original documents from him. I think we tend to forget that this poor guy was doing his best, following by faith (not perfect knowledge), and trying to do better after any failure. Line upon line, not instant perfection.

I believe people make up a lot of history. Who knows what to believe?

Will any of these documents provide evidence that we don't have to have faith in Christ, repent, be baptized, receive the Holy Ghost or endure to the end? Just wondering. I don't want to give up the good stuff just because someone did something bad back in 1840.

It is amazing to me that people that do not beleive in the LDS Church even care what is published. Read the Book of Mormon, it is is not true to you, what difference does it make if the words of Joseph Smith are not true? You have to think with your heart as well as your mind to have a testimony.

"Line upon line, not instant perfection."

If it was translated by "divine revelation" or "divine translation" and you (LDS) claim...

Why wouldn't it be perfect?

I was at the Church Archives doing so research on the Brigham Young papers. If you think what Joseph Smith left behind is big I can't imagine documenting all of Brigham Young's papers.

I am very excited about this project. I had the privalege of having a class with Dr. Esplin at BYU and he is truly a first rate scholar.

Speaking of Brigham Young, that is the most confused mess of history I have ever read. Nothing leads to much sense about truth or false with this man. He had too many people writing for him. Although, not much of it on his own. I don't know if it was because he didn't have time, or he just couldn't spell?

Consider the source. Would they really produce ALL the documents? Incidentally, if you want to know the "hidden history" you don't need to go to the Tanner's website or other anti-Mormon sites. You can read the books of independent Mormon historians and authors. Try BH Roberts "Book of Mormon Studies". Then try Todd Compton's "In Sacred Lonliness". Then try Bushman's "Rough Stone Rolling. Then try Juanita Brooks book on the Mountain Meadows Massacre. All of these were written by people not bought and paid for by the home team. Then try a few where you really let your hair down...D. Michael Quinn's "Origins of Power" (OK, he was x'd, but he is a pretty honest purveyor of history). Anyway, then you'll see what we are talking about.

I recommend visiting the project's website. It answers a lot of questions about its organization, the editors and much more. Also, some question when these will be available. Deseret Book is already preselling for the first of the volumes. To Rich directly, the following are the national advisory board as mentioned:

Harry S. Stout - Jonathan Edwards Professor of American Religious History and Chair, Department of Religious Studies, Yale University

Stephen J. Stein - Chancellor's Professor, Emeritus, of Religious Studies and Adjunct Professor of American History and American Studies, Indiana University, Bloomington

Mary-Jo Kline - Author of A Guide to Documentary Editing and editor of Political Correspondence and Public Papers of Aaron Burr

Terry L. Givens - James A. Bostwick Chair and Professor of Literature and Religion, University of Richmond

I had the opportunity to hear a lecture by one of the editors on the project and its scope. Its been amazing to hear what is being done and how thorough this project is. They have access to a lot of documents, including those that the RLDS (Community of Christ) have in their libraries. This will be a wonderful scholarly source for any who want to understand Joseph Smith.

Todd,

"You may object, but in the scholarly world this is how it's done. Not everyone can handle every piece of paper: over-handling (even by the faithful) would damage originals, or there might be some who would try to steal or destroy them."

I agree since every Archive in the world has access policies when it comes to old documents and records. Rarely, if at all, will anyone who doesn't have a legitimate reason to access records be granted access. A person who is working on a project may be granted limited access based on the duration and needs of the project.

"As to confusing people with piles of paper, Darrel: disorganized piles of paper are one thing; published books, with tables of contents, page numbers, indexes, etc., and available for electronic search on the Internet, are quite another."

I agree again. The 30 volumes will constitute about 15,000 to 21,000 pages. Each volume will be indexed and will be readily referenced. It isn't unfair to expect people to use the volumes as a resource and cite them as a source for smaller volumes and works. We aren't going to sit down and read them from cover to cover.

Re: Anonymous,

"If it was translated by "divine revelation" or "divine translation" and you (LDS) claim...

Why wouldn't it be perfect?"

That's not the doctrine of the LDS Church. Nothing in this life is free from error or perfect including the Bible since men are involved.

Even if God is perfect in all things he must work with fallible and human people when revealing his will and teachings to mankind.

The whole idea that just because God is perfect means that his revelations will come to us in an undiluted form ignores the fact that the only way this would be possible is if,

1) the man whom he is revealing it to is perfect in his understanding, perfect in his recall of it, and perfect in his re-stating it verbal or written form;

2) God takes over the man, seizes his body and mind and speaks literally through him or in other words we may need an Exorcist;

No matter how you look at it Heavenly Father must and does work with men. He's not going to sit there and dictate letter for letter and tell the prophet where to put periods. To suggest otherwise is plain ignorant.

To God works with Fallible Men,

"That's not the doctrine of the LDS Church. Nothing in this life is free from error or perfect including the Bible since men are involved."

"Even if God is perfect in all things he must work with fallible and human people when revealing his will and teachings to mankind."

Everything you said makes perfect sense.

Trouble is, why isn't everything you said sufficient to justify the Catholic Church as still being the one, true, holy Church despite all the imperfections of the men involved in it?

If what you say is true, and a Church can be true despite fallible men and their mistakes, there could never have been an "Apostasy". If there could never have been an Apostasy, then there never was a reason for a "Restoration". Joseph Smith should have just listened to your reasoning and joined one of the "True" churches of his day and stopped criticizing the fallibility of men in those Churches.

Please help me understand why your arguments work for the LDS Church but no other Churches?

Tyson,

God loves all men equally. But Mormons he loves MORE equally than others. All Churches have some truth in them, but the Mormon Church has MORE truth than everyone else. Ask them, they will tell you. All Churches inspire people to do many good things, but the Mormon Church inspires MORE good than everybody else. That is what Mormon means: more good. Ask them, they'll tell you. All churches also have fallible men in them, but the Mormon Church is the most true even with fallible men in it! Ask them, they'll tell you. And whatever you do, DO NOT ask anyone who is NOT Mormon about the Mormon church because you cannot get the truth about Mormonism from its enemies! Of course, the Mormons are happy to tell you all about the Great Apostasy of all the other Churches and how corrupt they all are, and they expect you to listen to them tell you about other Churches, but don't ever think of asking anyone but Mormons about Mormons!

Make sense?!

Some Help,

No, it makes no sense at all.

but I suspect that is your point, huh.