An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins
Palmer, Grant H. 2002. An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins. Salt Lake City: Signature Books.
Rating:
10
Summary:
You may not remember this, but back in December of 2004, Grant Palmer, the author of An Insider’s View of Mormon Origins, was reprimanded by the LDS religion for publishing this book. His punishment was disfellowshipment, which basically means he could only peripherally participate in Mormon worship services. It wasn’t made clear what he was supposed to do in order to return to full activity, but the punishment did make one thing clear: The LDS religion is serious about guarding its dishonest version of its history and is anxiously engaged in keeping its members in check!
I posted some emails I received concerning Grant Palmer’s trial on my blog back in December 2004, but am just finally getting around to reading his book. Well, it’s no wonder the LDS religion wasn’t happy with it – Palmer’s book is, in my opinion, the clearest illustration of how flawed the “official” versions of Mormon history are. What’s more, I think it is the best analysis of the origins of Mormon history that I have yet read, better by far than the quasi-official biography of Joseph Smith by Richard Bushman and the speculative biography by Dan Vogel. But before I speak too highly of the book, let me give a brief summary of the contents.
Perhaps unfortunately, the book doesn’t begin with Palmer’s assertion about the reliability of using the “Holy Ghost” or “revelation” as a means of arriving at truth. But Palmer does give a clear indication of what he thinks of this method on page 132, “American psychologist William James in his classic work, The Varieties of Religious Experience, studied hundreds of people, including religious founders, who claimed to receive inspiration from the Spirit, from revelation, visions of angels, and from face-to-face appearances of God. He included Joseph Smith with Augustine, Bernard de Clairvaux, the Buddha, Fox, Huss, Loyola, Luther, Mohammed, and Wesley. He concluded that while their experiences and feelings were real to them, they could not be a valid source for determining truth because their claims were doctrinally incompatible.” This illustrates that Palmer is working on the assumption that just because you get a warm fuzzy feeling that doesn’t mean something is true. If you throw out that premise, you then open up the possibilities for testing truth claims to other methods, specifically historiography and, where possible, to the methods of science. Palmer’s approach to Mormon history relies on these approaches rather than on warm fuzzies, which probably gives you an indication of what conclusions he will ultimately draw.
Quoting Palmer, the first chapter is a discussion of, “Joseph Smith’s efforts at translation. Chapters 2-4 examine Joseph’s intellectual environment, including the King James Bible, evangelical religion, and American antiquities, all of which influenced the content of the Book of Mormon. Chapter 4 also discusses religious feelings and the Holy Ghost. Chapters 5-6 reveal the impact of folk beliefs on two early claims of Mormonism. Chapters 7-8 investigate priesthood restoration and Joseph’s first vision, detailing the developments and what precipitated the changes in the history of these two experiences” (p. xiii).
While the topics covered are outlined in Palmer’s quote above, his conclusions, all of which I find compelling, are spread throughout the book. Let me highlight a few. As regards Joseph Smith’s ability to translate ancient texts, Palmer concludes, “that a large body of evidence demonstrates that Joseph mistranslated a number of documents,” (p. 36), leading Palmer to conclude that Joseph Smith had no ability to translate. In every instance when he claimed to have translated something that was verifiable – the Kinderhood Plates, Egyptian Papyrii, and a Greek Psalter – he botched it. And almost everyone of his “translations” has been found to be based on existing texts that Joseph Smith was known to have, primarily the King James Version of the Bible.
Palmer also tackles the testimonies of the “witnesses” to the golden plates. He arrives at two compelling conclusions. First, the majority of the “witnesses” claimed to have seen the plates and angel only with their “spiritual eyes and inspected them in the context of a vision, apparently never having actually possessed or touched them. But for them, the spiritual was material; thus, in their official declarations, their experiences sounded more physical than was intended” (p. 207). While I disagree with Palmer’s implied defense of these individuals (i.e., “…than was intended”), I believe his conclusion here is accurate. None of the witnesses actually saw or handled anything physically – it was all in vision. Palmer also notes that, “…all of the living signatories to the Book of Mormon, except possibly Cowdery, accepted Strang’s leadership, angelic call, metal plates, and his translation of these plates as authentic” (pp. 212-213). For those unfamiliar with Strang, he was a follower of Joseph Smith who claimed leadership after Smith died. He also claimed to have translated plates, and almost all of the witnesses to the golden plates also signed on as witnesses for Strang’s translations. The point being, of course, that if these witnesses are supposed to provide “evidence” for the Book of Mormon, then they should also provide evidence for Strang’s writings, none of which the mainstream LDS religion accepts as scripture. Clearly there is a problem there…
In similar fashion, Palmer illustrates that many of the early supernatural visitations Joseph Smith claimed were originally couched as purely visionary or metaphysical encounters but later turned into physical encounters as the needs and theology of the fledgling religion evolved, “The first stories about how Joseph received his authority show that, like other prophets and religious founders throughout history, he and Oliver first received their callings in a metaphysical way. Within a few years, their accounts became more impressive, unique, and physical” (p. 232). In short, Joseph Smith was an expert at making stuff up and revising his earlier claims so they would fall in line with his changing beliefs.
There are a number of additional topics and conclusions that I could address in this review, some of which I’ll touch on in my comments below, but for those interested, I suggest instead that you read the book. It’s well worth it.
Review:
I think part of the reason this book is so compelling and potentially so damaging to the LDS religion is that the author is a 34 year veteran of the religion’s own Church Educational System (CES). He was, in fact, still employed in that field when he wrote and published the book (meaning the LDS religion was actually paying him to write it – snicker 
. As the title of the book implies, the author is an “insider,” which is doubly true in the sense that despite arriving at all of the same conclusions I have regarding the history of the LDS religion, the author remains an active member of the religion. He no longer believes Joseph Smith was much of a prophet, that the Book of Mormon is a literal history of an ancient people, or that much of what Joseph Smith claimed actually happened. Additionally, he is well aware that the leadership of the LDS religion has intentionally and willfully manipulated historical documents or kept them from public sight for years with the aim of presenting a “faithful” history that leaves out all of the evidence that would allow one to arrive at the conclusions Palmer does. Despite all of that, he still believes in Jesus and supports, to some degree at least, the mission of the Mormons. How he reconciles such things is beyond me, but having members of the religion write such scathing exposes of the religion can only be seen as heresy, which explains why he was punished. What’s more, for critics of the church, this is an ideal piece of literature to give to members, since it was written by one of their own. Most critics with this breadth of knowledge leave, which instantly turns them into people who cannot be trusted. Not so in Palmer’s case – ergo, this is potentially one of the most damaging books that exists for the LDS religion.
I think the greatest attribute of this book is that it combines information from a broad swath of references and brings it all together in a very readable and concise format. This is perhaps the clearest and most forthright summary of the historical research into Mormon history conducted over the last 50 or so years. But in addition to recapping the existing information – much of which I had already read – the author introduced some insights and information that I had not heard.
For instance, while I was well aware that Joseph Smith had been tried and convicted of using a peepstone to defraud people, I had never read the excerpts from the proceedings that Palmer includes, “During the trial it was shown that the Book of Mormon was brought to light by the same magic power by which he [Joseph] pretended to tell fortunes, discover hidden treasures &c … Addison Austin was next called upon, who testified, that [he was] … with Smith alone, and [that Austin] asked [Smith] to tell him honestly whether he could see this money or not. Smith hesitated some time, but finally replied, “[T]o be candid, between you and me, I cannot, any more than you or any body else; but any way to get a living”” (p. 8). I had never read this quote elsewhere.
I was aware that Joseph Smith often separated himself from his scribes when “translating” (i.e., dictating) the Book of Mormon, but Palmer extended my understanding of this fact as well. Mormons usually claim that the sheet was to prevent the scribes from seeing the gold plates. But what most Mormons fail to consider is that Joseph never used the alleged plates for translating. He stuck his peepstone (a rock) into his hat and stuck his face over the top of the hat and pretended to be reading from the peepstone. So, if the sheet wasn’t to prevent people from seeing the plates, what was it for? Palmer raises this question and provides a compelling answer, “Since the gold plates were not used during the translation, why the curtain? No nineteenth-century church member mentions that Joseph used notes or books, but scholars have determined that he consulted an open Bible, specifically a printing of the King James translation dating from 1769 or later, including its errors” (p. 10). This is a great insight, combining two elements of Mormon history of which most Mormons are completely unaware to explain an odd behavior – separating himself from his scribes with a sheet.
Another attribute of this book that I absolutely loved was that Palmer is, in my opinion, the first to build a compelling case as to the origins of the Book of Mormon that does not rely on psycho-history or supernatural interference. By combining source material in Joseph Smith’s environment – specifically the KJV Bible, View of the Hebrews by Ethan Smith, The Golden Teapot by E.T.A. Hoffman, and an awareness of the cultural milieu of Smith’s environment – Palmer clearly illustrates the origins of the Book of Mormon. Neither Richard Bushman with his faithful history nor Dan Vogel with his pious fraud/psycho-history have a leg up on Palmer. Palmer’s approach is down-to-earth, simple, and supported by the evidence (a.k.a. sociological). Way to go Grant Palmer!
The other element of Mormon historiography I found insightful in this book was Palmer’s treatment of the “First Vision.” I have to admit that the conflicting accounts of the alleged vision didn’t play a role in my own apostasy. But after having read Palmer’s explanations as to why the multiple versions are so important, I can see why learning about the multiple accounts can lead people to apostatize from the religion. Palmer presents several profound insights regarding the “visions.” First, he notes that Joseph doesn’t talk about the “first vision” during the early history of the religion and only begins talking about it when the credibility of the Book of Mormon is questioned, looking for an earlier and more compelling illustration that he was “called of god” (starting around 1832). Also, his early versions of the vision (1832 and 1835) don’t mention God the Father nor anything about his calling (p. 240). It is only in 1838 that all of the details of the “official version” begin to take shape, many of which fall in line with doctrinal understandings that developed during the intervening years. This leads Palmer to conclude that the historical evidence, “suggests that when he rewrote his history in 1838, he reinterpreted his experience to satisfy institutional needs” (p. 240). Perhaps the clearest indication that Smith made up the “first vision” well after the fact is this insight, “Had Lucy [Joseph's mom] heard her son say that Jesus Christ personally instructed him “to go not after them” and to not “join any” church because “all” of the ministers, creeds, and churches “were an abomination in his sight,” she and her several children certainly would not have joined the Presbyterians and worshiped with them from 1825 until 1828. Nor is it probable that Joseph would have participated with the Methodists between 1820-28” (p. 253). Again, this insight draws upon information that most Mormons do not have – Joseph Smith joined the Methodist religion after his alleged “first vision” in 1820 when he was told that all of the extant religions were false. If he had really had that vision, would he have joined? In all likelihood – no! Clearly he made up the vision and modified it over time to fit institutional needs. If you need any more compelling evidence that Joseph Smith was a fraud, you are a prime candidate for blind believer of the year!
The only problem I have with this book is that the author is still a believer – and that really isn’t a very big problem. In all likelihood Mr. Palmer is basically a liberal Christian who doubts numerous aspects of Christianity but maintains a belief in the importance of Jesus’s message of love and peace. It’s hard to find fault with the message, even though the origins have, in my opinion, been shown to be contrived. Even though I don’t share Palmer’s continued belief in the supernatural, I think he has written a magnificent treatise on the origins of Mormonism. This should be mandatory reading for every Mormon. In fact, I believe that strongly enough that I would even be willing to share my copy with others or help them get a copy of their own – it’s that good.
