In the ongoing pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, let's discuss an episode of the Church History Matters podcast celebrating Moroni Day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LgnC0OT8Mo
We listened to the podcast during a long drive. Overall, it's a wonderful episode. The more we help people focus on Moroni's visit, the better. The hosts and guest in this podcast offered valuable suggestions on how to celebrate Moroni Day. I offered another suggestion here:
https://www.lettervii.com/2026/09/moroni-day-2026-how-to-celebrate.html
Suggestions for improvement. The episode would have been much better had the hosts and guests followed the FAITH format by starting with facts and then explaining their various assumptions, inferences, and theories.
For example, in the show notes they pose these questions:
Why did Moroni appear to Joseph Smith? What did Moroni tell him? What can we learn by comparing Joseph Smith’s accounts of these events? And why has September 21 become a meaningful day for remembering Moroni and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon? Scott, Casey, and Jack Welch dive into the historical accounts, the significance of Moroni’s message, and the remarkable connection between an ancient prophet and the Restoration of the gospel in the latter days.
But in the episode, they completely ignore the earliest and most detailed account of Moroni's visit, along with other relevant historical accounts.
We wonder why this continues. Perhaps the graphic shown above is a clue. It depicts Moroni in a Mesoamerican (M2C) setting. M2C seems to be the reason why these awesome Book of Mormon and Church history scholars continue to promote a narrative that ignores and contradicts the historical record.
This is why I suggest an improvement. How about presenting all the facts and then explain your assumptions and inferences so the audience can make informed decisions?
Here are some specific examples from the transcript. Original in blue, my comments in red.
The chastisement:
33:16 September 21st, there's just this rhythm of September 21st. In fact, you talk about him being Joseph's tutor or his coach. I just looked up, okay, what happened on September 21st, 1826.
He doesn't say where he looked it up, but apparently it was not in the Joseph Smith Papers. Presumably it was in someone else's narrative, such as from Saints, Volume 1, which is misleading on this event. This is a good example of why, when we "look something up," we should look at the original sources and not rely on Saints. Especially on a podcast about Church history presented by experts.
So the anniversary that we're celebrating this year, this comes from Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph's mother. She said that September 21st, 1826, Joseph was late coming home.
Actually, she said this happened around January of 1827. Lucy's statement: "the next January [Joseph] returned with his wife, in good health and fine spirits. Not long after this his father had occasion to send him to Manchester on business...."
Here is the link to Lucy's history.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/110
Note: there is an earlier version of Lucy's history that includes this account with less detail, but it was all lined out and replaced with the later version linked above. Here is the earlier version:
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/59
So, he's he's gone and the whole family's worried about him. And she said that he
33:43
came home and his father ran up to him said, "Joseph, why have you stayed so late? Has anything happened to you? We've been in distress about you these 3 hours." And then she writes, "After Joseph recovered himself a little, he said, "Father, I have had the severest chastisement that I've ever had in my life." And she said that Joseph's dad got a little angry. She said his father was so hasty and indignant like, "Well, who who chewed you out for 3 hours?
34:08
Who's been doing this?" And Joseph pauses and says, "Father, it was the angel of the Lord."
Here is the actual quotation, with the part they omitted in bold: “it was the angel of the Lord— as I passed by the hill of Cumorah, where the plates are, the angel of the Lord met me and said, that
Because of M2C, we all can see why they omitted the reference to Cumorah, but that omission is not good history. It doesn't honor Moroni to pretend Moroni never identified the hill as Cumorah, contrary to all the historical accounts.
This is who we're... He says, "I have been negligent that the time has now come when the record should be brought forth and that I must be up and doing that I must set myself about the things which God has commanded me to do." So, this is the 200th anniversary of Joseph Smith's three-hour chastisement from the angel.
As we saw, September is not the 200th anniversary of this chastisement, but no one in the podcast corrected the error.
The translation:
28:28
First 116 pages of
translation are lost. Remember, Moroni actually comes back and visits Joseph
Smith. This is one of his visits. Yeah. That's and he takes back the parts
that Joseph had been using. And maybe he takes all of the plates back, but I
think he's telling Joseph, I want you to be absolutely
28:56
scrupulous in following every one of my instructions and only do it the way I ask you to do it.
This is a paraphrase, but it is directionally correct. And it explains why Joseph (and Oliver and John Whitmer) always said Joseph translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates. Nowhere did Moroni say or imply that Joseph should read words off a seer stone he found in a well.
We can talk about that maybe later on
some of the changes. what's different once you know we move from 1828 to 1829.
Yeah. But I think Moroni gives Joseph further instruction and then finally
returns the
29:23
plates to him so that he can then again commence translating once Oliver Cowry comes and we then get the Book of Mormon translated in within just a couple months.
This narrative contradicts the historical record. Joseph told his mother that he was translating again soon after Moroni returned the plates, with Emma as scribe. But for whatever reason, the process was slow so Joseph prayed for another scribe, which was why Oliver Cowdery showed up in April.
“After the angel left me’, said he, “I continued my supplications to God without cessation; and, on the 22d of September, I had the joy and satisfaction of again receiving the Urim and Thummim; and have commenced translating again, and Emma writes for me; but the angel said that the Lord would send me a scribe, and <I> trust his promise will be verified. The angel He also seemed pleased with me, when he gave me back the Urim and Thummim; and he told me that the Lord loved me, for my faithfulness and humility.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1845/145
The earliest pages of the Original Manuscript are from Alma 10, and that is in Oliver's handwriting, so we know that at least by then, Oliver was the scribe. But there is evidence from the Printer's Manuscript that Emma scribed the Book of Mosiah, which aligns with what Joseph told his mother. And David Whitmer said it took eight months to translate, which would mean Joseph resumed the translation in November (Nov - June).
People can disagree about these details, but it serves no legitimate purposes to ignore the historical record.
Mary Whitmer saga.
there two other really significant
29:48
visits. One of them is to Mother Whitmer when Joseph and Oliver move up to the Whitmer farm. You remember she's out milking cows one day and a man walks up and and shows her the plates and lets her talk to the touch the plates. We have her testimony of that.
Mary Whitmer said the man introduced himself as "Brother Nephi."
I think that has to be Moroni.
There is no reason why that "has to be Moroni" and lots of reasons why it cannot be. David Whitmer met both the messenger (on the road to Fayette) and Moroni (as one of the 3 witnesses). He conversed with both of them. And he knew they were different people because he explained that Joseph Smith said the messenger was one of the Three Nephites.
It is not fair to LDS audiences to continue to ignore this historical record.
This Moroni narrative actually contributes to the confusion over the Joseph Smith History identification of Nephi as the person who first visited Joseph Smith. Brigham Young's own son, while a missionary, was troubled by this and it would help all Latter-day Saints to clear this up once and for all.
Another reason why this could not be Moroni is the difference in description. Letter IV explained that Moroni was taller than average, but the messenger with the plates was shorter than average, and older, stocky gentleman with a long beard. Two different people.
For a discussion of all of this, see https://www.mobom.org/moroni-and-nephi
The trip to Fayette
Now
the process can
30:14
begin again because the plates they had to be protected. There were people who were already throwing rocks on the in the doors of
Joseph Smith's little house, banging on the door, wanting to get in and
demanding to be able to see what was going on in that process. Right? I think
Moroni is watching over this. I think he carries those plates and says,
"I'll see you, you know, go on up to the
30:40
the Whitmer home."
This narrative ignores another key part of the historical record.
First, it wasn't Moroni who told Joseph to "go on up to the Whitmer home" but the Lord, through the Urim and Thummim. Lucy Mack Smith explained this.
In the mean time Joseph was 150 miles distant and knew naught of the matter e[x]cept an intimation that was given through the urim and thumim for as he one morning applied the<m> latter to his eyes to look upon the record instead of the words of the book being given him he was commanded to write a letter to one David Whitmore [Whitmer] this man Joseph had never seen but he was instructed to say him that he must come with his team immediately in order to convey Joseph and his family <Oliver [Cowdery]> back to his house which was 135 miles
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/lucy-mack-smith-history-1844-1845/100
This is also solid evidence that toward the end of the translation of the abridged plates, Joseph was still applying the Urim and Thummim to his eyes to look upon the plates.
Before leaving, Joseph gave the plates to the messenger whom they encountered along the road to Fayette.
When he commenced making preparations for his journey he enquired of the Lord in what manner the plates should be conveyed to their point of destination. His answer was that he should give himself no trouble about but hasten her to waterloo and after he arrived a[t] Mr. Whitmore’s house if he would repair immediately to the garden he would receive the plates from the hand of an angel to to whose charge they must be committed for their safety.
For a discussion of the trip to Fayette with references, see https://www.mobom.org/trip-to-fayette-references
And I think he then brings those to Mary Whitmer. Of course, she was agonizing over all these unexpected visitors in her house. And Moroni says, "It's okay. You're doing what's important." And gives her a blessing of knowing that this was truly what was happening was of God.
People can disagree about whether it was Nephi or Moroni who showed the plates to Mary Whitmer. That's ordinary differences of opinion about the historical record.
But hopefully we an all agree that it helps no one to omit relevant historical sources to promote a particular narrative.
It is difficult to believe that the podcasters here are unaware of these historical sources, which leaves us wondering, why do they keep doing this?
