Welcome to part three of the Joseph Smith Podcast! Today we are back with Dr. John Turner to cover his new book “Joseph Smith: The Rise and Fall of an American Prophet.” Today we are covering Chapter Four titled: Lost in Translation which takes place in 1827-1829 in Palmyra, New York.
In this episode, we explore one of the most pivotal and mysterious events in early Mormon history — the story of Martin and Lucy Harris and the infamous loss of the 116 pages of the Book of Mormon manuscript. With historian and non-Latter-day Saint scholar John G. Turner, we dive into the complexities of translation, belief, and the relationships that shaped the early Restoration movement.
We also examine:
- The discovery of the plates
- Martin Harris’ background and motives
- Lucy Harris’ suspicions and possible involvement
- The cultural and religious context of the time
- Theories about the Book of Mormon translation process
- What the loss of the 116 pages reveals about Joseph Smith’s prophetic development
This episode also reflects on broader themes of faith, deception, historical interpretation, and the psychology behind religious movements. Whether you’re a believer, skeptic, or historian, this deep-dive provides rich insight from a non-Mormon perspective.
Episode Transcript
Host: John Dehlin · Guest: John Turner
This transcript is machine-generated and lightly edited for readability. The audio is authoritative. Please excuse occasional errors in names and spelling.
Introduction and Episode Overview
John Dehlin [00:00:00] Hello, everyone, and welcome back to another episode of Mormon Stories podcast, Joseph Smith Edition. I AM your host, Dr. John Dehlin. Today we are back for our third episode in a series where we're talking about Joseph Smith and his life in depth, this time with Dr. John G. Turner. Hey, Dr. Turner.
John Turner [00:00:21] Hey, John.
John Dehlin [00:00:22] Hey, John. Welcome back.
John Turner [00:00:23] It is pretty fun to be here in Utah with you.
John Dehlin [00:00:26] Yeah. You're in studio.
John Turner [00:00:27] Yeah. This is new. It's unique.
John Dehlin [00:00:29] You're here for mha, is that right?
John Turner [00:00:31] I'm here for a couple of book events. Here for MHA did an event at Benchmark Book where people can already buy Joseph the Rise and Fall of an American Prophet. Going to be in Provo on the night of Saturday, June 7th at the Compass. And as an added bonus, I get to be here in studio with you, which is super fun.
John Dehlin [00:00:56] Yeah, we're excited. And yeah, let me just plug Benchmark Books. Benchmark Books is probably the number one bookstore in the world dedicated to selling Mormon themed books. And they're great people. If you want to really promote Mormon studies, Mormon scholarship, and you want to buy this amazing book, and we want you all to buy this amazing book, Joseph Smith the Rise and Fall of an American Prophet by John Turner. Your first choice might be to just go to Benchmark Books. Did you sign some copies of the book for them?
John Turner [00:01:27] They've got signed copies. They could sell anybody and you can't get it from Amazon until June 17th. So if you want a copy sooner, Benchmark's the best place.
John Dehlin [00:01:39] All right, so we love you, Benchmark support Benchmark Books. But if you're not able to get to Benchmark, please pre order this book now. We'll provide a link in the show notes for how to do that Amazon or directly from Yale University Press. We want to make this book an international New York Times bestseller. And thanks to all of you who have bought it and provided feedback so far. Just really quickly, we have an arrangement with John, just like we did with Matt Harris and with Mike of LDS Discussions. Those are a couple series that we've already done where we want to have him back for at least 10 episodes and we want to pay him for his work. So what we've done is we've set up a way for y' all to contribute to this series. You go to donorbox.org JosephSmith and so far we've received $1,200. So thank you to the 10 or 15 donors that have contributed to that. We've promised John half of all those donations. The other half just goes to production costs and everything. And we'll pay him that for as long as this series continues. So that in my mind, that pays, depending on how much we were to pay, that would pay for two or three of these episodes, which is kind of where we are. So if y' all want to see this series go the full 10 or more, please just take a moment to become a monthly donor to that series. You can cancel as soon as we stop or just make one time donations, but that would really help us not only make a great series, but also pay an important historian at least something of what he deserves for making such a great book. So anyway, thanks for joining us again, John. It's great to have you. Really quickly. We've done two episodes so far. We covered in episode one, Joseph Smith's early history. We recommend you going back and starting the series from the beginning if this is the first one you're dropping into. We talked about Joseph Smith's family, his ancestors and his parents and his family setting. And then we also talked about the first vision and the different versions of the first vision and whether or not he even had a vision. And then we talked about his practice of folk magic and treasure digging. And then we talked initially about the golden plates. And you even gave your opinion about whether or not you felt like there were actually gold plates, whether those existed. From there, we've gotten a lot of feedback. You've probably gotten some feedback and I have too. So I thought we'd just take a couple minutes to address some of the feedback that we've received. Last episode we had left that you were going to look into. This mound builder myth, which I was putting forth was sort of, as I understand it, a prevailing belief amongst many of Joseph's contemporaries that the existing dark Native Americans were not educated or smart or capable or sophisticated enough to have built all the amazing edifices and art and structures that frontier Americans were finding, which led many people to conjure up a belief that there were white Native Americans and dark Native Americans and that ultimately the dark Native Americans killed off the white ones. Very racist. But, you know, and so you said you were going to kind of look into that and just refresh your memory and. Or learn about whether or not that may have been an influence on Joseph Smith's Lamanite and Nephite narrative in the Book of Mormon. And I thought I'd ask you to just share what you found.
Community Feedback on Previous Episodes
John Turner [00:05:12] Sure. I mean, I'm a university professor, so I guess at this stage of my life I'm more used to Assigning homework than completing homework. But I'm down with the general concept. So I reread the relevant portions of Jason Covaledo's book on the mound builder myth and your summary is good, John. So I really think this grows out of the fact that when Europeans and later white Americans see these magnificent and enormous mounds in places like Ohio that basically are pre 1,300, pre 1,400, and they don't necessarily know that much about the exact dating, their conclusion is that the Native Americans of their day could not have accomplished those sorts of building projects. They're too magnificent for an allegedly degraded race. And so Europeans come up with the theory of a lost earlier race or lost earlier people, sometimes speculating that those people are the descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel. But there are other ideas. You know, people coming from different parts of Europe, Romans, you know, who knows? And there's not. This is such a pervasive belief that there, you know, for Joseph Smith to have encountered and thought about it doesn't require a belief that he used a particular text as a source. This is something that's just very, it's very widespread, it's almost a commonplace idea. And the Book of Mormon does track with that belief in the sense of there once was a lighter skinned, righteous, noble race of individuals that has died out and what we see among us is a darker skinned, degraded race. I mean, the Book of Mormon presents it in a new and different way for sure. But yeah, I think as a general cultural current in which Joseph Smith swam and absorbed some ideas, I think sure, that's a part of the story.
John Dehlin [00:08:01] And are you aware of any scientific, archaeological, anthropological evidence that would bolster this idea of dark skinned and light skinned Native Americans?
John Turner [00:08:13] It's just fanciful. Okay, yeah, completely fanciful, yeah.
John Dehlin [00:08:17] Is it? When you read that part of the Book of Mormon, is it problematic? Maybe with modern racial sensibilities for you, is it problematic?
John Turner [00:08:29] Yeah, I mean, I think it is. And I think it, honestly, I think it is for most people who read it. I could be wrong. You know, the idea that races or people have been cursed with dark skin, I mean that, that has been a pervasive racist idea among honestly Jews, Christians and Muslims for many centuries. Whether Curse of Ham, Curse of Cain, sort of a way to explain the fact originally that dark skinned Africans were degraded and enslaved and perhaps deserved enslavement. And that goes way back. I'm not going to try to pinpoint the century, maybe fourth, fifth century of the Christian or common era when slave traders began bringing large numbers of dark skinned African slaves to the Mediterranean world. People began making those connections which aren't in the biblical text itself. So, yeah, it's a troubling, disturbing idea about human beings and skin color. And so wherever one encounters it, whether it's in the Book of Mormon or other literature, yeah, it's an unfortunate reflection of the way that human beings have thought about each other.
John Dehlin [00:10:22] Would it be a stretch to maybe assume that the mound builder myth similarly sprung out of, let's just say, colonial guilt, that they were enslaving and, or displacing and or slaughtering the Native Americans that they found when they started colonizing the Americas?
John Turner [00:10:45] I mean, I don't know that it so much grows out of guilt, but sort of as a way of claiming and explaining and describing the superiority of one people over another. I will say, you know, in terms of the way that white Americans thought about Native Americans, maybe in comparison to the way they thought about Africans or African Americans, there's a little bit more ambivalence. So like Thomas Jefferson, for instance, when he looks at African Americans, he sees a degraded race that will never be able to improve. It's permanently inferior. When Jefferson assesses Native Americans, he sees a people that are inferior but have potential for improvement. And in a way, the Book of Mormon, you have this idea of cursed Lamanites, but with the potential to be redeemed, improved, whitened, enlightened. So I think that sort of tracks with broader ideas about race. So for instance, there's sort of a permanent cursed lineage that you see in some Latter Day Saint scriptural texts. But then you have this other cursed people that have the possibility of redemption.
John Dehlin [00:12:24] Yeah, okay, that's helpful. All right, well, thanks for helping to address that.
John Turner [00:12:30] I did my homework. Just let me know if you have anything for next week.
John Dehlin [00:12:33] I give you an a. All right, Dr. John gives Dr. John an A. How's that?
John Turner [00:12:39] Sounds good.
John Dehlin [00:12:41] All right, let's quickly. I like the idea of community feedback. And we've gotten a lot of good comments, specifically on YouTube, but also on Spotify and maybe some email. And the feedback is generally consistent. It's kind of a bell curve where the middle is people really happy with the exchange, with our exchanges, with the tone, with our approach. I would say that's the norm. Has that been, you know, you've gotten some feedback? What's been the feedback? The norm of the feedback?
John Turner [00:13:12] Yeah, I mean, I've heard from some people who really enjoy our interactions, you know, that you, you push with questions in a particular way. And, you know, sometimes I. I don't know, I push back or I resist a little bit, I think, because I'm not necessarily coming at the material with the same questions or perspective. I enjoy that sort of mixing. Mixing it up. And I. I also like the general idea that one should take questions from all quarters and from all sorts of points of view. So, I mean, I enjoy it. I hope a lot of the people listening enjoy it. I would also say I think I sense from some people a little bit of frustration in the sense of. Maybe a little reluctance on my part to engage the questions of truth claims. And I think, you know, that's partly because for me, those aren't the live questions. You know, I'm not a Latter Day Saint. I've never been a Latter Day Saint. I am pretty clear that I don't think that Joseph had golden plates. I don't think that the Book of Mormon is an ancient record. So for me, those are sort of settled questions. And then I'm most interested in what shaped Joseph's ideas, what shaped his personality, which aspects of his life can we really document and feel confident about? Where are perhaps we less certain? So I tend to be interested in some different sorts of questions from some of your community, but I appreciate that they have questions that are really important to them. And I think one thing that is perhaps a little bit difficult for me to empathize with on a human level, because it's not my background, is I know that some people are approaching this subject from a position of pain and anguish because they feel that either an institution or maybe in some cases a family or other circumstances have really wounded them, and they feel that that merits, you know, a particular line of questioning or a particular response. I would just say that's just absolutely not my background, but I hear that, and, you know, I'm sorry for that on a human level. And even though. Even though I don't. I don't myself engage these questions about Joseph Smith in that way, I certainly understand why people would want to do that and why that matters a great deal to them. Does that make sense? Are you sort of hearing that from people as well?
John Dehlin [00:16:18] Yeah. No, that's perfect. And again, the overwhelming feedback is positive. I'll just share outside of the Bell curve, which is the mean, there's feedback frustration with me and a little bit of feedback frustration with you. Some people are frustrated with me because they feel like I'm trying to either force a narrative, forcing you, in their words, to cop to a narrative that I want you to cop, to which I assume they mean is sort of a negative, anti Joseph Smith kind of approach, total fraud, charlatan kind of thing. Or another piece of feedback that I think I want to be really mindful of is that instead of just letting you share your perspectives first, I'm jumping in and trying to steer the narrative. So I'm going to be mindful of that piece of feedback because I think that is useful feedback. What's your quick. Is there any response you have to the allegation that I'm trying to force a narrative upon you?
John Turner [00:17:12] I don't know. I don't feel forced. And basically I'm happy. I like the idea of conversation and dialogue. So I am happy for you to ask questions in whatever way feels right to you, and I'm also happy for you to push back on whatever my approach is. So basically I don't feel pressured to agree with any particular points of view about Joseph Smith. So however you approach it, and however I approach it, I think we can have a good conversation about it. I think that's good for our listeners. And I also think that's the way that both history can work well and that's also the way that conversations about religious traditions can work well because there's a whole spectrum of human experiences and responses and we got to learn to talk to each other about them. And that's super useful for me as someone outside the tradition, I want to bump up against all of those responses, ideas and questions. So I like what you do. I'll probably keep doing what I do. And I'm glad that people care enough to share feedback.
Historians, Apologists, and Methodology
John Dehlin [00:18:30] Perfect. Two more things. There are people that, and I feel kind of defensive and protective of you in this regard. There are people that want to call you an apologist because you're not maybe showing anger at Joseph Smith or using sharp language, calling him a fraud or whatever, that in some sense you're being apologetic or some have said naive, that, you know, someone who had more experience with fraud or with charlatans or even cults would come down harder on Joseph Smith. Particularly, you know, you talked about the importance of considering mirth and fun and entertainment as an important motivation for Joseph Smith where other people just want to see fraud, charlatan killing animals, pagan witchcraft sacrificing. So really quickly, you've already addressed this a little bit. For those who are saying he's an apologist, you know, or he's naive. I know that you may not even feel the need to respond to that, but do you want to?
John Turner [00:19:34] Well, I mean, I could be naive. I definitely can't be an apologist because I don't think you can be an apologist for a tradition or church to which you don't belong
John Dehlin [00:19:45] or not on the payroll in some way.
John Turner [00:19:47] I am definitely not on the payroll. I don't want to be on the payroll. I'm definitely not going to be on the payroll. And honestly, it kind of amuses me because I don't think. I mean, I think there's a lot of things that. There's a lot of things in the book that probably the church wouldn't particularly like. And I actually feel in the book I'm a pretty straight shooter. There are things that Joseph Smith does that I criticize, that is, first of all, I document and that I do criticize, maybe in my own authorial way. I also don't think a. I also don't think a biographer, you don't want to go through someone's life and sort of with the idea of passing moral judgment on all of his actions, yea or nay. I think that would sort of ruin the story as well. And I do think it is a wild and fun story that, you know, some of the questions that we talked about in terms of visions and plates and truth claims, they certainly matter. And that idea of subterfuge or fraud or deception, I think there's a place to talk about that. If that was the thing that mattered about Joseph Smith, it'd be a really simple book to write. I don't think it would do the
John Dehlin [00:21:25] subject justice because what matters more than him being a potential fraud or charlatan in your mind?
John Turner [00:21:33] Well, for me, some of the other things that matter are the innovative, entrepreneurial, creative ways that he creates a new religious movement. And fraud is. That's not the main answer to me. So the creation of texts, the creation of rituals, the creation of ecclesiastical structures, the establishment of myth that ends up resonating and mattering for millions of people. Those are also really important things to talk about. And I don't think we have to with some of these thematic emphases. We don't even have to necessarily pick one and go with that. I mean, Joseph Smith had a really capacious life. One phrase I like in the book is he wasn't a one trick prophet. He does a lot of different things. And collectively those activities create this movement and this church and this tradition.
John Dehlin [00:22:45] Love it. Okay, last question. Before we jump into the main event, the main topic for today. Let's just take top notch. Let's just take standards for top notch world historians in American history or in any subject, would there be a place somebody's saying, I wish that John would take the approach, John Turner would take the approach of like a detective or even an attorney, where yes, it's, you know, primary source, documents based, yes, it's evidence based and yes, it's even neutral and dispassionate. But you're building a case to demonstrate in this case, again, people are just wanting to really expose Joseph for authentically what he was in terms of the truth claims. Would there be a way for a credible division, one respectable world class historian to write a book like that from an investigative, almost detective or attorney approach, or would that not be received well or looked upon well by the field? I'm just curious about that.
John Turner [00:24:03] So that's a great question. Trying to think of some good examples of where that would maybe be more appropriate and effective. So one historian and biographer that I admire is someone who died a few years ago, Manning Maribel wrote a fantastic and very well researched biography of Malcolm X. And that involved a lot of what I would consider detective work. For instance, on the question of his assassination and to what extent the FBI was involved, the FBI, the Nation of Islam, there were a lot of relevant sources to go through. There's a ton of material to work with. Maybe it's not easy to solve a case from 50, 60 years ago, but I think as a historian you're actually in a decent position to have a lot of evidence to sift through and try to do so. Joseph Smith, that sort of detective work you really can't do in a sense. I mean, maybe it depends on the issue, but maybe to think about the issue of the golden plates, what kind of detective work can we really do on that? For me, I didn't really feel like I had to be a detective. So I've read the Book of Mormon a few times. I've read some scholarship on the Book of Mormon. I think it's a 19th century text, not an ancient record. I didn't feel like I had to do a ton of detective work per se to arrive at that conclusion. So that basic understanding then informs my story of the retrieval of the plates and those episodes. And then I feel like, well, that's a pretty good starting point for figuring out a basic understanding of Joseph's activities in the late 1820s. But I don't really feel like I'm being a detective there per se. For me, it's more. It's more of a question of, well, looking at the evidence. I Have drawing some logical conclusions about it and going from there.
John Dehlin [00:26:27] Yeah, yeah. And I was really grateful as we ended last episode, how you ended chapter two, I believe, where you basically gave your opinion that you didn't think there were plates, you didn't have to do that. Most historians wouldn't do that. And I think that was valuable and important and a really important contribution. And then so leading into today's discussion, the only thing that then so that like this is to say we can all stipulate there probably were golden plates. And what that then can lead to for some is like, well then that means there's a conscious, ongoing conscious deception which then takes it from a good hearted guy who wanted to help people believe in Christ to like a guy who's constantly deceiving and fooling people, his father in law, his wife, his donors, his family members. And at what point is that good intentioned, loves Jesus and wants to help others believe in Jesus, just wants to build a community and give people hope and meaning and purpose. That's kind of one end of the spectrum. But another end of the spectrum is constantly deceiving people for money in really pernicious ways. And I think that's kind of a question that some have is like, how do we even like not just ongoingly see him as detestable if there's ongoing intentional, overt deception of people around him? Constantly.
Subterfuge, Pious Fraud, and Religious Experience
John Turner [00:27:56] Yeah. And yeah, first of all though, what's the basic reaction to that conclusion of subterfuge with the plates? Right? Because what I'm hearing from you and what I'm hearing from some listeners is some moral outrage. Like okay, First that's a moral flaw and sort of a sinful act, right? To put it in religious terms. Whereas I've been resisting that because I think, okay, maybe that's not great, but maybe there is this element of playfulness and mirth about it and Joseph's able to do something utterly improbable. And if he were an entrepreneur maybe and not a religious leader, we'd be more forgiving. And maybe I'm just sort of, I don't know, resistant or a little antithetical to moral outrage. And so I don't have that, I don't have that moral response to it. I also don't think for me, I don't make a logical leap from Joseph engaged in some deception at certain parts of his life to fraud was at the core of his religion making activity. Because it's hard to assess sincerity in every place along the way. And I think human beings are Complex. And we can engage in some dubious things in our life without necessarily being the case that we're just through and through, deceptive and fraudulent. So I hear what you're saying, and I'm sure we'll talk about this as we get going with, say, funding the translation of the Book of Mormon. But I don't think a necessary conclusion is, you know, we just sort of stamp Joseph Smith with the fraud label and use that to interpret the remainder of his life.
John Dehlin [00:30:15] Love it. Last question, really quickly. Dan Vogel is known by many for coming up with this pious fraud theory, which is, yes, he was intentionally, knowingly deceiving people, but he did sincerely believe in God and Jesus and maybe even learned from the Bible that even God's willing to deceive people if it might lead them to believe in Christ and to follow God's commandments and to get on the God train, so to speak. So that's the pious fraud idea that it was, yes, he was fooling people, but God was his example. The biblical God was his example in fooling people. And his maybe most sincere motive was to help bring people to Christ. Do you even have an opinion on that perspective?
John Turner [00:31:04] So, you know, I think I want to point to one spot in my book, which is in the introduction, where I sort of lay out how I approach this idea of sincerity and piety. I think it's really tricky. It's hard for historians. What I write is, in the end, historians cannot differentiate between genuine and insincere religious experiences with confidence. Fact is, says a character in Herman Melville's the Confidence man, one of the his less famous novels, when all is bound up together, it's sometimes confusing. It's better to narrate and interpret what Smith preached and practiced instead of pretending to discern his inner feelings at any given moment. So, yes, I do think Smith had some genuine religious experiences. I mean, he grew up in this kind of quirky, idiosyncratic Christian family, but, you know, the family believed in God and in Jesus Christ. I'm sure Joseph Smith did as well. I think you can look at some of his, you know, letters, his sermons, his, you know, other sources that point to genuine experiences. But I don't feel like I'm in a position when Smith dictates all of these revelations, for instance. How do I know in some cases that he really thinks he was getting this message from God versus do? I think in this case he was just going with what he wanted to manipulate, manipulate or dictate at a given moment? You know, I can't say, you know, Dean 3 DNC93, he definitely thought he got that from God, but DNC89, you know, he just, he just made that pure fraud. Pure fraud, right. I mean, that's just, that's just too tough. So there are, there are some moments in the book where I weigh in and I, and I say, yeah, it makes sense to me, given his family background, to think, well, other people around him were experiencing visions. For him to have seen and heard God or Jesus Christ, well, that's not super surprising. That doesn't mean we have to take the canonical Joseph Smith history as a verbatim account of what he experienced, but just the mere fact of having religious experiences. Yeah, I think that was part of his life. And it would be nice if we could be tidy and sift this all into columns of like, sincerity and insincerity. But it is all sort of mixed up. Mixed up together. And I think if we looked at other examples of human religious experience, we'd reach similar conclusions. I mean, I think that's just the. Whatever divine may exist is always bound up with the human.
John Dehlin [00:34:20] Yeah. Love it. Okay, well, let's dive in. Today the focus is going to be on chapter four, titled Lost in Translation. We're going to talk about Martin and Lucy Harris and primarily and the 116 pages that then, you know, the first 116 pages, quote, translated, you know, of the Book of Mormon and then them getting lost and then what happens as a result? So we're going to dig a little deeply here. So let's jump in. We're kind of at the beginning of chapter four in mid October 1827. Joseph. I believe Joseph and Emma are still in Palmyra at the beginning. Joseph's working for Peter Ingersoll a little bit and I guess he's wanting to start producing pages for the Book of Mormon. My first question is why do you think Joseph felt he needed a scribe to be a part of the translation process?
John Turner [00:35:22] You know, that is a great question and honestly, I haven't thought about it that much. The first thing that springs to mind is his method, according to Emma and others, is to gaze into his seer stone and see words and dictate them. So if that's his method, it is going to be a lot easier with a scribe so that he can dictate instead of writing. And I think he also knows that he's not facile with written words. He's not a great writer. He knows it's going to be really rough. And honestly, I sort of Forget what Martin Harris's attainments were in that respect. But Oliver Cowdery ended up being a great partner because he had more formal education. His written English was far more standard. It really would have been a messy manuscript if Joseph Smith wrote it himself. I will just say it's a really good thing he hadn't already met Brigham Young. Brigham Young would have been the worst Book of Mormon scribe ever because his spelling and handwriting are truly atrocious. So, yeah, I think Joseph felt that he needed a partner.
John Dehlin [00:36:51] Yeah. And if you start by what we've learned now, that plates weren't even really used in the translation, they may have not even been. They were either covered on a table by some accounts, or even not in the room altogether. And. And he's literally just reading from a stone in a hat. It could have been a lot simpler. He wouldn't have had to hide the plates from anyone. He wouldn't have even. The plates wouldn't have even needed to be created. He could just channel what God told him Ancient American, Native American prophets wrote or believed. And he certainly wouldn't have had a scribe nagging him to show the manuscript to his wife. That then would have led to them all being lost at the same time. If people were involved, it could make it seem more real, could make it seem more material. And if he could get them to actually believe that something divine was happening, then they become a witness, which in Martin Harris case is what happened. And of course, there's the issue of him needing money. So those are some things that come into my mind. Any responses there?
John Turner [00:38:04] So while on the money, he did need, he needed some just for supplies in terms of paper, which he's poor enough, that's actually not a completely negligible expense. And he just needs money for the time also. Yeah, I mean, it's interesting to think about this because if he had just worked on it on his own, there's also nobody to comment on, on the process or. And maybe comment in ways that might not be flattering. So there could have been. There could have been some advantages as well. I do think, because you mentioned that
John Dehlin [00:38:41] Martin Harris was like an expert, he had an expert level knowledge of the Bible. Right. Martin Harris knew the Bible really well.
John Turner [00:38:48] He knew the Bible well. I don't know that he necessarily knew it better than Joseph because Joseph's familiarity with the Bible actually is always something that has stood out to me. It runs through not just the Book of Mormon, but all of his textual productions, his private letters, his sermons. But yeah, I mean, I Think Harris to sort of jump into the story. Harris is an ideal benefactor because. For two reasons. Number one, Harris is desperate to believe in something and have a break with his existing life and a new departure.
Martin Harris as Joseph Smith's Scribe
John Dehlin [00:39:37] His life wasn't going great.
John Turner [00:39:38] His life wasn't great. He's in an unhappy marriage, apparently, and I forget exactly the source of the information, but Harris was planning to clear out of Palmyra. He's this prosperous farmer in Palmyra. He has got pretty significant land holdings. He was planning to leave and just travel for a year. So he's totally open to something new and to uprooting himself. He was like the Smiths. He was an. What I'd call an idiosyncratic Christian seeker. He's very open to visions. He's not rooted in a local congregation or a particular tradition. So he's open to new things in a lot of respects. He also has a tumultuous relationship with his wife, Lucy Harris, and apparently he's an abusive husband. Apparently he beats her and they exchange lots of hostile and caustic words with each other. So he's primed for a new beginning. And so in those respects, he's really an ideal partner for Joseph Smith.
John Dehlin [00:41:13] Absolutely. Okay. And when you say he was planning on leaving Palmyra, do you mean with Lucy or without Lucy?
John Turner [00:41:21] Without Lucy.
John Dehlin [00:41:22] Okay.
John Turner [00:41:22] He was just going to leave her. He had deeded a piece of land to her to. We don't know exactly why. Perhaps she had demanded a certain amount of financial independence or self sufficiency. But apparently he was planning to clear out and travel around and maybe try to find solace elsewhere if his domestic life wasn't happy.
John Dehlin [00:41:53] Yeah. Would it be fair to say Martin Harris was gullible or a, you know, a mark or a dupe or a good candidate to be a mark. Like, you often hear apologists trying to bolster his credibility as a serious man, a reputable man, as an intelligent man. Do you. Do you have any. Do you come down at all on his gullibility or.
John Turner [00:42:24] Yeah, credibility, sure. So I guess this is sort of in keeping with our interactions, John. So I don't use terms like gullible or dupe in the book. What I would say is he is eager to believe. He's like really eager to believe. So, yes, the simple answer to your question would be, yeah, he would be a mark in that sense, because. And we might talk about this in a little bit when he visits Charles Anthon, what he hears from Charles Anthon, and that's when he takes a.
John Dehlin [00:43:07] We'll get to that.
John Turner [00:43:08] Okay, I'll leave that for now.
John Dehlin [00:43:11] No, no, no, we'll come back to it as a whole.
John Turner [00:43:14] We'll come back to it. But basically Harris is. He's going to be looking for reasons to believe rather than looking for reasons to be skeptical. Okay, I think that'd be a good way of putting it. So when he first hears this story from Joseph Smith about the golden plates, both he and his wife, Lucy Harris, they're both intrigued and they both go to investigate. And I think when we hear that, if I heard that you had some golden plates, I might want to and you had them here in your studio, I might be eager to come by. But I'd probably be coming with the mindset of I don't actually think John has golden plates. And I'm going to debunk this story. If I was maybe open to the idea, but not sure I'd be coming to verify. I think Martin Harris is more in the mindset of, yeah, this sounds amazing.
John Dehlin [00:44:23] The heavens are opened, right?
John Turner [00:44:25] The heavens are open. I want to come see this for myself. I'm really open to it being true.
John Dehlin [00:44:34] Or maybe I want it to be true.
John Turner [00:44:36] I think he definitely wants it to be true. Like I said, I think he wanted a new departure in his life. He wants something to believe in and
John Dehlin [00:44:43] also to be a part of something important.
John Turner [00:44:45] Exactly right. And you know, what Joseph really wants is for other people to come and be a part of this story that he's creating. And so whether it's the Harris's or people like Oliver Cowdery or the Whitmers, you know, Joseph is thrilled when people are. Are open in that sense.
John Dehlin [00:45:10] So you've got a scene where Joseph performs kind of either a magic trick with a pin or some sort of, you know, either he fooled or he used special powers regarding a pin in Martin, do you want to tell that story really quick?
John Turner [00:45:30] Yeah. I mean, the story is, you know. Well, first of all, and it's worth saying, these are people who already know each other. So it's not that Harris just hears, oh, there's this young man, Joseph Smith, and he wants to go meet him. He already knows him because Harris hasexcuse mejoseph has worked on Harris farm. You know, when he's sort of just a day laborer, you know, he spends some days there working. And they were friendly. I think they wrestled. That was always something that Joseph enjoyed. He totally would have dominated me if I tried to wrestle him. And at a certain point, Joseph displayed what he could do with one of his seer stones. And according to the story, Harris had lost a little pin that he used to pick his teeth, you know, like clean his teeth. And Joseph put his seer stone and a hat, looked into it and was able to essentially just reach out and find this missing pin. So it was a demonstration of his cerec talent. And so Harris, you know, I think that is also an important part of the story in terms of being primed to believe. He already has at least some prior experience with Joseph's spiritual talent, and so he's very open to this new development.
Martin Harris, Treasure Digging, and the Plates
John Dehlin [00:47:10] Had Martin been involved in any of the treasure digging stuff and. Or would he have been aware of Joseph's reputation for being able to find buried treasure?
John Turner [00:47:19] As far as I know, he wasn't aware. I also would presume that he was aware of those activities. I don't think he participated in them, though.
John Dehlin [00:47:32] But he was aware?
John Turner [00:47:33] I would presume so.
John Dehlin [00:47:34] Okay. Okay.
John Turner [00:47:35] I don't have evidence for that, but I don't see why he wouldn't have been aware.
John Dehlin [00:47:38] And what do you make of that? What do you yourself make of that pin story?
John Turner [00:47:42] I don't know. I mean, there's another story that when Joseph first meets Josiah Stowell, he's able to describe Stowell's property and its houses and what it looks like, even though he's never been there. You often see those sorts of stories with psychics or with fortune tellers or other things. So I don't really know what to make of it, and I'm actually blanking on the source of the story in the case of Martin Harris and Joseph Smith. But I think the simplest takeaway is Harris is open to that sort of thing being true. He's certainly not put off by the idea that Joseph would use a seer stone. And so again, that makes him a good potential partner. Just, he's able to believe in that sort of thing. And so it makes it less of a leap for him to believe that Joseph could retrieve this hidden treasure from the earth in the form of the golden plates?
John Dehlin [00:49:00] Does that make you wonder if Joseph had special powers of finding stuff? Does that.
John Turner [00:49:06] Not really. I mean, I don't have an. You could come at it with just a skeptical idea of, well, Joseph must have known where the pin was and was able to therefore trick Harris. But we just don't know. And I think sometimes in those situations, I think individuals like Harris, they, like I said, he's looking for reasons to believe, and whatever Joseph did was convincing, convincing to him.
John Dehlin [00:49:41] Did Martin Harris Try and actually see the plates, feel the plates, look at the plates, and if so, what was Joseph's response to that? And then we'll get to Lucy.
John Turner [00:49:51] Yeah, so yes, he did. I mean, he wasn't so open to belief that he didn't want, you know, any evidence. So he pays a visit to Joseph Smith. And Joseph at that point has the object he's got, apparently has the plates in a box. And he won't open the box for Harris, but he lets Harris heft the box. And Harris conclusion is there's something heavy of metal in the box. And what's persuasive to Harris is Joseph is too poor to have acquired a large quantity of metal, heavy metal. But that demonstration alone, I don't think maybe for Harris that was semi persuasive. I'm not sure. But what Harris does, I think in keeping with Joseph's suggestion is he goes home to pray about it. And so he gets spiritual confirmation. And for Harris that's enough evidence to go on. He feels that God, through the still small voice of the spirit or some language like that has confirmed the truth of the story. And right at that point he becomes a financial supporter. So he gives Joseph $50 worth of silver. Right, $50 of silver. And so he's not at that point, 100% committed to following this wholeheartedly, but he's, we could say, persuaded enough to make an initial investment.
John Dehlin [00:51:53] Yeah. And I mean, I'm wondering when Joseph putswe have to assume he just found some metal and put it in a box and he found some heavy stuff. I guess the logic there is that if there's extra heavy metal, if the box is heavier than people would expect that somehow that would be persuasive.
John Turner [00:52:18] I guess so. It seems pretty quirky to me. I mean, it would take a little bit more to persuade me rather than that demonstration. But apparently that works for Harris. I think what really works is the spiritual confirmation and just being really open to this being true. I think the source of, for this particular part of the story is Lucy Mack Smith's history. And I think one thing you could say about that is she's not looking to paint Harris in, I would say, a particularly bad or a particularly flattering light. So I tend to think perhaps we could maybe take her more or less at face value for the story.
John Dehlin [00:53:12] As I'm reflecting on God's role potentially in this whole story, it's interesting that God would tell Joseph he can't show the plates to people, but it's okay for Joseph to Have the plates in a box and give the box to people and that they would heft the box, find it really heavy and then believe that there are plates inside that God's okay with that type of proof. That's a little bit shy of actually seeing them. So you can semi prove it's basically God saying to Joseph, you can semi prove that you have the golden plates, but you can't fully prove that you have the golden plates.
John Turner [00:53:54] Right. I know it is an inherently weird thing, but I guess if I were going to put it sort of in, I don't know, like religious studies terms, like being pretty close to a sacred object could still be powerful for people. Like I'm trying to think of a good example. Like if, if maybe you knew you were probably would be able to see it. In this case it's not a perfect analogy, but if you, if you were new, if you knew you were very close to a significant relic, say of Shroud of Turin. Sure. Or Jesus Christ or the bone, the bone of a saint or something. I think certain individuals could be excited about being like near that relic, even if it were obscured and in a box. So I can sort of. I think for Harris there's still a certain excitement of just being close and holding this box doesn't work for Isaac Hale, Emma's father, or Lucy. Well, Lucy's an interesting case. So according to Lucy Mack Smith, Lucy Harris actually visits Joseph Smith before her husband does. And I'm a little bit less certain how credible this is. Apparently has a similar sort of initial response. Joseph won't show her the plates. In fact, Joseph apparently is a bit rude and says he'd rather talk to her husband doesn't particularly want to talk to her and she's offended. But Joseph looks into her eyes and assures her that he's really found an ancient record. Also lets her lift the box and apparently she also goes home and prays about it and she sees a personage who shows her the plates, which technically would make her a witness, Right?
John Dehlin [00:55:57] Exactly.
John Turner [00:55:59] And also gives Joseph some money. Now I mean, it's possible that Lucy Mack Smith is skewing this in a way of saying that Lucy Harris at first believes and then maybe quickly apostatizes or something. And so maybe this is unflattering to her, I don't know. But it also wouldn't be totally shocking if from again maybe a similar religious background. Lucy Harris was also open to believing at first and then later really gets spooked when Martin Harris is going to give too much of the family resources to this project.
Joseph Smith's Persuasive Power and Influence
John Dehlin [00:56:48] For me, as I'm trying to think about the main tool or technique or gift or power that Joseph used stemming from the treasure digging time, it's sort of this repeat of there actually is no treasure, but you're able to create an experience where there's enough physicality along with your own persuasiveness, such that people not only leave an experience believing that there's something physical, but also that they're willing to pay for it. Like that. It seems to be kind of like he's like. I mean, I don't know, a more of a materialistic or secular explanation is he's learning how to convince people that stuff that isn't there really is there. And he's even able to get them to feel like they're having spiritual experiences or mystical experiences to persuade them further. And by the way, he gets paid like that's the pattern I'm seeing that spans the treasure digging into the beginning of the creation of the Book of Mormon. Does that sound fair and legitimate or not?
John Turner [00:57:57] Yeah, no, I mean, I think that is. And whether we wanted to describe it as a talent, a trick or a deceptive practice, I mean, it is kind of remarkable that it works. It doesn't work on everybody. When the group relocates back to Harmony, Pennsylvania, and Joseph tries the same thing, really, you could say with Isaac Hail, maybe he's not trying to get money, but he's trying to convince his father in law he really has this object. Well, Isaac Hale just thinks this is offensive, first of all, and ridiculous. And you can't have anything in my house that you're not willing to show me. And no, I'm not really impressed at the idea that I could lift the box. Right. I mean, it doesn't sound like a winning, you know, if it doesn't sound like a winning technique. But you're right. I mean, so, I mean, I would say there is a real talent for. For helping others to have confirmatory religious experiences. And Joseph, you know, as a. If we think of Joseph as a visionary, it's a little bit less. You know, a lot of people are having visions, religious visions during this time period. It's a more unusual talent to be able to help other people. People have visions akin to your own. And Joseph does have that ability. And that happens at a lot of points in his, we could say, prophetic career. And yeah, this sounds like, again, like a really unlikely gambit though. But at least in the case of the Harrises, it works.
John Dehlin [00:59:53] Yeah. And if we were to project forward from Joseph Smith's life even till now. To me, this is like the DNA of the Mormon experience, and you might say the religious experience. It's literally, pray about the Book of Mormon. Is it true? Believe in the church. Pray about whether there's a modern prophet, he speaks to God. If you feel like it's true, obey the church. Pray about the law of tithing. Pray about your experience at church. That's kind of the DNA of what's led to a $300 billion, 4 to 17 million member, mega, global, powerful, super church. The DNA of that is constantly telling either investigators or members, here's a thing. Pray about it. Do you feel good? Believe it, it's true. Here's an experience. Pray about it. Do you believe it? That's kind of what all of the Mormon experience, and you could argue all of religious experience really comes down to in the end, isn't it?
John Turner [01:00:57] Well, there's definitely an internal logic there. I mean, I'm, you know, we talked maybe at the outset about the fact that I am also a believing Christian. I'm a bit more of a. I have a little bit more of a skeptical bent, though, I suppose, so that. That exact dynamic isn't in my DNA. It's not so. Not. Well, not really. So, I mean, I'm a little bit.
John Dehlin [01:01:20] I.
John Turner [01:01:20] Just a little bit more irascible or skeptical. I think if I, if I felt like I heard a divine voice telling me to have a tuna sandwich for lunch, I might say, well, what about turkey? You know, but, but, but at the same time, I do get it, right? I mean, what better evidence could you have than divine confirmation? I think, you know, I, for myself would want to say, you know, I got to be a little bit. I've got to be a little bit careful because our minds are really powerful. And, you know, the Catholic Church often, you know, will take that approach of, okay, there's a claimed miracle. We're open to the idea of that
John Dehlin [01:02:05] being true, like the Virgin Mary on a French toast or something.
John Turner [01:02:08] But we're not going to leap to believe that. You know, let's be careful. Let's not jump in too far based on an internal experience. But I totally, I totally get. If you're Martin Harris and you go home and you pray about it and you feel that God is telling you that it's true, that's a really good reason to give $50 of silver to Joseph Smith. And there are certainly large numbers of American Christians who are going to look to that sort of internal experience as the evidence they need to join this movement and to support it.
John Dehlin [01:02:55] Yeah. Really quickly. You may have mentioned this in past episodes. What do you think was likely in the box if not plates?
John Turner [01:03:03] So I don't know. I have no idea. We don't have any evidence.
John Dehlin [01:03:08] Like a brick, like tin.
John Turner [01:03:11] Tin.
John Dehlin [01:03:12] Lead. Lead's heavier than tin.
John Turner [01:03:14] Yeah. I mean, I think we don't know. But I do think it's important to note, as you did, there's an element of physicality to this. Joseph could have, from the get go, simply said, I've been able to retrieve these plates. I've got them in a secure location. He initially has them in the woods still, or they're buried in the hearth. Right. And he could have just left it at that. But there is this ability for people to have a physical or sometimes tactile experience. I think we just don't know. Brick. Metal of some sort. I would lean toward metal of some sort because we have people who feel these things through a cloth and think, yeah, they seem like metallic, thin sheets of metal. But we can't confirm any particular alternative explanation for the plates. You know, we just don't have. We don't have enough evidence. So we have to leave it as a mystery.
John Dehlin [01:04:17] There were like. We did an episode with a guy who recreated plates of tin using tools that would have been available to Joseph at the time. And they're sitting over there on that shelf. They're quite heavy, actually. The actual dimensions that Joseph described, there were sheets of metal that. Metalists, metallurgy people, or cobblers, whatever they were called back then. There were sheets of metal being used for purposes during his time in his town or village, Correct?
John Turner [01:04:53] Yeah, I think. I don't know that much about it. I guess if I were an apologist, I'd probably say, well, if Joseph went out and acquired something like that, somebody would have known about it and word might have gotten around and we don't have evidence along those lines. There's a really smart scholar named Sonia Hazard who suggested that it would make sense that Joseph might have encountered printing plates at some point in his life and that that could have been even an inspiration for the whole project. And that's something else. But for him to have acquired that, he would have either had to stumble upon it, pilfer it, he would have no way of buying something like that. And maybe some of these tactile reports of things that really do seem like metal sheets, maybe those people, maybe. Maybe we can't necessarily trust their reports. They really wanted to believe in the Reality of the object. So it could have been something just like bricks, but we don't know. I mean, I think the only thing we really know is there was a box, there was something heavy in it, and we unfortunately can't peer into it.
John Dehlin [01:06:11] I'll make sure Julia includes in the show notes the link to that short episode where the guy brings the plates to the Mormon story studio and explains his theory. Cause it's worth reviewing as one consideration. Okay, cool. All right. Thanks for going through this in such detail. So the next part of the story that I've teased out is that at some point, Joseph's looking in his stone, and he tells Martin Harris that he sees Martin in the stone. Do you want to tell that story? And then I want to hear why you think that might have been an effective thing for Joseph to tell Martin that he sees Martin in the stone.
Joseph Presents the Plates to Martin Harris
John Turner [01:06:55] Yeah. So one source we have for this encounter or this interview between Joseph and Martin Harris about the plates comes from Harris's later recollection. And apparently, when Martin Harris visits Joseph, Joseph tells him that he's looked into a stone and he has seen Harris as the man who will assist him with the translation. And I'm presuming this was flattering to Harris. It's sort of hearing that God has a plan for you, that you have an appointed role. And I think that's actually before Harris hefts the box. So that's sort of how the conversation starts. He still would like to be able to see the plates. But my sense is hearing that from Joseph probably made Harris a bit flattered and even more eager to believe in the reality of the plates.
John Dehlin [01:08:04] It would make Harris. I mean, let me check on that. Like, it's one thing to say that just like Joseph can see the future in Iraq or have visions with the rock, what it ends up melding to by the end of the story is God wants this or God said that. Do you think at this point in the story, Martin is thinking, maybe I'm chosen by God to bring forth a marvelous work and a wonder. Do you think that it's starting to. Because that could be a manipulative thing for Joseph to do. Oh, my gosh. God is choosing you to bring forth this important scripture. That would make Martin even more eager to not only help out, but also to give money?
John Turner [01:08:48] Yeah. And I mean, I think that's true whether we want to use the language of manipulation or persuade or just flattery or persuasion. But, yeah, that is something that as human beings, we sort of like hearing, honestly, whether It's a divine appointment or just a human appointment, like there's something great in store for you. You're special, you know, you've been chosen for a particular purpose. And you know, it's in keeping with the theme of a number of Joseph's early revelations for individuals that. Yeah, as you said, they've been chosen for a particular role in what will be a marvelous work and a wonder.
Lucy Harris and Women's Property Rights
John Dehlin [01:09:38] Going back to Lucy, really quick, two quick questions. There is this really disturbing story that your book tells that I had not remembered where. When Lucy's trying to get proof from Joseph, he seems to respond in frustration in saying something to the effect of I prefer to deal with men and not their wives. That's. Is that common for the day? Is that as disturbing to others or you as it was to me?
John Turner [01:10:07] Yeah, I mean that's, I mean I wouldn't say that it was disturbing and I'm pretty sure it's from Lucy Mack Smith's history. I mean, if anything it's just a little bit weird. And we know, we know Joseph was open to having conversations with people's wives, so.
John Dehlin [01:10:26] Sorry. Ouch.
John Turner [01:10:28] So I don't know, I don't know. It's weird. You know, I guess if I were going to reconstruct though, what I think it is is Joseph sees Harris as his prospective benefactor. And by the way, I don't know that we. I don't know that we exactly know how word gets to the Harris's about this and what exactly prompts them to visit Joseph. If the Smiths has sort of put out a feeler or they'd found some way of getting the news up to them. We don't know. But it would make sense to me actually that if Joseph sees Harris as his prospective benefactor, he doesn't particularly want to have the conversation with Lucy Harris first. And she pays the first visit.
John Dehlin [01:11:18] She clearly has a more skeptical. Like the South Park Book of Mormon Joseph Smith episode. Lucy clearly has more of a skeptical worldview or approach to Joseph Smith than Martin Harris does.
John Turner [01:11:31] Maybe. Or at least she ends up having a more skeptical worldview according to Lucy Mack Smith. Lucy Harris at first, I mean, she has almost the identical response as her
John Dehlin [01:11:42] husband and sees it in a vision.
John Turner [01:11:44] Yeah. And gives him money.
John Dehlin [01:11:46] Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Really quickly, Julia wanted me to follow up. Were women allowed, you mentioned potentially Martin giving Lucy some property. Were women allowed to own property back then?
John Turner [01:11:59] So that is a great question. So typically women who were married did not own property in their own name. It's not quite that Simple. But we know later on, for instance, that Joseph deeds a large amount of property to Emma in Nauvoo. So, yeah, one could do that. It was simple for unmarried women to own property generally, but typically. Husbands would be the property owner. So it's an unusual story, but there's a deed on file, so we know that this actually was the case. But I think we don't really have great insights into exactly why Martin Harris was willing to do that or exactly why Lucy Harris wanted him to do that.
John Dehlin [01:12:57] Okay. Okay. So at some point, Joseph decides he wants to go back to Harmony, Pennsylvania. Do we know why he wants to move back? Do you have a sense for why he wants to move back to Harmony and leave Palmyra?
Moving to Harmony and Hiding the Plates
John Turner [01:13:10] Yeah, the story. And I don't know if this is coming from Joseph's history or from Lucy Mack Smith's history, but the story is there's just too much hubbub and tumult in and around Palmyra that there's too many people who are aware of the plates who might want to get the plates or steal the plates, and it's going to be safer. It may also be that, you know, that it seems as if Joseph and Emma were uncertain whether to make their home near the Smiths or back in Harmony. And so there has been some back and forth, I think, uncertainty about that. But before the end of the year, they've moved back to Harmony. And Isaac Hale wants Joseph and Emma to be there. He wants them to settle down on his property. He wants Joseph Smith to become a respectable farmer and a respectable individual. So I think the. I think the Hales would have been quite happy for them to return.
John Dehlin [01:14:23] I'm guessing they didn't have a lot of privacy in Palmyra. Joseph and Emma, correct. As a married couple?
John Turner [01:14:29] Correct. No. Because they're living with other family members and there are a lot of Smiths, and it's cramped and it's been such a tumultuous time for the family in terms of losing title to the land, but being able to stay in the house for a while, and then eventually they're going to end up back in a really cramped log cabin. So in terms of living circumstances, yeah, Harmony is definitely the better choice.
John Dehlin [01:15:01] So you mentioned in the book that when they plan on leaving New York for Pennsylvania, a lot of Joseph's friends are concerned and. Or, you know, Joseph's concerned about what might happen in that move. Do you want to talk about that and how Joseph dealt with those concerns?
John Turner [01:15:22] Yeah. So there are all sorts of these stories of potential Threats and adventures and escapades. And Joseph has these former sort of treasure seeking partners and sort of former friends at this point, people like Samuel Lawrence. And he's apparently worried that they're going to ambush him as they're leaving town and try to steal the plates because that would be an opportune time. And he engages in a bit of deception and subterfuge, kind of gets it into circulation that he's going to be leaving on a particular day, leaves a couple days earlier. And the story is that the plates are in a barrel of beans at that point, you know, just hidden away. And that, that that box is nailed shut and they leave town. By the way, I think that's a really fun detail in the story. The idea that this, you know, this sacred valuable object would be stashed in the beans is just, I think that's just a really fun image.
John Dehlin [01:16:39] It is fun. One thing that confuses me is, you know, later when Joseph, you know, when Martin or Lucy lose the 116 pages and Joseph loses his power to translate, I believe we're going to learn that he loses both the spectacles, that God takes the spectacles away, the urimum thummim away, but he also takes the plates away. So I'm always confused, like, why does Joseph need to worry about plates, protecting the plates when he's traveling from New York to Pennsylvania? If he could just say, hey, God, can you take these away? We're going to make a trip, take them away, and when we get to, you know, harmony, you can give them back again. I'm confused as to why some points he has to protect them, and other points they can go and come with God's wishes. How do you make sense of that?
John Turner [01:17:29] Yeah, well, I mean, I make sense of it from the starting point that I don't think he had played. So but yeah, I mean, those are really funky parts of the story, especially in connection with the lost manuscript pages, because he, you know, those sources are actually a little bit murky in terms of what's going on. But it does seem like these objects, they can come and go. The angel or God can take them, can give them back. We don't really have any insight into how Joseph would have described the mechanics of their movements. You know, there are other stories later on about Joseph having left the plates in harmony when he goes to the Whitmer house and personages showing up with them in Fayette. So, yeah, there's all sorts of funky stories, I think, in terms of needing to leave early and hide the plates in a barrel and things like that. I do think that's in keeping with this whole time period of adventure, fun in the woods, escapades. I think Joseph likes very much, feels and wants to cultivate a sense of excitement and danger. I think he relishes that. And so I see that in some of the descriptions of those activities.
John Dehlin [01:19:07] Yeah. And then why Joseph would feel the need to create a narrative that he hid plates that didn't exist or to leave early so that he could avoid them getting stolen when he knew they didn't exist. I'm just trying to make sense of that.
John Turner [01:19:24] Yeah, well, that's not going to be easy, John. I mean, I guess. I guess if you start from the idea that the plates don't exist, but you are purportedly leaving with them, you still wouldn't want someone to ambush you and be able to prove that you have no plates. So there'd be reason, almost regardless, plates or no plates, there'd be a reason for engaging in that behavior.
John Dehlin [01:19:50] But worst case, if that happened, he could say, oh, God took him away and he's going to give them back to me once I get down there. That could be his out, right?
John Turner [01:19:59] Yeah, I mean, you could probably come up with an out. But on the other hand, at this time period, so from September 1827, at least until he moves to the Whitmer house, Joseph is claiming to be in possession of the plates. So it would have been a different story if he had said something like that.
John Dehlin [01:20:23] Yeah. Okay. So they arrive in harmony. You've already mentioned Isaac asked to see the plates. Joseph wouldn't let him. Isaac gets mad and says, you can't keep them in the house. Like, I always wondered, like, Emma's not listed as one of the three witnesses to the golden plates or one of the eight witnesses, I forget whether she actually eventually claimed to have seen. I think she claims to have lifted them under a towel or something. But, like, it always didn't make sense to me that she wouldn't just peek under. Right.
John Turner [01:20:57] Yeah, I would definitely have peaked.
John Dehlin [01:21:00] Unless she was worried that God would strike her down. Like, there's the whole Ark of the Covenant thing where God said, don't touch the Ark and someone touched it and was struck down. Like, do you think maybe the fear of God was put into her, that if she looked she'd be killed? Like, why wouldn't Emma look?
John Turner [01:21:17] I mean, I think I said this on a prior episode. One of the most frustrating things about studying Joseph Smith or writing a biography of Joseph Smith is not Knowing more about Emma's experiences and what, what is in her mind, what she knows, what she's thinking. And for me, this is very much an unanswered question that I would love to be able to answer. So apparently, right, she goes with Joseph to the hillside in September of 1827 and apparently then she's with him. You know, she's with him. She's definitely with him when he returns.
John Dehlin [01:21:59] And that's when he allegedly was given the plates for the first time.
John Turner [01:22:02] Correct. And then stashes them somewhere in the woods. Right. But she claims to have been there so we could unpack that. Right. So is she just there waiting, sort of waiting off to the side while Joseph goes up and gets the plates and then stashes them somewhere? Or does she see what's going on at the time and then you're right, so she's, she's there then when Joseph begins to work with the plates and she claims to have felt them under this cloth, but not to have lifted the cloth. Couple of possibilities, right? If we think there is an element of subterfuge or deception or fraud here, Perhaps Emma is 100% aware of what Joseph is doing. You know, maybe she's in the know, maybe she is part of the plan and a co worker with her husband. That wouldn't be a crazy explanation to me. Maybe, on the other hand, she absolutely believes in her husband's syric or prophetic gifts from the start, including the treasure digging. Maybe she accepts what Joseph is saying at face value. Maybe she treats this with, you know, as a sacred command not to look or even press Joseph to look. We just don't know. I wish we knew. I wish I had greater insight, but we don't. It seems incredible to me that she would not have had an intimate sense of what Joseph was doing.
John Dehlin [01:23:53] Yeah. Julie's reminding us in the comments that that night in 1827 when Joseph went with Emma, he went like at 2am, he's wearing all black. They have a black horse. Like, why so much sneaky, sketchy sketchiness?
John Turner [01:24:09] Was the moon out? I don't know. But she had ample opportunity to know what. What transpired. What transpired?
John Dehlin [01:24:21] Yeah, yeah.
John Turner [01:24:22] And she's just. She, Emma is smart. Now, I will say when we talk about plural marriage in later episodes, she either doesn't know because the deception is impressive or she doesn't want to know or countenance rumors of Joseph's polygamy. But Emma's definitely no fool. As, you know, as that conflict develops, she's Very forceful. So I think Emma is definitely. She's definitely intelligent and capable. I think, you know, my own instincts are. She would. She would have had some sense about what's going on.
Isaac Hale, Emma Smith, and Life in Harmony
John Dehlin [01:25:16] Well, to that point, when Isaac Hale demands that Joseph not keep the plates in the house that he lets Joseph and Emma live in, it's almost like he's doing Joseph a favor, because I can't imagine being Joseph and having to constantly hide the plates from the wife he's living with while they're in the small cabin they're living in. So that allows Joseph to be able to say, oh, don't worry, Emma. They're in the woods. And now he doesn't have to worry about Emma finding out that it's really a brick or lead or printing plates. You know what I mean? Because they're not constantly in there with Emma to look at.
John Turner [01:25:57] Yeah, well. And apparently Lucy Harris shows up and ransacks the house. This is per Lucy Mack Smith, who wasn't an eyewitness, by the way, to what's going on. So, I mean, who knows? But. But she apparently shows up and she wants to know because her husband has gotten too into Joseph's activities. And you're right, it's sort of convenient that they're not in the house. Though he does seem to have had an object present during at least some of the translation work. So, you know, I'm not sure. Maybe there's a bit of back and forth with retrieving the plates as needed for the project, the pseudo plates, the objects.
John Dehlin [01:26:47] Right, right. Okay. So let's go to the Anton exchange. Why do you imagine Joseph Smith felt the need, number one, to make drawings of the Book of Mormon characters? What do you make sense of why he chose to call them reformed Egyptian? Why not Hebrew? Why not regular Egyptian? You know, let's start there. So why did Joseph tell the world that the plates were written on reformed Egyptian, written with reformed Egyptian and not either Hebrew or regular Egyptian?
John Turner [01:27:26] That's a great question. So I'm sure other people have put a lot of thought into that question and would have probably more sophisticated answers. My basic answer is that for many, many centuries, maybe at this point a couple millennia, Jews and then Christians have been very fixated on the union of ancient Jewish and Egyptian knowledge and wisdom, partly stretching back to the fact that Abraham and Joseph go to Egypt. So there's some points of connection in Jewish scripture and the idea of both. The idea of Egypt as an ancient repository of knowledge and wisdom is very strong. And it's, if anything, Enhanced in the early 1800s with greater access to Egyptian on the part of European archaeologists, we're getting to the era of the Rosetta Stone. So there's a lot of both European and American interest in ancient Egypt. And the idea of fusing that with ancient Judaism and the Bible is super attractive. So, I mean, that's sort of my superficial explanation. They're probably more Egypt.
John Dehlin [01:29:25] Egyptomania.
John Turner [01:29:27] Egyptomania.
John Dehlin [01:29:29] Early 19th century Egyptomania.
John Turner [01:29:31] Right.
John Dehlin [01:29:31] Wasn't Napoleon conquering Egypt and blowing the nose off the Sphinx Right around this time?
John Turner [01:29:37] A little bit earlier, but yeah, or very early 1800s. And so Joseph, at least, you know, it's interesting because there are some sources that he really wants to work with the characters in sort of a semi scholarly way. At first. There's a reference to the creation of an Egyptian Alphabet, that you could create an Alphabet using the characters and then work with that. Harris, I think at this point he does believe, but he's looking for additional reasons to believe before lending additional and more extensive financial support. To go back to your question, though, why not just Hebrew or why not just Egypt?
John Dehlin [01:30:42] Like if, let's just say Lehi and his family lived in Jerusalem 600 years before Christ and then they leave and sail to America, what language would they have spoken and.
John Turner [01:30:55] Or written if they left near Jerusalem at that time?
John Dehlin [01:31:00] If they were Israelites, they were Jews.
John Turner [01:31:02] Hebrew.
John Dehlin [01:31:03] Hebrew.
John Turner [01:31:04] Right, right.
John Dehlin [01:31:04] They would have spoken and written Hebrew.
John Turner [01:31:07] Right.
John Dehlin [01:31:07] Okay.
John Turner [01:31:07] But, you know, there's this sojourn elsewhere where there's that fusion with Egyptian. I mean, obviously it wouldn't have been workable for Joseph to. I mean, Hebrew. He obviously could not have written out Hebrew characters in 1828. You know, that would have been an impossibility for him.
John Dehlin [01:31:30] Why?
John Turner [01:31:30] He doesn't know Hebrew.
John Dehlin [01:31:31] Right. So he asked him, does he have to. Could it be. He had to make up the existence of a language that no one could interpret so he could provide the symbols to make it seem like there were actually plates with symbols on them, but symbols that then he could say, well, no one can translate it because it's a language that is so old no one's ever heard of it before. It's a way of covering up and preventing people from accusing him of making stuff up. I don't mean to. Is that feasible?
John Turner [01:32:03] No, I mean, I think that's feasible. I mean, I think also. I mean, there wasn't any alternative though. Right. I mean, so. But I mean, even if that's feasible, it is sort of a risky thing to do because while we're not quite to the point. Well, nobody in the United States of 1828 or into the 1830s can decipher and translate Egyptian hieroglyphics. There's a couple of European scholars who are just developing the ability to do that.
John Dehlin [01:32:38] But Joseph didn't know that. Right.
John Turner [01:32:41] Likely Joseph may or may not have been aware that that was sort of a beginning to be something that could be done. But it would have been possible for individuals to compare any characters with known reproductions of Egyptian hieroglyphics. So, I mean, so, you know, I guess you could say it was a bit of a risky thing to do. And there would always be the possibility that you could. You could produce these characters. Somebody could take them to a scholar who might say, well, these look like chicken scratches. So it's an interesting development in the story that Joseph is willing to do
John Dehlin [01:33:35] that because for sure he's stuck with the problem of he's claiming to translate ancient records. So people are going to ask, what language are you translating from? He's going to have to say what the language is. And then if he says a language that's known, people are going to be able to test whether he's translating accurately or not. So then his other option is to say it's some language that no one knows.
John Turner [01:33:59] I mean, I think he could. Yeah, I mean, I guess he could have said it's Hebrew because this is an ancient Israelite family. Right. He could have said that and said, well, I can't show you the characters. That would have been a pretty simple answer, too. I don't know. I guess in my mind just that I think part of it is just that fusion of Egyptian and Hebrew is a really attractive idea and it would resonate with people and maybe also make sense to people that there would have been that melding of cultures and language.
John Dehlin [01:34:39] It just seems like he was trying to create as much materiality as possible when there probably wasn't any. But just telling people, oh, it's Hebrew, but I'm not gonna show you the characters. Well, that's not as compelling as, oh, I'll show you the characters. Now, they're characters you can't actually, you know, interpret because it's a type of Egyptian that. No, you know what I mean? It skates on that edge of just like, hefting the plate she can't see. It's like, well, you can see this, but you're not going to be able to actually validate that I'm actually translating them. But here's the characters. And that adds Some mystery and some materiality to it.
John Turner [01:35:22] Yeah, I mean, and I think it's actually really fascinating that we have that characters document that is in the church. I think it's now in the church archives. I think Community of Christ, I think formerly owned it and it was part of the recent sale and transfer. I think what we don't have is we don't have the rubbings or initial drawings that Joseph made. So we're a little bit removed.
John Dehlin [01:35:53] It's like a copy of a copy,
John Turner [01:35:54] a copy of a copy, something like that. So we have some sense of what this might have looked like. But maybe we don't know exactly what. We don't know exactly what. Harris carried on his travels where he was looking for scholars who could tell him if this was legit.
The Anthon Transcript and Characters Incident
John Dehlin [01:36:14] But I think your point is still important. It's pretty bold to say Martin Harris, here's some characters go up to one of the top scholars we can find at one of the most prestigious universities we know of, show him this stuff. Because Joseph wouldn't want Martin to come back saying, oh well, the scholar says you're a hack and a fraud.
John Turner [01:36:39] Right.
John Dehlin [01:36:39] So Joseph's. Unless Martin's in on this, which is also a possibility by some people's account, Joseph's risking something by sending Martin to run these characters by a well known scholar.
John Turner [01:36:55] Correct. So yeah, I mean, I think again with Joseph sometimes it's a little bit hard to know if there is some sincere religious engagement at this point in ways that might sound a little crazy to us. But we know in the mid-1830s when, when he starts working on the Book of Abraham project, we know that he creates an Alphabet and a grammar. He's really puzzling over these papyri and he's puzzling over these characters and I think he's trying to make something of them. I don't think it's. And it seems that he begins creating these characters documents before Harris shows up in harmony. So he might have just been working on this stuff on his own at first. Maybe he feels that through inspiration he's able to create this Alphabet. I mean, I think that's a possibility. And then when Harris shows up, I think these documents of characters already exist. According to Joseph, God tells Harris he should take them to New York City and see what people make of them. And that this is going to provide evidence for Harris perhaps. I mean, if it's a slightly different language, nobody should be able to translate it. So I don't really know what the. I don't know in Joseph's mind, exactly what the expected result is going to be.
John Dehlin [01:38:50] What do you make of the characters as you've reviewed them personally?
John Turner [01:38:54] Oh, gosh. I mean, so I have no idea what to make of them or exactly what the sources of inspiration were. I think, you know, I love that character's document. I mean, first of all, it's just a reminder of how rough and rustic it is. Right. Because characters is spelled C A R A C T O R S. That's not from Joseph. It's John Whitmer's transcription. But, you know, this is, you know, here they are in Harmony, Pennsylvania. They're creating these documents. It's got to look really rough and crazy. And then Harris carries this off and he meets with a number of people. And according, you know, and according to Harris's report, these people say, yeah, this, this, this, this could look like this, this or that. And, you know, Harris. Harris's report is that Charles Anthon tells them it's some combination of Egyptian, Chaldean, Assyrian, Arabic, which, if it looked anything like the character's document, I don't think Anthon would have said that. Right.
John Dehlin [01:40:39] Because those characters don't look like those languages.
John Turner [01:40:41] They don't look like those languages, at least as far as I know. I claim zero expertise in this realm whatsoever. I did not think I needed to search out scholars of those languages to assess the characters document.
John Dehlin [01:41:00] Yeah. So what do you make of Martin Harris coming back with a very different account than what Charles Anton's account ends up being? How do you make sense of two such differing accounts? Martin Harris comes back with increased belief in Joseph Smith and his powers, allegedly. Whereas Anton is reported to have basically said, this is silliness. Be careful, you're dealing with the fraud, basically.
John Turner [01:41:32] So here's my best explanation, which leans into, I really think, Joseph's history. So the sticking point for Anthon in that conversation seems to be that moment when Harris explains, not only does Joseph Smith have gold plates, but there's a portion that's sealed. And so Anthon's response is, I can't read a sealed book. Right. This is crazy. And at least when Harris shares that with Joseph, Joseph interprets it as a confirmation of biblical prophecy. It's an allusion to a passage in the book of Isaiah. But I think somehow whatever Harris encountered with Anthon, he already understood as confirmatory. Right. Because I don't think he had some crisis of faith and then got back to Joseph, and then Joseph was able to reinterpret the conversation with that biblical passage. But I'm sure Joseph's interpretation is just additional confirmation and encouragement. And I mean, I think that. I mean, it is a crazy story because, you know, on the face of it, Harris meeting Anthon, it should have disrupted his belief rather than confirming it, but it doesn't. Whatever Anthon tells him, and we have those dueling accounts, you know, I figure we don't necessarily need to really trust either of them. But whatever Harris hears from Anthon, it's enough to make him feel confirmed and Joseph's interpretation even. Even more so. And, you know, he's now. He's now ready to more fully commit to Joseph Smith. He's more ready to give of his resources. And his wife, Lucy Harris, is now just absolutely livid and, you know, just. I would say just, you know, just almost beside herself that her husband is willing to commit so much of their wealth and prosperity to this project.
John Dehlin [01:44:13] Yeah. I'm just so confused about how. Let's just say Anton really did say this is a dumb, ridiculous exercise, but Martin comes away believing more. I don't know how to square those two, necessarily, although I do. I would say that if Joseph had in his back pocket this Isaiah interpretation, that it ultimately gets rejected by a scholar. Because I cannot read a sealed book. That's kind of a heads I win, tills you lose. Because if Anton validates the manuscript, then it's been validated by a scholar, and if he rejects it, well, Isaiah prophesied that it would be rejected. So in that sense, I don't even know if Joseph had that figured out beforehand, but it almost seems like a heads I win, tails you lose, kind of.
John Turner [01:45:04] No, it does. I mean, I think in a way, it'd be kind of hard to exactly set that up in advance because you don't exactly know how the conversation is going to go. I do think, in a more general sense, sense, maybe it's not as risky of an errand for Joseph as it seems on the face of it. Right. Because in my mind, if Anthon totally rejects this, it would maybe be not that hard to say that you can't trust the learned who are puffed up with knowledge. There's a truth here that he can't access. At the same time, to send Harris off when he's not with you and he's going to be encountering these other people and he believes, but he's not 100% committed. There is an element of risk involved and it works out.
John Dehlin [01:46:01] One of the things I wondered was whether Joseph needed a little bit more time. Let's just Assume Joseph's writing the story ahead of time, putting the story, putting the narrative together ahead of time. I wonder whether he needed a little bit more time, and it's his way to keep Martin involved, but. But buy himself time to finish whatever planning or preparation he needed to actually do the. The translation.
John Turner [01:46:24] Possible. And. But maybe also, you know, he. He does always sort of have to bring Harris along. I mean, if Harris is sort of open to greater support, but not sure, maybe you need some sort of errand. It also gives Harris something really important to do. So, I mean, it could even be that. It could even be. There's a lot of possibilities. It could be that it's not so much that Harris wants proof as that Joseph has an important errand or for him. And again, that could be just attractive to Harris. On the face of it. It even could be that Joseph's been working on these character documents, really believes that they could be inspired and is hoping for some confirmation. I think there's a number of possibilities. We're still in the stage of Joseph's life that we. We don't have great documentation. We're relying on these retrospective accounts. It's tough.
The Translation Process and Seer Stones
John Dehlin [01:47:37] Okay, well, I have in my notes, as you mentioned, that Lucy Harris gets livid. You mentioned that she cuts him out of her bed. So now they're not sleeping together. He's sleeping on the couch or somewhere else. And then you write that she asks her daughter's suitor to purloin. Is that steal. What is that word? Purloin?
John Turner [01:47:59] Steal, yeah.
John Dehlin [01:48:00] To steal a copy of the character's and make a transcription. And then Lucy, as you mentioned previously in this episode, accompanies Martin to Harmony. She ransacks the house trying to find the plates, you know, and then. This is a story I didn't remember ever reading before. You have Lucy as she's ransacking the house or grilling Joseph, encountering a black snake that maybe she interprets as a guardian spirit or as Satan or as shaken. And I don't ever remember hearing that story before. Is that something you uncovered? Is that something that others have written about? And what do you make of that black snake? And is that Lucy Smith, Lucy Mack Smith that gives that account of Lucy Harris encountering a black snake, guardian spirit, Satanic being.
John Turner [01:48:57] It's. It's from Lucy Max History. Okay, so, no, it's not. It's not new to me. I. I would always love to uncover new, great documents. I really want the missing 116 pages. So if anybody out there knows where they are. Send me some pointers. But, yeah. And I think other, you know, she's looking for the plates, so she's in the woods. Some people have interpreted that snake as, you know, a guardian treasure spirit, or thought that she would have interpreted it as a guardian treasure spirit. I think Satan would be another possibility. I don't know. We probably shouldn't put too much stock in it, really. If it's from the account of Joseph's mother, who wasn't on the scene at the time and, you know, is probably sharing a story that she heard and she's not. She's not dictating it for a couple more decades. Really?
John Dehlin [01:50:01] Yeah. Okay. Well, that's interesting. And it does tie to this guardian, again, spirits guarding the treasure kind of thing. So that does seem on brand for how these people saw the world, for whatever. That's all right. So really quickly, you know, Joseph. There's the first seer stone, that Joseph gets the second seer stone, and then the Urim and Thummim. And then there's indications that he has to hide the Urim and Thummim, but that sometimes he uses it, but the people can't see it. And then eventually when the 116 pages get lost, they're taken away. What do you make of the Urim and Thummim?
John Turner [01:50:44] Okay.
John Dehlin [01:50:44] And wasn't it someone else's vision, Someone who saw through a seer stone the Urim and Thummim? And some say that almost made Joseph have to incorporate the existence of spectacles into his narrative because someone else he went on a treasure dig with saw the spectacles.
John Turner [01:51:02] I think that's true.
John Dehlin [01:51:02] Samuel Lawrence. Yeah. Is who Julia is telling us.
John Turner [01:51:05] You know, sometimes my head just starts spinning.
John Dehlin [01:51:07] I know.
John Turner [01:51:08] You know, so Joseph used some sort of object for the translation. Right. Some sort of translation aid. And so there's sort of three different labels for what he used. One is Urim and Thummim, these stones placed in the high priest's breastplate. So, you know, this biblical object and some of Joseph's accounts of the translation process, they use the term Urim and Thummim. Usually that's sort of after 1835. That's what Joseph later on sort of uses as the name for his translation device. In other accounts, it's spectacles, these stones in this sort of silver bow. I think that's the term used in Joseph's 1832 history, if I'm not mistaken. And then Joseph's associates at the time, including Martin Harris, talk about him using One of his seer stones, probably the white seer stone that he had found on the Willard Chase property. And people, you know, I think there are faithful Latter Day Saints who argue about how best to explain this, whether seer stone or spectacle. Urim and Thummim, it seems to me we have pretty strong accounts that he's at least mostly using the white seer stone. He has a couple of seer stones, so I wouldn't stake my reputation on which of them it was, but let's just say the white seer stone. This may be connected to some references in the Book of Mormon. I mean, I think that's. That's a possibility. But it seems that mostly he would place his seer stone in a hat, he would look into it, he would see words, he would dictate them. We have testimony to that effect from both Emma and Martin Harris. So they would be two people really well positioned to know what Joseph's doing. And so I think their explanations are pretty credible.
John Dehlin [01:53:51] And that is odd for someone trying to look at this objectively. Why would God go to the trouble of providing Joseph with these magic spectacles that I think at some point your book mentions as being acknowledged as more powerful than the seer stones?
John Turner [01:54:05] I can see anything with them.
John Dehlin [01:54:07] Yeah. Why would God go to the trouble of preserving those, making them and giving them to Joseph if Joseph was going to then not use them when he actually translated them? And the same thing could be said about the plates. Why weren't the plates actually used in the translation? If they were made, created and preserved, and given to Joseph, and if he was fighting so hard to protect them, then they're not even used. Like both the non use of the Urim and Thummim and the non use of the plates in the translation is really problematic for people trying to make sense of this. And then when you add to it the introduction of the stone in the hat that was used in all that treasure digging, that's when people start going, this whole translation thing is not making sense.
John Turner [01:54:51] Yeah, I mean,
John Dehlin [01:54:54] I know we're probably beating a dead horse.
John Turner [01:54:56] No, no. Well, I mean, it's a good question. I was struck by the fact that the Joseph Smith Papers project somewhere in one of the introductions to one of those volumes, refers to the Book of Mormon. And I'm going to forget the exact phrase, but it's something, as you know, Joseph's first, like, inspired revelation or revelatory dictation or something like that. So just the term translation, it's just so inherently misleading because when you hear translation, you think of, well, okay, I've got access to these words in one language and written in a book or on plates, I'm looking at this one text and I'm going to make a translation of it into another language. I think revelatory dictation is a much better term. Regardless, Joseph is not looking at one text and translating it into a different language. Instead, he's dictating.
John Dehlin [01:56:07] Yeah. And again, the only problem with that revelatory explanation is that Joseph's not claiming to be a revelator at this point. He's claiming that his power is to be a translator. And he's claiming he named the origin language and we all know what the destination language was, Reformed Egyptian to English. So for modern Mormons to sort of say, well, it wasn't really translation, I mean, that's kind of a bait and switch. And the text and the history doesn't support the idea of revelation instead of translation. Am I being too harsh there? Am I being. Are my expectations too high?
John Turner [01:56:47] I mean, you may have really high expectations, John. I don't know.
John Dehlin [01:56:51] Are those unreasonable, reasonable expectations?
John Turner [01:56:53] Well, what I think is, let's just go back to the sources that we do have. So we have Harris saying by the aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the prophet. And we have Emma saying that Joseph sat with his face buried in the hat with the stone in it. Now, both Harris and Emma think of this as a translation. Right. But they clearly think that what Joseph is doing is seeing words, as far as I know, just seeing words in English. Right. For him to vocalize and saying them and then somebody's writing them down. So I don't think that Harris and Emma are really engaging in a bait and switch. They're just describing a really idiosyncratic way of creating a text. Right. That Joseph and they refer to as a translation, by which I think they mean the dictation of this text, which they are claiming also exists in reformed Egyptian on these plates. Yeah. I mean, so it's quite something.
John Dehlin [01:58:17] Right, well, and I wasn't accusing Emma or Martin of a bait and switch. I was more referring to Richard Bushman, Terrell Givens, Spencer Fluman, Blake Ostler, any modern apologist that basically says it wasn't really translation, it was more of a revelatory experience. That's a bait and switch given what the documents say, given what Joseph claimed, given what even Emma and Martin claimed was going on.
John Turner [01:58:47] Right, right. Yeah. I mean, I would say it accords with what Martin And Emma say if you.
John Dehlin [01:58:55] The revelation or the translation.
John Turner [01:58:57] Revelation. Oh, well, because they're saying this is his method.
John Dehlin [01:59:01] Oh, he's reading it from a stone, which implies not a translation.
John Turner [01:59:05] I think that implies not a translation as we. We would think about it. They still use that term. Now, I think when Joseph. Joseph is always really circumspect. Right. About the method.
John Dehlin [01:59:18] Gift and power of God.
John Turner [01:59:19] Gift and power of God.
John Dehlin [01:59:20] God didn't want you to know the details.
John Turner [01:59:22] And when Hyrum at one point says, hey, essentially, Joseph, why don't you tell people, I don't know, they're having a conversation probably with some new church members. Why don't you talk a bit about the translation and share? He doesn't want to do that. If you just look at his account, it just doesn't really give you much insight into what he was doing. I think all of them thought they just used that term translation for it, being well aware that he hadn't translated it in any traditional way that we would understand as inherent to translation.
John Dehlin [02:00:10] Yeah. Do you know about Blake Ostler's expansion theory? Have you heard about that?
John Turner [02:00:17] Tell me.
John Dehlin [02:00:17] So there's this Mormon attorney who also kind of does what some call scholarship on the side, and he's come up with the idea that it's not either Joseph translated, you know, from language to language, or Joseph just revealed stuff or made stuff up. There's something in the middle where Joseph would, you know, read words and get a sense, but then add his own language and his own words and his own context to make it. To make the text make more sense to modern sensibilities. And so why would he say horse when we know horses weren't, you know, really around during the Mesoamerican time period? Well, what he saw was probably something that was a tapir or something else. But Joseph on the fly, saw whatever the animal was, knew that no one would know what that meant. So then he used the word horse consciously so that then we would at least have a sense for what he was talking about. In other words, the reason why it reads as a 19th century document is because it's a combination of Joseph translating but then adding his own verbiage and language and context so that then it would be usable and understandable to the rest of us. That's my understanding of Blake Ostler's expansion theory.
John Turner [02:01:47] No, I mean, I get that. I also get. I get the attraction of that idea. Because if you approach the Book of Mormon simply as this is an ancient record describing ancient civilizations and Joseph is Simply a conduit for this text and there's none of Joseph or his culture and environs in it, then all those anachronisms and a whole bunch of other issues, they're more troublesome. Right. Whereas if you make space for Joseph's active engagement and elements of his language or even ideas in it, you could, you could come up with a way to maybe shield the Book of Mormon from some of those criticisms. Yeah, I mean, that totally makes. I can understand the apologetic attraction, but
John Dehlin [02:02:52] in terms of that being consistent with the historical record and what people were claiming was going on, would it be consistent with what the documents suggest?
John Turner [02:03:04] So, I mean, what I think the documents suggest, and there are other sources, if we really wanted to delve into this, we'd have to look at besides the ones I'm mentioning from Emma and Martin Harris. I think what the documents suggest is that this is Joseph Smith's dictation. Right.
John Dehlin [02:03:25] Word for word dictation.
John Turner [02:03:26] Yeah. Well, I mean, more or less the
John Dehlin [02:03:29] words show up in the stone, he reads them, Martin confirms what he heard and wrote, and then Joseph moves on to the next phrase.
John Turner [02:03:38] Right, right. I mean, I personally understand the Book of Mormon as Joseph's creative production that he dictated, whether or not he actually saw words in his stone as part of that dictation. I'm just agnostic about that. I don't know. But, you know, I think the words flow out of Joseph Smith and at first Harris and then later Oliver Cowdery write them down and given their testimony, it sounds like they more or less wrote down exactly what Joseph said because there's some process of checking that they've recorded it correctly.
John Dehlin [02:04:14] Yeah, really quickly. If there weren't plates and if he wasn't really translating and he was the sole author and he is using a stone and a hat. Have you thought about what actually was going on? What did Joseph have paper in the hat? Would he memorize a story that he wrote or conjured earlier and then during a session just recited by memory to Martin and then later Oliver, like, have you thought about it? But because either again, Martin and Oliver would have been in on the scam or he would have been able to. He would have had to convince him, them that he was doing what he said he was doing while he was doing something else, either by pure memory or by referencing a text that Martin and then later Oliver couldn't see. So do you even have a theory about what he likely was doing?
Authorship and Origins of the Book of Mormon
John Turner [02:05:10] So that's a fun question. So first of all, I think that. And I get pushback on this from people from all around the spectrum. Right. People who are faithful Latter Day Saints, people who are real critics and detractors. Right. My own interpretation is that Joseph was capable of dictating this text over a relatively short period of time, thinking, say of the two months or two or three months that he works intensively with Oliver Cowdery. It's actually a lot of time, if you think about how long you might do that per day, but it's still a relatively short amount of time. I don't think that Joseph had some study aid in the hat. That just sounds difficult mechanically, you know,
John Dehlin [02:06:04] because it's dark in the hat.
John Turner [02:06:05] It's dark in the hat. Right. And, you know, apparently he's blocking out the light, so.
John Dehlin [02:06:10] But some say it was a white hat and the light could have gotten the.
John Turner [02:06:13] That sounds crazy to me. Like, boy. And that would just give me a headache if I was trying to do that. Actually, just looking in a hat at a stone for a long period of time would probably give me a headache on the face of it. But trying to read something inside of the hat, that sounds awful. So what I think is that Joseph had this in his mind. Whether he exactly worked it out in advance and memorized something, who knows? I think he had a really creative mind. He had a really strong memory. I think there's a scholar, Bill Davis, who has a theory that it would have been feasible for Joseph to have sort of kept an outline in his head, like sort of head points, laying down heads.
John Dehlin [02:07:02] William Davis.
John Turner [02:07:03] Right, William Davis. I think that's. That's an attractive theory.
John Dehlin [02:07:08] Did he call that heads or bones laying down heads?
John Turner [02:07:11] I think we have an episode with him.
John Dehlin [02:07:14] We'll have Julia include that episode with William Davis in the show. Notes.
John Turner [02:07:18] Yeah, I mean, I haven't really. I haven't thought intensively, John, about, well, how much would Joseph have to have in his head per day? And what would be the practical struggles of keeping the various threads of the narrative in order. But I don't think those are insurmountable obstacles for Joseph Smith. For me, it's not a reason to accept as an apologetic argument that on a human level, Joseph couldn't have done this. I have a high enough view of Joseph Smith in terms of his intellect and creative talent to believe that he could have done it. It's also not from the other angle. Joseph has had for a long time detractors who think this uneducated numbskull could never have produced this. It's not great, but it's impressive enough. He couldn't have done it, which I always think is sort of kind of a funny argument that, you know, he must have gotten the text from somewhere else or somebody else must have written it. Sort of the Book of Mormon. It's pretty wretched, but it's impressive enough. Joseph couldn't have written it. I always think that there's a little bit of an inconsistency in that approach. And I think Joseph was. He had worked. I think he could work a lot out in his mind and he had the ability to keep it straight and to dictate it. And I would say I have placed a lot of weight on these testimonies from Emma and Harris and a few others who were there. We still can't really be certain what was he doing all day long. If we lean into those sources, does that mean that's the method he used 8 hours a day or something like that? We don't really know that. None of these people talked at great length and in great detail about the translation. They said more than Joseph himself. But there's still a lot of uncertainty about what exactly this looked like on a daily, ongoing basis.
John Dehlin [02:09:48] So just to summarize, there's at least a few variables. There's how capable Joseph Smith was and then there's how impressive the text, the Book of Mormon text is. And then there's how much time he actually had and how much we know about what he was doing during that time. And what the Mormon Church would kind of want to say is Joseph Smith was so illiterate and uneducated and the Book of Mormon is so phenomenal and the time period was so short that there's no way he could have produced the book.
John Turner [02:10:23] Right.
John Dehlin [02:10:23] And what I think I heard you say, and I think I heard you say you think a lot more about Joseph's intellectual capability than maybe Mormon apologists would want to concede in this context. Some would, like Mark Twain would say the book, the Book of Mormon is actually not as impressive as faithful Mormons think it is. And so in that sense, they would reduce the miraculous nature of the text itself and say, it's not a great book, it's not that interesting. So a really smart Joseph Smith could produce a not very impressive text, especially given that it's a 19 19th century document sort of to begin with. And then you're adding, there's a lot we don't know about the time he spent. And I would even argue, you know, what was he doing when he allegedly, you know, later when he loses the 116 pages. He's, you know, the spectacles are taken away, the plates are taken away, and his gift is taken away for a season. Could he have been planning his rewrites? Could he have been planning on what he was going to do with the story? Now? The 116 pages had been taken. There are things you could do with his timeline again, in addition to the eight or 16 hours a day he could have been planning or prepping during the actual translation process. What I hear you saying is Joseph was impressive enough. Maybe the text isn't as impressive as believers want to make it. And maybe there's a lot more time for him to plan and prep and scheme and devise than what Mormon apologists would want to concede. Is that a fair restatement of what I heard from you?
John Turner [02:12:07] That's pretty fair. I mean, I don't know if I want to do this too, try to get the level just right. But, yeah, I mean, I think in a way, both faithful Latter Day Saints, at least some faithful Latter Day Saints, and some of Joseph's detractors have shared a pretty low view of his intellectual talent. Now, I don't know, it's a little bit more complex than that, probably. And in terms of the Book of Mormon, you're right. So there's sort of. The faithful Latter Day Saints see this as an incredibly complex and inspiring text. Right. And then there's Mark Twain, chloroform in print. I'm probably somewhere in between, sort of like, yeah, there's some impressive bits. And there is also a complexity in terms of the narrative. And I think that's a fair point, but I don't think it's so stratospheric that Joseph couldn't have produced the text. I tend to think it's not, you know, that he wouldn't have needed to have spent months after the loss of the first manuscript. I wouldn't think he would have needed necessarily to, like, write it out in a funny way. I'll also just throw out one other idea. If we've probably all had times in our lives where we've worked on writing something and if you weren't storing it in the cloud somewhere, you lost it because you lost the old floppy disk it was on, or if it was handwritten, you lost it and you had to start over. I think it's a lot easier to take a second crack at something. It's always really painful to lose it, and it's hard to start over. But I think a second attempt is Often the better attempt.
John Dehlin [02:14:11] Oh, so it was like a big rewrite. They gave him a chance to actually produce something better.
John Turner [02:14:16] He'd at least written, you know, he had at least already worked on the project once. And so in a way there could be some literary advantage, especially for a first time author.
John Dehlin [02:14:34] For those who want to say Martin was a co author or Sidney Rigdon was a co author or Oliver was a co author, that Joseph had help, do you see any feasible scenarios where Joseph had co authors?
John Turner [02:14:47] Sure, great question. So I am not at all persuaded by the Rigdon theories. And I know some people hold them really passionately and are really committed to them, but I just think there's no evidence that Signe Rigdon met Joseph smith before late 1830 or that Rigdon somehow conveyed a manuscript to Joseph Smith. So I see no Rigdon authorship. Harris and Cowdery authorship. That idea has never been as attractive to people who have looked into and written about this issue. I think nobody really holds Harris in such high regard that they want to assign authorship to him. And he didn't write, certainly didn't. He wasn't the ultimate author as far as we know. Cowdery has always struck me as an interesting idea of somebody who could have been a partner in some way. I don't think that theory's ever really gained traction anywhere. Khattery was better educated, he would have been a more facile writer. But I still think the simplest explanation is just that Joseph dictated the text, Cowdery wrote it down. Having somebody educated like Cowdery write it down, it's still kind of a rustic rough text, but maybe it made it a little bit smoother. That's about as far as I'd go with that.
John Dehlin [02:16:23] Okay. All right. So going on to the pages, getting lost. So Joseph and Martin produced 116 pages and then Martin starts haranguing Joseph to be able to take the 116 pages and show them to Lucy. Joseph looks into the stone. God says no two times and then God says yes a third time. I didn't know God could be just kind of like argued into doing what you wanted. That's an interesting.
The Lost 116 Pages and Their Aftermath
John Turner [02:16:54] You need to get, you need to know God more closely, John. But yeah, I mean there's biblical stories right, Where God changes his mind on occasion or is persuadable by human beings.
John Dehlin [02:17:07] Try to see the master of the universe going no, I mean it, no. Okay, I'll do it.
John Turner [02:17:16] That is a fun part of it. But God can be importuned, I guess. Right.
John Dehlin [02:17:22] Well anyway, so Martin takes the 116 pages to Lucy and somehow they, I mean, I get the sense from your book that Martin was kind of careless showing them the people he shouldn't have been showing them to, that he also picks a lock and, you know, and they were locked away, but ultimately they disappear. One thing that I was surprised to learn is that at first, first Martin beats Lucy with a rod, blaming her for destroying or hiding the manuscript. But then later he changes his story and says he doesn't believe that she's the one that got rid of him, which then means that beating was unnecessary. It is problematic. I don't think we've given enough attention that we want to. We as Mormons want to lift Martin Harris up as one of the honorable, venerable, if that's a word, you know, three witnesses to the Book of Mormon. But he freaking beat his wife with a rod. Like that's. I don't think we've really reconciled, you know, come to grips with that problem. But regardless, what do you want to say about kind of the disappearance of the under 16 pages?
John Turner [02:18:36] Yeah, I mean, so if we step back from all the arguments about the Book of Mormon, this is again, kind of a fun and zany story. Right. Because Harris, he's not that stable. He's not that reliable. Right. And so you can see exactly the train wreck that's coming. Right. Okay, you can have them, but only show them to this select number of people. What could possibly happen when Harris is a couple hundred miles away and you're not there to keep. Keep an eye on this situation. On the one hand, it might, this might also reveal that Joseph really did feel quite reliant on Harris at this time as a partner, as a benefactor. Right. Because why not just keep saying no? Why not? Why not let him do it? Maybe, you know, maybe Harris, you know, you talked about Joseph having to ask God a few times. Well, presumably Harris really has to beat. Wear down Joseph's resistance. Right. And maybe it's. I really need to be able to show these to Lucy Harris and I need to resolve this conflict and I've got to do that before I can move forward and support. Support this project more. So, I mean, I think that's possible. But yeah, you can see the train wrecks wreck coming. He shows it to anybody who wants to see it and he ruins his wife's bureau. And Harris apparently doesn't even realize the manuscript's gone until Joseph comes to town to retrieve it. I think in terms of Martin Harris beating Lucy Harris, we have for him beating her with a rod. After the manuscript's loss, there's one source that makes that claim. I included it because in general, I think there are some other sort of Palmyra recollections that Harris did beat his wife. We don't know exactly what happens at this moment. But, yeah, I think there's a serious character flaw there for sure. Harris does later state that he doesn't think that Lucy Harris is responsible for the manuscript's loss. So there's, you know, there's still some. There's still a lot that's not known about this episode. But, yeah, it is a crazy, zany part of the story. You know, there's this project on which Joseph has placed a lot of spiritual import. He seems to understand the book's publication as his economic strategy for the family. And nevertheless, he lets Harris go off and lose the manuscript. So you could see some failure of Joseph's judgment here too.
John Dehlin [02:21:55] I think it's interesting, as I read your account, that at some point Martin's been gone too long. Emma's about to have a baby. The baby dies, which is. It has to be tragic and disastrous for the family. Does the baby die before Joseph leaves to go confront Martin?
John Turner [02:22:19] So the infant dies either. Right. It's either stillborn or dies right after birth.
John Dehlin [02:22:26] And this is their first child.
John Turner [02:22:28] It's Emma's first pregnancy. And Emma apparently is very in a perilous state of health for a little bit of time afterwards. About two weeks later, she's recovered to the point where Joseph feels like he's able to travel. He's apparently not in a good state. The story is that by the time he reaches Manchester, which is where the Smith farm is, just around the Palmyra Manchester line, I mean, he's totally strung out. He's exhausted. He can barely, barely walk. So he's already at a really dark and. And troubled moment. It's unfortunate, I think, that he leaves Emma in those circumstances, it's not a good time to leave. And so he's.
John Dehlin [02:23:23] Yet he had spent a couple months on this manuscript. And I think he was viewing it as his possible livelihood.
John Turner [02:23:28] Absolutely. No, I mean, I think. And in that sense she probably would have agreed. He'd better go. Better go get it back.
John Dehlin [02:23:36] Her parents could have been attending to her.
John Turner [02:23:39] Absolutely. I mean, she was. She's just not left entirely on her own. But it's a tough time. It's a tough time to leave. I'm sure she's devastated as well. And then, of course, when the manuscript is missing, you know, I think Joseph is devastated. Not just because he's angry at Harris, but I'm sure he's really angry at himself for having let this out of his possession. I mean, this is clearly not a good idea.
John Dehlin [02:24:11] You write that he was weeping and grieving like an infant. That's a pretty dramatic reaction on Joseph Smith's part.
John Turner [02:24:17] Yeah, well, and I think it shows how much was at stake for him with, with this project. I mean, let's say he'd never been able to bring this to fruition. Right. We never would have heard about it. And as I've said before, publishing the Book of Mormon from the start seems like a totally harebrained scheme. But this had been his life since the previous September. Right. And so, yeah, I definitely understand the devastation.
John Dehlin [02:24:52] Do you think Lucy's guilty of hiding and destroying the 160 pages?
John Turner [02:24:56] I don't know. I mean, it is striking to me that, I mean, their marriage falls apart, Lucy and Martin Harris. Why does Martin Harris eventually defend her on that score? I'm not sure. Simply destroying it, though, I don't know. That doesn't necessarily make the best sense in terms of Lucy's motivation. I think in a way keeping a copy would have been. That would have been. She wanted to discredit Joseph. That might have been a better move. She could have stolen it and stashed it somewhere. On the other hand, again, we don't have a great alternative explanation except that perhaps Martin Harris is grossly irresponsible with it.
John Dehlin [02:25:48] Yeah. And it's possible she did hide it and then it got destroyed later or someone took it or, you know, we don't know.
John Turner [02:25:56] I mean, all we know is it's never turned up. Yeah, very unfortunately.
John Dehlin [02:25:59] Yeah. And I mean, you know, obviously the, the south park episode called all about the Mormons basically speaks of this entire incident like a smoking gun. Because if ever there were a chance, you know, okay, God's not going to let anyone see the golden plates, but they can heft a heavy box. God's going to show these characters, but they're characters that no one can read. Like, how is anyone ever going to know if Joseph actually has powers and if there's actually source plates that he's dictating from? Well, this is a big chance because Joseph and Martin could just go back and, you know, I think people would be willing to say, oh, there's some different spellings or there's some different word arrangements, but this is Joseph Smith and Martin's chance or God's chance to show that Joseph is actually Translating stuff from a source text because they could just reproduce a very similar text to the one that they didn't. And so, you know, according to south park, and I think a lot of reasonable people, the fact that they don't even try to reproduce the text, but instead Joseph has to create a whole different narrative and then he creates this backstory about there's different plates and there's the secular plates and then the religious ones. And now I'm going to switch to the religious ones. Some would say that just that's like real smoking gun evidence that they're not really translating, you know, by the gift and power of God, an ancient text from plate. Is that fair to say that's a reasonable smoking gun for somebody looking to disprove this whole story?
John Turner [02:27:40] I mean, I don't think it's faith affirming. I guess the other thing I'd say is for those people who think it's impossible that Joseph could have authored the text and he must have gotten it from somewhere else, this story perhaps is good for Joseph Smith as the author of the Book of Mormon, because if this came from somewhere else, it would presumably have been much easier to reproduce. So, I mean, I could, you know, I could see that. That argument as well. Yeah. No, I mean, it's.
John Dehlin [02:28:16] Again, you're saying that if Joseph had, let's just say, written all this out beforehand and was dictating it.
John Turner [02:28:22] Right.
John Dehlin [02:28:22] Then it could have been very easy for him just to read, redictate it, and it could have been very similar.
John Turner [02:28:28] Right. Or if he was using another manuscript as Solomon's Baldi manuscript, something like that, then it would have been easier to at least get close to the mark again. So, again, this is one reason I take pleasure in the quirks and saniness of this story. So if you step back from debates about the truth of the Book of Mormon, this is such a funky story. Right. And the topper is that manuscript has never surfaced. Right. So you have something that makes it all a lot more convoluted, which at the very least is going to make anybody, you know, sort of scratch his head. Right. And then there would have been apparently no need for precautions or translating from a different set of plates because there is no first manuscript to compare the final product to. So it's like totally, totally unnecessary and it's just another crooked path in the story that makes it a whole lot more fun.
John Dehlin [02:29:46] Yeah. What do you make of Joseph's response? Number one, that God took his power away. He didn't just say, all right, Martin, Come back and we'll do it. You know, what do you make of the fact that he needed months, said God took the plates away, said God took the spectacles away, said God took his power away. What do you make? What's your secular possible explanation for that being how Joseph responds to the 116 pages getting lost?
John Turner [02:30:18] So I'll tell you. My sort of secular explanation for this period of Joseph's life is he's in what for him is a not unprecedented but still somewhat unusual state of melancholy, despair and uncertainty. This is actually not that typical later on in terms of how Joseph responds to failure and setbacks. Usually this guy is unnaturally resilient, right? If, if he has a disaster or a setback, he sort of plunges ahead even more strongly. In this case, it takes him, I don't know, a good half year to sort of get back on his feet. I think he's full of a lot of self doubt about whether he is indeed going to pursue this project a second time. I don't think it was a certainty that he was going to. As I've said, the whole Book of Mormon project is sort of a harebrained economic scheme, right? To produce this hefty book and sell it or to even put forth a religious vision in this manner. It's really unusual, audacious, not that likely to succeed. And I think when the manuscript is lost, Joseph is deeply uncertain about whether he's going to see this through. I think stopping then was a bit of a possibility and finding a different new direction would have been a possibility, I think. You know, those stories about the spectacles and the plates coming and going, they're a bit nebulous. I think they mostly come from Lucy Mack Smith. I don't really think we, you know, I don't think we have a whole lot of insight into that, unfortunately. And then we do have this revelation, which I think is interesting. I think I'm not totally persuaded, but I'm open to the idea. I think it's from the scholar Ann Toews, who looks at that language in that summer 1828 revelation and isn't convinced that it's a dictation of a divine message. So it doesn't read exactly like a lot of Joseph's later revelations, which are clearly, in the words of Jesus Christ, it could again be an encounter with the angel, the personage, you know, who with whom Joseph had previously discussed could be a moroni. Let's just. We'll just say that for shorthand, right? Could be that and it could Sort of fit into this longer multi year pattern of encounter, chastisement, you know, seeing the plates, not being able to have them. So, you know, I'm not so sure that Joseph has really, you know, resolved what he's going to do and how he's going to proceed at this point.
John Dehlin [02:33:29] What is the gist of this revelation we're talking about or communication?
John Turner [02:33:34] Yeah, well, the gist is that Joseph needs to repent that he has transgressed, but there is an assurance that he still has this divine command. Thou art Joseph and thou were chosen. I think that that language is in there for better or worse. I haven't memorized Joseph's revelation, so it's something like that. And then there is some content discussion related to the manuscript and my people. I think the Nephites or something like that is the. What the speaker in the revelation says. So it could be God, it could be Jesus Christ, but it could be Moroni or a Nephite. It's unclear.
John Dehlin [02:34:33] It struck me it was interesting that God or Nephi or Moroni didn't condemn Martin and didn't condemn Lucy. Instead they put the blame on Joseph. Like, if Joseph's making all this up, why isn't he having a revelation saying, behold, Martin, you should not have crossed God and tempted God or Martin, your wife is diabolical. And you know, why did Joseph get the blame? And I know you don't know the answer to this, but that's interesting to me. Two things are interesting. One is that Joseph gets the blame for all of this happening even though it was Martin and Lucy's doing. But the second is this is for me is a very important pivot because up until this point, Joseph was a treasure digger. And then like a guy claiming to do translations of a book, maybe a bit of a seer or whatever, but now all of a sudden he's receiving direct revelation from God. And most importantly to me, using what he claims is direct revelation from God or angels to tell other people what they need to do. And that's a. I think of that as a power grab and I don't mean to put pernicious words upon it, but if you've listened to any Mormon stories, you'll know one of the most dangerous things I see is when somebody claims to be speaking for God because number one, how can anybody test it? And number two, all sorts of really horrible things have been done by people following those who claim to be speaking for God. So for me, this is a potentially dark and dangerous turn where Joseph starts to grab or gain or claim to have power that then gets used in really unhealthy ways. But do you have reactions to that? Do you hate that? Do you like that? Do you see it?
John Turner [02:36:26] So I see that actually even more strongly the next winter when Joseph does begin to dictate revelations which are in the words of Jesus Christ to people like I think his father. I think there's one for, you know, maybe a couple for Martin Harris the first half of the next year. I see that, you know, I see the summer 1828 as sort of still this transition and uncertain phase. By the next year when Joseph is dictating messages in the words of Jesus Christ for other people. That's a totally new model of maybe what we would call prophetic leadership. Right? Yeah, that is a really new departure and it's a new and a different thing for him. I think in the summer of 1828, he's just at this moment of self doubt and uncertainty, which as I said, I think it's unusual for him. As Joseph gets older, he doesn't have a lot of those moments. So when things really go wrong, say when he leaves Kirtland, you could see might want to take a couple of months or longer to regroup. Think about it, figure out your next move. Joseph heads right for far west and there's no lull. Right. This is going to build another community. And again later in life he's so resilient. There's no self doubt. I think as a young man, Joseph had a lot more self doubt and uncertainty. He wasn't sure of himself. He wasn't exactly sure which way to turn or what to do. Somehow by early 1820, get the timeline right. By early 1829, he's able to resolve those self doubts. And it's really interesting that he begins leading in this new way through revelation. I do see that as a turn in terms of whether it's dangerous for someone to lead by claiming to speak for God or through God with messages. That's a great question. I think, yes, on some level that's certainly not an uncommon form of religious leadership, regardless of the exact method. But one phrase that has kind of stuck out to me about Joseph and his revelations recently is Marshall McLuhan's phrase, the medium is the message. That's really true if you think about these revelations. The message is at least one of the messages is that Joseph is God's prophet and that he has an authority to lead in this manner.
Joseph's Recovery, Revelations, and Mosiah Priority
John Dehlin [02:39:50] Yeah, well, yeah, I certainly only just meant the seeds of what he would do later. But to me, this is sort of him. And you could say he's gaining confidence. There could be a cynical interpretation, which is he's testing how much he can get away with. He's testing various techniques of how to deal with the crisis and seeing how much he can put on God and how much by maybe sometimes using God as the bad cop, but Joseph is the good cop. Martin, I want to give you the 116 pages, but God's saying that I can't. Oh, Martin, look, you prevailed on me. I convinced God to let you take the pages. Now God's saying, you need to stop your foolishness. I'm getting punished, Martin. God's mad at me. Now, a cynical view would say this is a way of him learning how to manipulate people by claiming angelic or divine intervention. And he's seeing what he can get away with and how claiming revelation might allow him to deal with catastrophe but also. Work with people to achieve his objectives going forward.
John Turner [02:41:09] A couple of interesting things, as far as I know, and I could be forgetting something. I don't think he sees Martin Harris from the time that the manuscripts lost, which is summer, right? Maybe still June, maybe early July, 1828. I don't think he sees him until sometime late the following winter. So he could have. Right, dictated one of these, you know, condemnatory. He could have dictated a condemnatory revelation for Harris or a message of encouragement or something. There's really no contact, which is also sort of an interesting thing. Joseph doesn't really attend to that relationship, which is still important in terms of the Book of Mormon publication. He kind of just lets that slide for months, and maybe again, he's not sure what to do about it. Second thing that strikes me as interesting is that when Joseph does begin to produce revelations in the beginning of 1829, the people who are close to him, they accept them, right? There's not. Wow, this is unusual. Why are you doing this now, Joseph? These family members and other supporters who are close to him, they seem to accept this as a next step in keeping with, I guess you could say, a spiritual authority that maybe they've already granted to him. Because, you know, if, let's say, I was tight with the pastor of my local church and I generally accepted his spiritual leadership, and then suddenly he showed me a revelation that I was supposed to do something. Wow, where'd this come from? But, you know, again, speaks probably to the fact that we don't have that many sources for this time period. But as far as we know, when Joseph begins to Produce these texts, they're accepted.
John Dehlin [02:43:18] Yeah. Really quickly, before we kind of wrap up. Are you aware of the idea of the Mosiah priority as it relates to the translation?
John Turner [02:43:29] Yes. So I'm going to have to. I'm clearly not as good at keeping everything in my head as Joseph Smith, but I believe that's the theory that when Joseph begins the second attempt, he begins with the book of Mosiah, gets to the end, which is where the
John Dehlin [02:43:49] 116 pages left off. Correct.
John Turner [02:43:52] And then gets to the end, and then at that point resolves through revelation, how to proceed with the missing portion. Right.
John Dehlin [02:44:02] And is that. Is that in and of itself potentially condemnatory? Like, wouldn't that sort of assume that he had something already planned out or written out? So he. So he says, I've already invested so much in what I've already done to write the whole book. I'm just going to finish what I started, finish the rest of the book, and then go back and figure out how to fill in the missing pages. Why else wouldn't he just start over? What does it imply if he re begins his translating process where he left off, except this time with Oliver Cowdery and Martin? What does that imply to you?
John Turner [02:44:40] Yeah, I mean, I guess to me, again, it implies. And I guess this is sort of in keeping, to some extent with the story that Joseph tells. I think it implies he doesn't know what to do in terms of resolving the issue of the lost pages and what to do about that. And in that sense, I guess maybe the simplest thing to do is to plunge ahead and then figure out what to do.
John Dehlin [02:45:06] But plunge ahead with what if he's not actually reading off golden plates and translating? Then plunge ahead with what if he starts with Mosiah and continues. That assumes either in his brain or somewhere on paper, he's already got this written out. Right. Doesn't that imply that.
John Turner [02:45:23] I think it implies that he's got the story worked out in his brain. Yeah. I mean, for me, it implies that. I'm sure it implies other things for other people. I mean, I agree that on some level, it's sort of a weird choice, because maybe it would make more logical sense that it'd be easier to simply start over from the beginning. On the other hand, if you sort of start in the. Well, maybe it's not quite the middle, but almost the middle. Right. You have the advantage when you write the early portions of having clarity about the end. So maybe there'd be some that. Maybe that would be beneficial. As an author, I Don't know. Honestly, I haven't thought about that too deeply, John. And I don't know that Mosiah priority has necessarily persuaded everyone. I did look into it the last time I worked my way through the Book of Mormon, which was a few years ago. And, I mean, it seemed like a reasonable theory to me, but I certainly wouldn't stake my reputation on it.
John Dehlin [02:46:49] Okay, so part of your answer is it's not necessarily a fact that Joseph began with Oliver Cowdery, starting with Mosiah, finished, and then came back.
John Turner [02:47:02] I'm trying to remember when he dictates the revelation. I mean, I think it's a revelation that resolves how you should deal with the missing portion. And I'm trying to. I don't remember. I'll refresh my memory for next time. Exactly when that comes.
John Dehlin [02:47:22] All right, well. And again, we're asking so much of you because, like, even me, I've been studying this stuff for 30 years. Right. In different ways. Or then you look at a scholar with Dan Vogel. That's. That's, like, been his heavy emphasis for his entire lifetime. This is just one of many things you've pursued, one of many books you've written and researched, and we're asking you to have this unreasonable memory and curiosity around details that just wasn't in scope with the book when you wrote it. Right.
John Turner [02:47:59] I mean, that's true, but, I mean, history is fun in the details, so I. I love the detailed questions. It forces me to think. Think more about things. And let's face it, we are not the only one discussing these details. I mean, a lot of people love to get into the weeds of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon. And so. Yeah, no, I. I welcome that. This has been a really fun conversation, John.
Closing Thoughts and What Comes Next
John Dehlin [02:48:27] All right, well, that kind of takes us through the end of chapter three of your book, which means what's next? Is it Oliver Cowdery and him completing the Book of Mormon and then the witnesses?
John Turner [02:48:39] So I think we actually made it through four chapters, which we don't work as quickly as Joseph Smith. Right. I think that the next chapter is on Oliver Cowdery and the witnesses. And then I have a pretty short sort of summative chapter on the Book of Mormon and how it pertains to Joseph Smith's identity.
John Dehlin [02:49:03] And we forgot to mention that even though Martin Harris kind of lost his ability to participate in the Book of Mormon translation process, Joseph does promise him there's a chance he could still be a witness, one of the three witnesses to the golden plates. So he's left with that hope that maybe he's not totally cut out. Right.
John Turner [02:49:24] Absolutely. Although my. I would also say that maybe I'm not sure about the spring of 1829. I don't think that Joseph ever really trusts Harris again. There's more tension in their relationship going forward.
John Dehlin [02:49:51] And you said it broke Martin and Lucy Harris's relationship. This was the undoing, the final undoing of their.
John Turner [02:50:00] I don't know that the loss of the manuscript was the final undoing. Harris's decision to bankroll the Book of Mormon's publication. I don't even know if that's the final undoing either, but I think that's the bigger tension point.
John Dehlin [02:50:13] Okay. All right. All right. Well, it's been really fun to have you come to Salt Lake to come into the studio to hang out face to face. And you know, this is almost a three hour episode. So you're such a good, you know, such a good sport to be willing to give us this much time and attention. And I'm just going to go ahead and really quickly, please buy this book, the Rise and Fall of an American Prophet Joseph Smith by John G. Turner. Buy it at Benchmark. If you don't want to buy a benchmark or if they run out, you can buy it at Amazon pre order. You can buy it from Yale University Press directly. Let's make this an international bestseller. If you value this exchange, we would love you to financially donate to support John and the time he's willing to invest with us. You can go to donorbox.org Joseph Smith and contribute to the series. We're giving half of the donations to John for as long as he's engaging in the project. We've probably had 12 or 15 people. Like, it's kind of mind blowing. Tens of thousands of people are enjoying this series and only like a dozen or 15 have actually contributed to it. Please consider contributing to it so that we can cover production costs, but also so that we can reward this generous and thoughtful and super reputable historian with the time he's willing to invest with us. Please do donate. Please do support us. There is a risk that we'll stop earlier than we would want to without that support. So please do. Thanks to all the regular Mormon stories donors and listeners. We couldn't do this without our just bread and butter donors. So thank you. You are making this possible. Please like this episode. Please subscribe to this channel. Please comment we love your feedback. Please comment on the episode on YouTube and Spotify. Please email us with your feedback. You can also email John. Is it John G. Turner Gmail?
John Turner [02:52:21] What is the JG Turner52JG Turner52mail.com?
John Dehlin [02:52:27] That's how people are. People emailing you?
John Turner [02:52:30] I get some emails.
John Dehlin [02:52:31] Okay.
John Turner [02:52:31] Yeah.
John Dehlin [02:52:31] Okay.
John Turner [02:52:33] I love hearing from people.
John Dehlin [02:52:34] And if you have questions or feedback or criticisms or if you really like this approach, we want to hear from you as well. Any final words you want to say, John?
John Turner [02:52:43] For today, I'll just say it was really fun to be 8ft away from you instead of, you know, looking at it through screens. That's great, too, but fun to be in your space and fun to be talking with you.
John Dehlin [02:52:58] All right. All right. Well, we'll at least come back for episode number four. I think there's a pretty good chance of that. So enjoy MHA the Mormon History association. And we look forward to having you back again, John Turner.
John Turner [02:53:12] Thanks, John.
John Dehlin [02:53:13] Thanks, everyone, for joining us today on Mormon Stories Podcast. We appreciate everything. Be good to each other, be kind to each other, and we'll see you all again soon on another episode of Mormon Stories Podcast.
Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.
Thumbnail Credits: Image of Martin Harris from LDSDaily.com; Backgroung image from stock photos
One Response
There were enough people in that day who were not enamored with the multitude of Christian sects that some identified themselves as Deist but others were described as “seekers”. It seems that Harris was likely one of those. If so that would have predisposed him to believe the message of Smith.