The "Mormon Bible"

An article has been going the rounds of the papers about “the original Mormon Bible.” It started in the Detroit Post and Tribune, a reporter of which interviewed Major J.H. Gilbert, of Palmyra, who claims to have set up in type nearly all the matter for the first edition of the “Book of Mormon,” and worked it off on a hand press. He has the unbound sheets as he took them from the press, and exhibits them as a great curiosity.

There is a great deal of nonsence talked about this first edition. It is said to be a very rare book, and in many respects essentially different from the subsequent editions. There are quite a number of copies of the first edition of the book in this Territory, and its contents are substantially identical with all other editions of the work. The chief difference is in the printing and binding, which are better in the later editions than in the first.

The article to which we refer states that “nobody but Joe himself ever saw the golden tablets.” It is evident that the writer of this statement is ignorant of the history of the book, and of the facts in the case, and that he has never examined the work about which he talks so positively. The book is prefaced with the testimony of Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris, who state with, words of truth and soberness that an angel of God came down from heaven and showed them the plates, and the engravings thereon, while the voice of God declared to them that the record was translated by the gift and power of God. And. lest this testimony might be objected to, as partaking too much of the supernatural, the testimony of eight witnesses is appended who state that Joseph Smith had shown them the plates, which they handled with their bands. Thus eight persons saw the plates naturally, and three others in addition to Joseph Smith testify that they were exhibited to them by the power of God.

It has been represented that the three last named witnesses subsequently apostatized and denied their former statements. This is as grossly incorrect as the allegations that there were no witnesses. Those men, having been greatly favored, were tempted in a corresponding degree, and failing to endure were severed from the Church. But they never denied their statement concerning the plates and the heavenly manifestations in relation to them on the contrary they always maintained the truth of their testimony under every circumstance. Two of them—Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris—returned to the Church, and died within its fold reiterating their first testimony to the last. The article in the Post and Tribune, states that Martin Harris did not follow the “Mormons” eastward but “remained near his home where he died two years ago.” This is also inaccurate, Martin Harris came to Utah asking forgiveness for his faults, was received into the church, and died in Cache Valley in this Territory, Bearing testimony of the truth of the “Book of Mormon.” David Whitmer has not yet returned to the fellowship of the church But, like the other two witnesses, when questioned concerning the “Book of Mormon” repeats his former statement in the firmest manner, and, so far as we are aware, and we have conversed with many persons who have interrogated him, he has never denied his original testimony in the least degree.

There is one point connected with this argument about the expulsion from the Church of the three witnesses, which our opponents do not appear to perceive. If these persons were in league with Joseph Smith, to palm upon the world as a divine revelation a work written or adopted with Intension to deceive, would the chief conspirator have the temerity to excommunicate his chief associates in crime, on their infraction of the rules of his Church? Does not the fact of his dealing with them as with ordinary members prove, if it proves anything, that the notion of a conspiracy between those four persons is a fallacy? And if they were not conspirators and deceivers, does it not follow that their testimony is true?

The article closes with a repetition of the Solomon Spaulding story, which has been so often refuted during the last thirty years or more that we will not waste space upon the matter further than this: The connection between the supposed Spaulding and his manuscript about the “lost ten tribes,” and Joseph Smith and the “Book of Mormon” is always made to be Sidney Rigdon. He is represented as a printer in the Pittsburg office, where the manuscript was said to have been deposited, and to have cooked it up with Joseph Smith into the “Book of Mormon.” Passing by the fact that the “Book of Mormon” is not a history of the “lost ten tribes” and only mentions them once, and that incidentally, it is well known that Sidney Rigdon never saw Joseph Smith, nor had any connection with this Church until after the “Book of Mormon” had been printed for some time. Sidney Rigdon, a Campbellite preacher, was converted to “Mormonism” by Parley P. Pratt, and the latter was not baptized until September, 1830, several months after the Book was published. Elder Pratt first saw the Prophet Joseph Smith at Manchester, New York, and bring sent by him on a mission to the Western States, on his way met Sidney Rigdon in Ohio, to whom he presented the “Book of Mormon,” and whom, with many other Campbellites he convinced of its truth. This is well established history.

Those who desire to devise or accept some plausible story of the origin of the “Book of Mormon,” should be shy of such silly inventions as the Spaulding nonsense. Yet it is copied from paper to paper, and standard Cyclopaedias print it with the utmost gravity. When the story was started it was exploded and so entirely shattered that its inventors never touched it again. But of late years it has been picked up and patched together, as the only means by which the production of such a work as the “Book of Mormon” by an educated youth can be accounted for. All that any person need do to disprove the Spaulding story to his own entire satisfaction is, to hear it carefully, and then read the “Book of Mormon.”

The testimony of the witnesses of that book cannot be gainsayed nor disproved. They could have no object in making it except to tell the truth. It was of no pecuniary benefit to them. They had no prospect of reaping any reward for it but persecution and contumely. And it stands to day unproven and unshaken as a witness to this generation of the work commenced for the consummation of all things, and of the reopening of the long lost communication of man with his Maker. The “Mormon Bible” is the same Bible that all Christian sects profess. to believe. The “Book of Mormon” corroborates and supports the Jewish record, but does not supplant it, and both unite in bearing testimony to all nations, Jew and Gentile, that Jesus is the Christ, and that the day of His everlasting dominion is near at hand.—Deseret News.