D&C Changes: 2 and 10 (part one)

Church was cancelled today (snow in Baltimore = end of the world), and besides we have a new baby at home. So it's a good time to continue the "D&C changes" series. I'm placing a chronological framework on this enterprise, using the order of the revelations that appear in our current D&C. I've already talked about the Lectures on Faith and D&C 3. Today, I'll pop back in time to D&C 2 then return to the correct order by discussing D&C 10. Again, the best sources are Saints Without Halos, and Robert Woodford's dissertation. D&C 2, Moroni's Malachi quote, did not appear in the D&C until 1876. Other sources for this passage include the Manuscript History of the Church (the earliest, dated to 1839), various LDS periodicals, and old editions of the Pearl of Great Price. No significant changes. D&C 10, a further revelation relative to the lost 116 pages, has seen a number of changes. Today, I will discuss the dating of this revelation, regarding which there is some disagreement. Our D&C has "the summer of 1828", the History of the Church and the Journal History have August or September 1829, and all other copies have May 1829. We follow B.H. Robert's dating as found in his edition of HC. The following reasons suggest a May 1829 date: 1. Joseph must have been actively translating the Book of Mormon at this time - April through June 1829 were his most prolific months. 2. D&C 10:53 says: "And for this cause have I said: If this generation harden not their hearts, I will establish my church aming them." In no revelation preceding May 1829 is this statement made by the Lord except for BC 4: 5 (substantially altered in D&C 5), which we date to March 1829. May follows March. 3. D&C 10:3 might suggest that Joseph was to resume work on the Large Plates. By May 15 1829 he and Oliver had reached 3 Nephi . If he had immediately begun work on the Small Plates then 4/5 of the Book of Mormon was finished by 15 May (which by our reckoning is too much). If the Small Plates were indeed translated last, then a May revelation detailing what to do about them would seem about right. 4. Lucy Mack wrote that the Urim and Thummim were returned in September 1828, too late for Joseph to have received section 10 through it earlier. 5. Joseph Smith did not correct the May 1829 date in the early copies of the revelation. Roberts preferred 1828 because the the Manuscript HC from which Roberts was working had this introduction: "After I had the above revelation, both the plates and the Urim and Thummim were taken from me again, but in a few days they were returned to me when I enquired of the Lord, and the Lord said thus to me *** I did not, however, go immediately to translating...." The asterisks referred to the pages containing D&C 10. Roberts reasoned that Section 10 must have been the first revelation received after the return of the Urim and Thummim (a "few days"). Section 10, therefore, must have closely followed Section 3, dated to July 1828. Phew! See also Max Parkin, "A Preliminary Analysis of the Dating of Section 10," Seventh Annual Sidney B. Sperry Symposium: The Doctrine and Covenants (Provo: BYU, 1979), 68–84), and Woodford pp. 200-205. Changes to the revelation will be discussed in part two...."