Does the CES Letter Mormon Prove Joseph Smith Was a Fraud?

The CES Letter Mormon is a document written by Jeremy Runnells, a former member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. After experiencing a faith crisis in the early 2010s, Runnells compiled an extensive list of criticisms of the LDS Church.

Since it was made public in 2013, the Letter has been a common source for anti-Mormon literature, and it has caused some members of the Church’s beliefs to be significantly shaken. Runnells raises many questions about Church history and doctrine. Some of the most pointed critiques aim to discredit Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon Church. 

But do these criticisms prove Joseph Smith was a fraud? Here’s an explanation of a few of the CES letters arguments through the lens of historical context and reasoned faith. 

The Seer Stone and the Book of Mormon

One of the CES Letter’s criticisms of Joseph Smith’s legitimacy as a prophet is that Joseph used a seer stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon from an ancient, unknown language into English. To modern sensibilities, this can sound odd or superstitious. Critics often seize on the unfamiliar imagery to discredit the process altogether.

Historical accounts do report that Joseph used a seer stone, placing it in a hat to block out light while he dictated the text of the Book of Mormon. But from a faithful Latter-day Saint perspective, this method is not necessarily grounds for skepticism. Instead, it demonstrates how God meets His children where they are. Mormons believe that God speaks to people “according to their language, unto their understanding” (2 Nephi 31:3). In Joseph’s cultural and spiritual world, the use of a seer stone wasn’t abnormal. It was a known method of seeking divine insight, not unlike the biblical Urim and Thummim.

Interestingly, later in life, Joseph told Orson Pratt he no longer needed the seer stone, as he had grown in his ability and confidence to receive revelation. The stone may have initially helped Joseph act in faith, but ultimately, his prophetic gift did not rely on it.

So, does the seer stone prove Joseph was a fraud? No, not necessarily. The real question the Mormon CES Letter should be asking is not how God chose to reveal the translation, but whether the translation bears divine fruit. And for millions, the answer is an emphatic yes.

The Priesthood Restoration: Late Reports or Later Revelation?

Another major claim in the CES Letter is aimed toward the priesthood restoration accounts. It is taught in the Church that the priesthood authority originally given to Peter by Jesus Christ was eventually lost from the world because of the wickedness of the people. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery claimed that this authority to lead Christ’s church was restored to them in 1829 through angelic visitations by John the Baptist, and later by Peter, James, and John. 

However, the CES Letter PDF points out that these angelic visitations were not recorded in Church documents until 1832. Critics argue that this delay is evidence that Joseph invented these experiences to bolster his authority after the fact. At first glance, this concern may seem valid. But a closer look at the historical and spiritual context offers a more nuanced explanation.

Oliver Cowdery was actually the first to publicly discuss the priesthood restoration, and as early as 1830, a non-LDS newspaper reported that Oliver claimed angelic authority. So the idea that there was complete silence until 1832 is simply not supported by the broader historical record.

But why the delay in publishing more detailed accounts? In 1829, Joseph was a young, often mocked visionary, working under persecution to the point of threats on his life even before the Church was organized. According to Joseph’s 1838 account, “we were forced to keep secret the circumstances of our having been baptized, and having received this priesthood; owing to a spirit of persecution which had already manifested itself in the neighborhood.”

Oliver Cowdery’s Integrity

Perhaps the most compelling evidence against the CES Letter’s fraud narrative is the testimony of Oliver Cowdery. Critics would have to believe that Oliver, a man of conviction who stood up to Joseph Smith when he believed it necessary, maintained a lifetime conspiracy about these events. That seems implausible, especially given Oliver’s complicated history with Joseph and the Church.

Even after his excommunication and estrangement from the Church, Oliver wrote in 1846, “You would be [sensitive on the subject]… had you stood in the presence of John, with our departed Joseph, to receive the Lesser Priesthood—and in the presence of Peter, to receive the Greater.” He reaffirmed the events in personal letters and bore testimony of their truth even when he had every reason to expose Joseph if it had been a lie.

Revelation: An Ongoing Process

The CES Letter also criticizes Joseph for modifying his earlier revelations, including adding details about the priesthood restoration. However, the legitimacy of this critique is only supported in paradigms that are not even held by Latter-day Saints. For them, this development is consistent with their theology.  

Mormon beliefs do not follow patterns of sola scriptura as much of the Protestant world does. Once scripture is written, it isn’t sealed as long as prophets are still receiving revelation. Joseph often revisited earlier revelations to add context or clarification as greater light was received. It wasn’t done in secret, and it wasn’t deceptive. It was consistent with the Mormon belief that God reveals truth “line upon line” (2 Nephi 28:30), helping His children understand divine events as they become prepared.

Fraud or Legitimate Founder?

The CES Letter LDS raises provocative questions. But based on the evidence from faithful, reputable sources, its conclusions are not the only—or even the most reasonable—ones.

• Joseph used a method of translation that fit his cultural understanding and spiritual maturity.
  
• The priesthood restoration may not have been widely documented until later, but evidence suggests it was known and taught from the beginning.
  
• Oliver Cowdery’s enduring testimony undercuts any theory of conspiracy.
  
• Revelation, by LDS belief, is progressive and open, not static.
  

At the end of the day, belief in Joseph Smith’s prophetic calling—and the Restoration—is a matter of both faith and reason. Critics who support materials like the CES Letter Mormon may find room to doubt. Believers can find ample reason to trust. But it is ultimately up to an individual’s own spiritual and intellectual persuasions to decide for themselves what they believe. Joseph may not have been perfect, but neither were Moses, Peter, or Paul. To Latter-day Saints, what matters is not the weakness of the man, but the strength of the message.

About Mormonism Explained

Mormonism Explained is a resource that was designed to provide objective and factual information about Mormonism, its history, doctrines, and policies. Our team of researchers consults experts and primary sources to present factual information on a variety of topics relevant to the Mormon Church.

Tags