The Pattern of Revision

History That Keeps Changing

Every organization occasionally updates its understanding of its own history as new documents emerge or scholarship advances. But the LDS church exhibits a distinctive pattern: systematic revision of its founding narratives, doctrines, and historical claims—often without acknowledging that changes have been made. Members taught one version of history discover decades later that the church now tells a different story.

This pattern matters because the LDS church claims prophetic authority. If that claim is valid, we would expect consistency—or at least transparency about changes. Instead, we find a recurring cycle: teach a narrative confidently, quietly revise it when problems emerge, and then act as if the current version was always the official position.

The First Vision Accounts

The Official Narrative

The First Vision is foundational to LDS faith. According to the canonized account (Joseph Smith—History 1:15-20), in spring 1820, fourteen-year-old Joseph Smith was confused by competing religious claims. After reading James 1:5, he retired to a grove to pray. There, God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him as two separate personages. He was told to join no existing church, for all were wrong and their creeds were an abomination.

This vision is cited as evidence that the Father and Son are separate beings (contradicting the Trinity), that all existing churches had apostatized, and that Joseph Smith was called as a prophet to restore the true church. LDS missionaries worldwide share this story as the beginning of the Restoration.

The Earlier Accounts

The LDS church now acknowledges that Joseph Smith left multiple accounts of the First Vision that differ in significant details. This acknowledgment came primarily through the Gospel Topics Essays published in 2013-2015, after decades of these discrepancies being raised by critics.

The 1832 Account: The earliest known account, written in Joseph Smith's own hand, describes only one personage appearing—the Lord (Jesus)—not the Father and Son together. It mentions forgiveness of sins as the primary message, not the apostasy of all churches. Smith's age and motivation for praying also differ from the later official account.

The 1835 Account: Describes "many angels" in addition to two personages, details not present in other versions. The identity of the personages is less specific.

The 1838 Account: This is the canonized version, written eighteen years after the alleged event. It includes specific details about the apostasy of all churches and the appearance of both Father and Son—details absent from earlier accounts.

The Book of Mormon Translation

The Traditional Narrative

For generations, Latter-day Saints were taught that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon using the Urim and Thummim—ancient interpreters that came with the golden plates. Church artwork depicted Smith studying the plates directly, often with Oliver Cowdery writing at a table nearby. The image conveyed scholarly translation from an ancient record.

The Revised Narrative

The church now acknowledges what historians had long documented: Joseph Smith frequently translated by placing a seer stone in a hat, burying his face in the hat to block out light, and dictating the words that appeared to him. The golden plates were often not even present during translation—sometimes they were hidden elsewhere or covered with a cloth.

This seer stone was the same one Smith had used earlier for treasure seeking— activities for which he was brought to court in 1826. The church now displays this stone and has published photographs of it, a dramatic reversal from decades of avoiding the subject.

The shift in narrative is remarkable. Members who mentioned the seer stone and hat method were once considered to be repeating "anti-Mormon lies." Now the church itself teaches this version. But the transition happened quietly, without acknowledging that the previous narrative was misleading.

The Tight vs. Loose Translation Problem

The seer stone method implies a "tight" translation— Smith reading exact words that appeared miraculously. Witnesses described him seeing text appear, dictating it, and not continuing until the scribe had it recorded correctly.

But a tight translation creates problems: Why are there so many errors (grammatical, factual, and doctrinal) that required later correction? Why does the text reproduce King James Bible translation errors? Why does it include nineteenth-century language and concerns? If God was providing the exact words, why were thousands of changes needed?

The church sometimes shifts to a "loose" translation theory when defending against these problems—Smith received ideas and expressed them in his own words. But this contradicts the eyewitness descriptions and raises questions about the reliability of the text.

The Book of Abraham

The Original Claim

In 1835, Joseph Smith purchased Egyptian mummies and papyri from a traveling exhibitor. He declared that one of the scrolls contained writings of the patriarch Abraham, written "by his own hand, upon papyrus." He subsequently produced the Book of Abraham, now canonized in the Pearl of Great Price.

The Book of Abraham contains significant LDS doctrines not found in the Book of Mormon: the pre-mortal existence of spirits, the council of the gods, the star Kolob near God's throne, and other distinctive teachings. It also includes "facsimiles"—reproductions of images from the papyri with Smith's explanations of their meaning.

The Egyptological Problem

In 1966, portions of the original papyri were rediscovered in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Egyptologists—including LDS scholars—examined them and reached a unanimous conclusion: the papyri are common Egyptian funerary texts (the Book of Breathings), dating to roughly the first century BC, and have nothing to do with Abraham.

The facsimiles are scenes from Egyptian burial practices. Smith's explanations of them are completely incorrect. What he identified as "Abraham sitting upon Pharaoh's throne" is actually the Egyptian god Osiris. What he called "Abraham in Egypt" is a standard scene of the deceased being prepared for the afterlife.

This is not a matter of scholarly disagreement. Every qualified Egyptologist who has examined the papyri—Mormon and non-Mormon—agrees that Smith's "translation" bears no relationship to the actual content of the documents.

Doctrinal Revisions

Race and Priesthood

For over a century, the LDS church denied priesthood ordination to Black men and temple ordinances to Black members of both sexes. This was taught as doctrine, rooted in the pre-mortal existence. Black people, church leaders taught, had been less valiant in the war in heaven and were thus cursed with dark skin and priesthood restriction.

Brigham Young taught that this curse would not be lifted until the resurrection of all other people. Yet in 1978, President Spencer W. Kimball announced a revelation extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members. The church now disavows all previous racial theories as "not doctrine."

But they were taught as doctrine by prophets and apostles for over a century. The racial restriction was not presented as policy but as divine curse traceable to the pre-mortal existence and to Cain. How can teachings proclaimed as doctrine by multiple prophets be suddenly declared "not doctrine"?

The Lamanite Identity

Until 2006, the introduction to the Book of Mormon stated that the Lamanites are "the principal ancestors of the American Indians." Generations of members were taught that Native Americans descended primarily from the Israelites of the Book of Mormon.

DNA evidence definitively showed that Native Americans descended from Asian populations who crossed the Bering land bridge—not from Middle Eastern Israelites. In response, the church quietly changed the introduction to say Lamanites are "among the ancestors" of American Indians. This subtle change represents a massive theological retreat, but it was made without fanfare or explanation.

Temple Ceremony Changes

The temple endowment ceremony has undergone multiple revisions since its introduction in 1842. Significant changes include:

• Removal of the penalties—mimed throat-slitting, disemboweling, and other gestures symbolizing death for revealing temple secrets (removed 1990)
• Removal of elements depicting Protestant ministers as servants of Satan (removed 1990)
• Changes to the women's covenant—women originally covenanted to obey their husbands as their husbands obeyed God; this was modified in 2019
• Removal of the five points of fellowship embrace through the veil (removed 1990)
• Various modifications to the creation narrative and dialogue

These are not minor adjustments. If the endowment was revealed by God to Joseph Smith, why does it keep changing? The 1990 changes were especially dramatic— eliminating elements that had been practiced for 150 years. Members who went through before and after 1990 experienced substantially different ceremonies.

The Implications of Revision

Prophetic Reliability

The LDS church claims to be led by living prophets who receive divine guidance. If this claim is true, we would expect prophetic teachings to be reliable and consistent—or at minimum, we would expect transparency when corrections are needed.

Instead, we find a pattern where prophets taught doctrines confidently (racial restrictions, Adam-God, blood atonement, the Lamanite-Indian connection), only for later prophets to disavow these teachings as opinion or error. The current prophet is always reliable—until the next prophet revises what he taught.

This creates an impossible epistemological situation. How can a member know which current teachings will be disavowed in fifty years? If Brigham Young was speaking as a man when he taught about race, how do we know Russell Nelson isn't speaking as a man about current matters?

Historical Honesty

The church's handling of its history raises questions about institutional honesty. For decades, members who raised historical concerns were told they were reading "anti-Mormon lies"—the seer stone, Joseph's polyandry, the multiple First Vision accounts. Now the church acknowledges these things, but without apologizing for dismissing earlier questioners as faithless troublemakers.

The Gospel Topics Essays, while representing progress toward honesty, are buried on the church website and not incorporated into standard curriculum. Many members remain unaware of them. The church seems to want credit for disclosure while not actually ensuring members learn the disclosed information.

A Foundation of Sand

The pattern of revision in LDS history reveals a troubling reality: the church's foundational narratives have shifted significantly over time. The First Vision accounts evolved. The translation story changed. The Book of Abraham cannot be what Joseph Smith claimed. Doctrines once declared essential have been abandoned. Temple ceremonies keep being modified.

This pattern does not prove that every LDS teaching is false. But it should prompt serious questions about prophetic reliability and institutional honesty. If the church has gotten so many things wrong—and then quietly changed its story— what else might be unreliable?

For our Mormon friends who are discovering these patterns, the experience can be disorienting and painful. A lifetime of trust in prophetic leadership begins to crumble. We must be present with compassion, not triumphalism, as they process what they're learning.

And we can point them to a better foundation. The gospel of Jesus Christ does not require constant revision because it was true from the beginning. The Bible has withstood centuries of scrutiny because it honestly records what happened. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever—not a shifting foundation but an unchanging rock.