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).