CES Letter – Comprehensive Video Notes

Background of the CES Letter & Author’s Approach

• Letter length: 83 pages; designed so that “you can read it in a day.”
• Licensing: Released under Creative Commons Attribution to encourage free distribution.
• Author (Jeremy Runnells) cites his deafness: writing became his primary, precise language; aims at concise, direct style (“boom-boom-boom”).
• Acknowledges intellectual debt to earlier critics/researchers—especially Gerald & Sandra Tanner (“Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?”) and others who exposed issues in the 1960s.
• Purpose when written: address a CES (Church Educational System) director and Runnells’s family.
• Guiding quotation he chose (J. Reuben Clark): “If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation; if we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.”

Book of Mormon Concerns (Top Three + More)

1. 1769 King James Version (KJV) errors
   • $17$ explicit wording errors unique to the 1769 edition are replicated in the Book of Mormon (BofM).
   • Analogy: 1769 errors = $9\,\text{mm}$ shell casings proving a 19th-century source.
2. Sermon on the Mount (SotM) duplication
   • Whole SotM appears verbatim in 3 Nephi despite being Jesus’s speech in Palestine.
   • Joseph Smith’s later JST “corrections” of SotM never appear in BofM, implying BofM reflects pre-correction KJV.
3. Italicized KJV filler words
   • 17th-century translators added italic words to smooth English; those same italic strings (e.g., 7-word sequences) appear in BofM—problematic for an allegedly ancient text.

Additional items briefly flagged:

• DNA evidence vs. Lamanite claim (referenced to Simon Southerton).
• Anachronisms: horses, steel, tapirs (Daniel Peterson’s suggestion), coins with unknown names.
• Inconsistent BofM geography (Werner Hauck model mapped onto upstate NY; names like Lehi, Rama, etc.).
• Comoros/Moroni parallel: Island of Comoros (Arabic “Komorrah”) with port Moroni—famous in Captain Kidd folklore; Kidd stories circulated in Joseph Smith’s treasure-digging milieu.

Translation Method Shift

• Historical record: primary translation of published BofM done with a seer stone in a hat, not by using physical plates.
• Stone originally found in 1822 well-digging on William Chase’s property; ordinary rock, not Nephite artifact.
• Words allegedly appeared on stone; tight dictation (word didn’t disappear until pronounced correctly).
• Plates used only during lost 116 pages incident (Martin Harris)—if at all.

Alternative 19th-Century Source Texts

• View of the Hebrews (Ethan Smith, $1825$) – parallel migration narrative, lost records, Hebrew origins, etc.
• The Late War (Gilbert J. Hunt, $1819$) – pseudo-biblical style: “Now it came to pass…”; chiasmus; themes of righteous vs. wicked, standard of liberty, etc.
• First Book of Napoleon (Modeste Gruau, $1809$) – biblical cadences mirroring BofM rhetoric.
• Spaulding manuscript referenced but not emphasized.
• “Everything is a remix”: Runnells & Johnson brothers argue Joseph used multiple overlapping sources plus KJV.

Possible Collaboration Hypothesis

• Oliver Cowdery: scribe for both BofM (1829–30) and Book of Abraham (1835-36); promoted “Philosophy of a Future State.”
• Motive for Cowdery’s later silence: preserving legal reputation; admitting fraud would destroy livelihood.

First Vision & Priesthood Narratives – Timeline Tensions

• Revival year: official narrative says $1820$; historical data place regional revival $1824$.
• Accounts:
  • $1832$ handwriting: Single “Lord” (Trinitarian view), purpose = forgiveness of sins, Joseph already concluded churches were wrong.
  • $1838$ narrative (published $1842$): Two personages, purpose = which church to join, “never entered into my heart” they were all wrong.
• Age discrepancy: $14$ vs. $15$ years.
• Attempt to join Methodist Sunday School $1828$ (8 yr after vision) contradicts “all churches abomination.”

Priesthood restoration:

• David Whitmer: claimed he first heard of Aaronic/Melchizedek priesthood after $1834$.
• $1833$ Book of Commandments lacked priesthood stories later back-dated into $1835$ Doctrine & Covenants.
• Contradiction with Book of Mormon: Alma baptizes without laying-on-hands authority; BofM omits priesthood offices/names.

Doctrinal Evolution Snapshot

• Early BofM & $1832$ documents: Trinitarian language (God = Christ).
• By late 1830s: separate corporeal Father & Son, reflected in altered scripture passages, lectures on Faith edits, etc.
• Temple marriage, endowment, celestial plural marriage absent from BofM—introduced only in Nauvoo era.

Translation Track Record Beyond BofM

• Book of Abraham: Egyptian papyri translations proven incorrect; facsimile restorations used random glyphs rotated/flipped.
• Kinderhook plates $1843$: Smith stated they contained Jaredite descendant history; plates later shown
  100\% 19th-century hoax.
• Summary graphic cited: of 3 claimed ancient translations — Abraham, Kinderhook, BofM — only BofM lacks original for verification.

Polygamy / Polyandry Issues

• >30 wives; $2$ age $14$ (Helen Mar Kimball, Nancy Winchester).
• 
  D&C\,132 justification = “multiply and replenish … raise up seed.” Therefore intent = sexual.
• Violated 1835 D&C statement mandating monogamy.
• Coercion tactics: salvation promises to families; threats of angels with drawn sword; parents pressured daughters.
• Polyandry: sealed to women already civilly married (e.g., Zina Huntington, etc.).

Cultural & Treasure-Digging Context

• Early 19th-century New England rife with Captain Kidd treasure legends, divining rods, seer stones.
• Smith family ran treasure-digging business; Joseph employed peep-stone for locating silver/gold for neighbors (for pay).
• Understanding this milieu is key to evaluating witness testimony & restoration origins.

Witnesses – Reliability Questions

• Three Witnesses never described seeing plates with natural eyes; many accounts describe “spiritual eyes,” “vision,” or plate-handling covered with cloth.
• David Whitmer letter: no knowledge of priesthood restoration events until mid-1830s; revelation narratives evolved later.

Letter’s Intended Function & Impact

• Not exhaustive scholarship—acts as a launch pad directing readers to primary sources.
• Runnells has received thousands of emails; common themes: marital stress, personal angst, gratitude for concise issue map.
• Motivational core: “save marriages & families” by promoting transparent history; personal childhood trauma over parents’ divorce makes him sensitive.

FAIR’s (LDS Apologetics) Response & Runnells’s Counter-Response

• FAIR tactics identified:
  • Straw-man arguments (e.g., map access re: Comoros instead of Kidd folklore).
  • Obfuscation & excessive complexity to deter lay readers (“read books by scholars first…”).
  • Personal characterization (attention-seeking, relying on anti-Mormon sources).
• Runnells’s reply (“Debunking FAIR’s Debunking”): more time-intensive than original CES Letter; includes donut graphs:
  • Large proportion of CES issues unaddressed or conceded by FAIR; minority directly disputed.
• FAIR silently altered web pages after his critique, validating some corrections.

Emotional & Practical Aftermath for Author

• Personal stress: late-night work, emotional weight of correspondents’ crises.
• Public reaction largely positive; few hostile emails (some from fundamentalists or ultra-believers).
• No security fears; perceives himself as ordinary person unexpectedly thrust into spotlight.
• Continues community service (e.g., Father-son campouts, helping with moves) despite disaffection.

Philosophical / Ethical Themes

• Transparency vs. “faith-promoting history”: call for institutional honesty.
• Appeal-to-authority fallacy: presence of believing intellectuals ≠ evidence of truth (analogous intellectuals in Islam, Catholicism).
• Simplicity of Gospel contrasted with requirement for advanced apologetic complexity—raises question $\text{Is\ confusion\ a\ sign\ of\ divine\ authorship?}$

Numerical & Chronological Reference Quick-List

• Letter length: $83$ pages.
• 1769 KJV unique errors: $17$ in BofM.
• BofM timeline ending $421\,\text{AD}$ yet includes 18th-century KJV forms.
• Lost pages: $116$.
• Key publication years: $1809$ (Napoleon), $1811$ (Joseph Sr. dream), $1819$ (Late War), $1820$ (official First Vision), $1822$ (stone found), $1825$ (View of Hebrews), $1828$ (Methodist class attempt), $1832$ (handwritten vision), $1833$ (BoC), $1835$ (D&C with priesthood), $1838$ (new vision draft), $1842$ (Times and Seasons publication), $1875$ (monogamy clause removed).