Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 07:20AM

It has been asserted on this board as supposedly "pretty well established that Joe and Sidney didn't meet until after the Book of Mormon was published. Why do people think he [Rigdon] helped write it? Surely a better case can be made for Joe and Joe Snr putting it together with the help of Cowdery? I'm skeptical of the Spaulding-Rigdon theory myself, but it's treated like doctrine around here for some reason."

Apparently, it's even worse than "doctrine"--at least as far as "archytas" is concerned. It's the result of a conniving plot of some sort:

"I find it ironic than an advocate of the Spaulding theory is criticizing other people over supposed errors in historical methodology. Do you believe in all conspiracy theories or just the Spaulding theory?"

("Re: Defend the Rigdon-Book of Mormon theory," posted by "archytas," on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 8 March 2013; and "Re: Joseph Smith, a 'Pious Fraud'?-Fraud? Yes. Pious? Hell, No. (Part 1 of 3)." posted by "archytas," on "RfM" discussion board, 15 September 2014)
_________


Actually, "archytas," the reason why there's justifiable skepticism regarding your claim--namely, that "a better case can be made for Joe and Joe Sr putting it together with the help of Cowdery"--is because there are persuasive historical indicators that, in fact, Rigdon knew Smith before 1830 and participated in the concoction of the Book of Mormon.

**RfM poster "Makurosu' notes, for example, that "there is sufficient evidence to make the theory quite plausible," citing as a solid research source in that regard the book,"The Spalding Enigma: Who Really Wrote The Book Of Mormon?," by Wayne L. Cowdrey, Howard A. Davis and Arthur Vanick.

"Makurosu" also points out that "[t]here are a few eyewitness accounts placing Smith and Rigdon together before the Book of Mormon was published. Also, there is some evidence that Rigdon was working on a book similar to the Book of Mormon, and he can be placed at the print shop where the Spalding manuscript was last seen. Spalding's widow and his brother and other witnesses were familiar with his book and said they believed the Mormons had plagiarized it. It goes on and on. It's not iron clad, but it's a plausible theory. . . .

". . . 'The Spalding Enigma' is a tremendous book just for the research into the friends and family of the usual characters you read about in early Mormon history. It provides a context I haven't seen anywhere else in addition to the excellent introduction to the Spalding-Rigdon theory. Another good book is "Sidney Rigdon: A Portrait of Religious Excess" by Richard S. Van Wagoner. That one follows Rigdon's life before Mormonism and long afterward into the 1870s. It gives you a sense of what he brought to Mormonism so that you can see it in the writing of the Book of Mormon."

"Finally, I recommend 'Inside the Mind of Joseph Smith: Psychobiography and the Book of Mormon,' by Robert D. Anderson. The primary purpose of this book is to provide a hypothetical diagnosis of Joseph Smith's mental illnesses by the author who is a psychiatrist, but the research into the Smith family and their possible influence on the Book of Mormon is also interesting. Lehi's family is very similar to Joseph Smith Sr.'s family, and the moves they made are similar to the moves made by the Smith family. [NOTE: I concur with "Makurosu's" recommendations in this regard, having in my personal library all three books for ready and reliable reference].

("Re: Defend the Rigdon-Book of MOrmon theory," posted by "Makurosu," on "RfM" discussion board, 8 March 2013)


**Also taking to task attacks on the "Rigdon-Book of Mormon theory is RfM poster "Uncle Dale," who writes:

"I'll restate a slightly exaggerated 'attack' that I made
upon this subject, tithe late Vernal Holley c. 1975:

"1. Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt and Oliver Cowdery all swore that Rigdon knew absolutely nothing about Joseph Smith, the golden plates, or Mormonism, before Cowdery and Pratt presented Sidney with the BoM late in 1830.

"2. Rigdon, Pratt and Cowdery were all honest, trustworthy men, whose testimonies are frequently cited by objective historians. There is no reason to doubt their testimony.

"3. From late 1824 until late 1830, when he met Cowdery and Pratt, Rigdon lived in a remote frontier town, farm from Joseph Smith. From 1824 to 1827 he was not even on a stage route, had few neighbors -- there is no way that he could have even known of an obscure farm boy in far off New York; much less have met him.

"4. Rigdon was a popular Cristian preacher by 1830. He was well respected and trusted by hundreds of devout Christians. None of his parishioners knew anything about Joseph Smith, or any gold bible. Had Rigdon been in contact with Smith, somebody would have noticed that and reported it. Nobody ever accused Rigdon of any such connection with Smith, until the Spalding lie was first published by E.D. Howe at the end of 1834.

"5. Considering points 1-4, we can safely assume that Rigdon was telling the truth, that he never knew nothing about the gold plates, Book of Mormon, Mormonism, or Joseph Smith until months after the book was published.

"Therefore, there is no reason to even begin investigating all the other claims of the Spalding-Rigdon lie.

"Needless to say, Vern had a compelling counter-argument."

" . . . [W]hat really surprised me was the material Vern had assembled, in order to show that Sidney Rigdon DID [original emphasis] know about the Gold Bible, prior to his famous meeting with Cowdery and Pratt late in 1830. . . . Vern convinced me that Rigdon MUST [original emphasis] have known about the Gold Bible well before he saw Cowdery and Pratt carrying the Book of Mormon. Years later, Rigdon's biographer came to the same conclusion. . . .

"Yes, Sidney Rigdon was accused of having a hand in writing the Book of Mormon, by people who knew him, years BEFORE [original emphasis] anything was ever published regarding Solomon Spalding.

"That came as an astounding revelation to this (then) young and observant Latter-day ay Saint."

("Re: Defend the Rigdon-Book of Mormon theory," posted by "Uncle Dale," on "RfM" discussion board, 8 March 2013)


**RfM poster Craig Criddle provides damning details pointing to Rigdon-Smith connection prior to 1830:

"Evidence implicating Rigdon as a major contributor to the Book of Mormon

"There is strong evidence for a collaborative authorship model for the Book of Mormon, starting with Solomon Spalding and gradually engaging Rigdon, Smith, and others, with Rigdon playing a major role from behind the scenes.

"Rigdon was highly motivated to produce a work of scripture as a response to Alexander Campbell (Rigdon's mentor/nemesis), and especially as a response to Campbell's 1825 plan to produce a revision of the Bible. There are many reasons why Rigdon would need to conceal his role in such a scheme if he hoped to attract away followers from Campbell (to "puke Campbellism" as he put it). And he clearly needed help in bringing the new scripture to light in a way that would seem miraculous. He was not a magician, but Smith was. This is documented in Episodes 3 and 4 at http://mormonleaks.com.

"In 2008, Jockers et al. published a paper supporting the conclusion that Rigdon was a major contributor. The preprint is available here: http://www.matthewjockers.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/LLCPreprintReassess1.pdf.

"The final published paper is available here: http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/4/465.abstract?sid=9d31ab0c-5ea4-4409-98a6-d9daa858a33a

"Here's a 2009 summary of the multiple lines of historical and textual evidence implicating Rigdon:
http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/rigdon1.htm

"Since 2009, additional historical and textual evidence has been assembled. You can see it at Episode 3 at http://mormonleaks.com. There is plenty of documentation in the footnotes.

"The following are some of the arguments that seem especially strong to me:

"--Rigdon was named as a likely author of the Book of Mormon before his connection to Solomon Spalding was known. Spalding was named as a contributor to the Book of Mormon before anyone knew about his connection to Rigdon. Separate groups of people independently made these allegations. We now have both historical and textual evidence linking Rigdon to Spalding.

"--Rigdon had motive, means and opportunity to modify the Spalding base text to create the Book of Mormon (Episode 3 at http://mormonleaks.com) and to conceal his connections.

"--Computer text analyses attribute specific sections of the Book of Mormon to Rigdon based on his usage of frequently used words (Episode 3 at http://mormonleaks.com). These attributions align well with usage of "Wherefore" and the phrase "children of men" in the front & back of Book of Mormon. They also align with an unusual Early Modern English usage of "that", and with content similar to "View of the Hebrews". Most of this evidence is presented in Episode 5 at http://mormonleaks.com.

"--Theology taught by Rigdon before 1830 appears in the Book of Mormon. In particular, a conversion sequence taught in 1828 by preacher Walter Scott (Rigdon's preaching partner) appears in the front & back of the Book of Mormon, parts of the Book of Mormon created after the lost pages incident - and the same sections where Rigdon's "word print" is strongest. Campbell considered the appearance of this conversion sequence in the Book of Mormon to be conclusive proof of Rigdon's involvement. This evidence is available in Episode 5 at http://mormonleaks.com";

{"Evidence implicating Rigdon as a major contributor to the Book of Mormon," posted by "Craig C," on "RfM" discussion board, 8 Mary 2013)


**Allow me to chime in with quoted reference to the following observations about a pre-1830 Rigdon/Smith/Spalding/Book of Mormon connection. For starters, the premise that Rigdon did not meet Smith before 1830 is an historically-contestable claim:

"Historical evidence connecting Rigdon to Smith before 1830'

"Prior to 1830, Rigdon reportedly made several statements in which he indicated his foreknowledge of the Book of Mormon and the impending rise of a new religion.

"At a Reformed Baptist convention in Aug 1830, Rigdon spoke of a fuller revelation about to come forth and the need for a complete restoration of the gospel.

"Rigdon denied meeting Smith before 1830, but several people reported seeing him at or near the Smith's prior to that date and Rigdon's calendar contains gaps at critical time periods when he would have had time to visit Smith.

"In 1868 Rigdon wrote a letter in which he claimed to know the contents of the sealed portion of The Book of Mormon.

"James Jeffery, a friend of Rigdon's, testified that in 1844 he heard Rigdon say that Smith used a Spalding manuscript to fabricate The Book of Mormon.'"

("Could Joseph Smith have written the Book of Mormon?," under, "Historical evidence connecting Rigdon to Smith before 1830," at: http://www.mormonthink.com/josephweb.htm)


More connecting points between Rigdon and Spaulding (thank you Craig Criddle):

"Historical Evidence Connecting Rigdon to Spalding

"Rigdon Shared a Post Office with Solomon Spalding and Evidently Frequented a Print Shop Where Spalding Had Left a Manuscript Entitled 'Manuscript Found' for a Time. The Manuscript Disappeared. Spalding Reportedly Suspected Rigdon Had Taken It.

"John Winter Reported that Rigdon Kept a Copy of a Spalding Manuscript in His Study

"Witnesses Familiar with Spalding's 'Manuscript Found' testified that it was Similar to the Book of Mormon but Lacked the Religious Content

"Rigdon and Spalding were Independently Named as Authors Before Anyone was Aware of a Connection Between Them.

"In 1839, Rigdon Wrote a Letter Denying his Role in the Composition of The Book of Mormon. His Letter Contained Demonstrable Falsehoods.

"In 1888, Walter Sidney Rigdon, Sidney Rigdon's Grandson, Said that his Grandfather's Role in Fabrication of the Book of Mormon was a Family Secret."

("Sidney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon," by Craig Criddle, at: http://www.mormonthink.com/mormonstudiesrigdon.htm#20)
__________


**For a robust and persuasive debate about the Spalding Manuscript being the most likely source for the Book of fMormon, see the entire above-mentioned RfM thread (where, by the way, anti-Spalding scoffer "archytas" enters the debate but doesn't fare all that well): http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,819013,819013#msg-819013' see also, Vernal Holley's "Book of Mormon Authorship," at: http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs2/2001vern.htm)


**Also, the following is a telling look at Rigdon's fingerprints, as they appeared all over the pre-published Book of Mormon, through the vehicle of Solomon Spalding's pre-1830 manuscript writings:

"Amazing Hidden Facts about the Book of Mormon's Origins . . .

"(Reference notes taken from 'Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon' by Cowdery & Scales, unless otherwise stated.)

"1. FACT: A Rev. Solomon Spalding (sometimes spelled Spaulding in records), a retired Congregational minister, wrote a fiction novel (then called a romance, though this did not indicate that it was a love-story). The novel was called Manuscript Found, but has since at times been referred to as Manuscript Story. The story was written around 1812 and was inspired by the excavation of a nearby Indian mound, and was about the migration of a group of Israelites to the new world.

"2. FACT: The manuscript was read to Spalding’s friends, relatives, neighbors, and parishioners between 1812 and 1815.

"3. FACT: Spalding died in 1816. The manuscript had previously been taken to a print shop for possible publication. The shop was in Pittsburgh and was owned by Mr. R & Mr. J Patterson. Their printer, a Mr. J.H. Lambdin was often seen by townsfolk with Sidney Rigdon.(pg. 95-96)

"4. FACT: Spalding before his death told a minister friend named Joseph Miller (see page 100) that "Rigdon had taken it, or was suspected of taking it." Spalding’s widow also (see page 94) stated as early as 1820 that she believed Sidney Rigdon had copied the manuscript (remember, this was years before the Book of Mormon was published).

"5. FACT: Oliver Cowdery’s law partner (Cowdery was one of the original three witnesses to the Book of Mormon) in Tiffin Ohio, Judge W. Lang, stated, 'Rigdon got the original (Manuscript Found) at the job printing office in Pittsburgh.'

"6. FACT: A Dr. J. Winter testified that he saw Rigdon with the manuscript, and Rigdon told him that a Presbyterian minister had brought 'this' to the printers to see if it would pay to publish it. (p. 105)

"7. Mrs. Amos Dunlap was the niece of Rigdon’s wife. She stated that as a child she visited the Rigdon family (around 1826-27). 'During my visit Mr. Rigdon went to his bedroom and took from a trunk which he kept locked a certain manuscript. He came out into the other room and seated himself by the fireplace and commenced reading it. His wife at that moment came into the room and exclaimed, "What! you’re studying that thing again?" Or something to that effect. She then added, "I mean to burn that paper." He said, "No, indeed, you will not. This will be a great thing someday.' (p, 107)

"8. Harvey Baldwin tells that his father heard Rigdon preach in the church in Bainbridge and visited Rigdon’s home several times. When he would arrive at the Rigdon home, he would often find Rigdon in a room by himself, and each time Rigdon would hurriedly put away books and papers he was examining, as if he did not wish them to be seen. (p. 108)

"9. FACT: Martin Harris, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, was snowbound in a hotel in Mentor Ohio, with a man named R.W. Alderman. Alderman states that he learned from Harris then that 'Rigdon had stolen a manuscript from a printing office in Pittsburgh, Pa., which Spalding....had left to be printed. . . . . Joe (Smith) and Rigdon did (print it), as the Book of Mormon." (p. 145)

"10. FACT: Sidney Rigdon, during the 4-year period between 1823 and 1827, was a minister who kept an official itinerary record, and in it were many gaps. He apparently made numerous trips from his home in Bainbridge, Ohio, to Palmyra NY (250 miles) where Joseph Smith lived, being gone for weeks at a time. (Ref. pp. 118-120)

"11. FACT: Although Rigdon denied having known Smith before the Book of Mormon was introduced (around 1829) he was seen at Joseph Smith’s home and reported to be with Smith by all of the following according to their testimony: (see pp. 125-on)

"Able Chase, an acquaintance, a teenager at the time--'I saw a stranger there who they said was Mr. Rigdon. He was at Smith’s several times, and it was in the year of 1827 when I first saw him there, as near as I can recollect.'

"Mr. Gilbert, proofreader for the Book of Mormon--he states that in a conversation with a Mr. Lorenzo Saunders, who knew the Smiths well, Saunders said 'he knows that Rigdon was hanging around Smith’s for 18 months prior to the publishing of the Mormon Bible.'

"Mrs. S.F. Anderick, a neighbor stated (p. 134) 'Several times while I was visiting Sophronia Smith at old Jo’s house, she told me that a stranger who I saw there several times in warm weather and several months apart, was Mr. Rigdon.'

"Daniel Hendrix, acquaintance of Joseph Smith and Rigdon: he related hearing Joseph Smith tell people in 1828 about the 'bonanza he had found. . . . golden tablets.' 'For the first month or two at least Joe Smith did not say himself that the plates were any new revelation or that they had any religious significance, but simply said that he had found a valuable treasure in the shape of a record of some ancient people. . . . He (Rigdon) and Joseph Smith fell in with each other and were cronies for several months. It was after Rigdon and Smith were so intimate that the divine part of the finding of the golden plates began to be spread abroad.... Smith and Rigdon had hard work to get funds together for the new Bible.'

"Mr. Pearne, former neighbor of Smiths told others he saw Smith and Rigdon together before the Book of Mormon was published (p. 143).

"Mrs. Eaton, interviewed Smith’s neighbors regarding Rigdon, and concluded that a stranger came to the Smith’s home in the summer of 1827, whose name was Sidney Rigdon. (p. 145)

"12. FACT: Rigdon was a Campbellite Minister in 1827-29, who had been excommunicated from being a Baptist minister because of teaching heretical beliefs. During this time period before the Book of Mormon came out, his congregation heard him often preach about a coming new revelation (page 108) that would make the Bible outmoded, and he even seemed to know it would speak of America’s ancient inhabitants, solve the mystery of the mounds, there would be the return of miracles, and a new system of sharing all things in common, and more. (pp. 108-116) Some state this information was given as early as 1827, and was detailed enough that they concluded that he must have known all about the Book of Mormon when he preached these things.

"13. FACT: Rigdon himself told a man named James Jeffries the following information, according to Jeffries: 'He and Joe Smith used to look over the M.S. and read it on Sundays. Rigdon said Smith took the MS. and said, "I’ll print it," and went off to Palmyra, New York.' (p. 104)

"14. FACT: An acquaintance of both Rigdon and Smith named Dr. J.C. Bennett stated the following in 1842:

"'I will remark here...that the Book of Mormon was originally written by the Rev. Solomon Spaulding, A.M., as a romance, and entitled the "Manuscript Found," and placed by him in the printing-office of Patterson and Lambdin, in the city of Pittsburgh, from whence it was taken by a conspicuous Mormon divine, and re-modeled, by adding the religious portion, placed by him in Smith’s possession, and then published to the world as the testimony exemplifies. This I have from the Confederation, and of its perfect correctness there is not a shadow of doubt.' (the Confederation refers to the inner circle of Smith’s friends).

"15. FACT: Sarah Pratt, the wife of an early Mormon leader, read this view of Dr. Bennett’s in a book he wrote, and said the following:

"'This certifies that I was well acquainted with the Mormon Leaders and Church in general, and know that the principle statements of John C. Bennett’s book on Mormonism are true."

"16. FACT: (While the above could be referred to as a hostile witness, consider the following:) Isaac Butts who knew Rigdon from 1820 on, stated that when he came back to Ohio after Mormonism had made converts there, people he had known earlier in New York WHO WERE CONVERTS to the church told him that they had seen Sidney Rigdon much with Joseph Smith BEFORE THEY WERE CONVERTED. (Rigdon supposedly was converted about the same time as they were). (pp. 142-43)

"17. FACT: David Whitmer, the third witness to the Book of Mormon did not believe the 'Spalding theory,' but stated in his booklet, 'An Address to All Believers in Christ,' that the story had been printed in the Encyclopedia Britannica and the American Cyclopaedia.

"He believed Rigdon and Smith first met in the winter of 1830. But he also states that Rigdon and Smith immediately became intimate, and Rigdon was given the position of first counselor and vice president of the church by the end of 1830. . . .

"Whitmer states that the whole idea of the Priesthood was not a part of the original church nor in the original revelations (compare early sections of the 1830 Book of Mormon with their counterparts in the Book of Commandments to see this is true), but it 'all originated in the mind of Sidney Rigdon.' (Who is in control here?) Elder was the highest office of the church originally, and about two thousand had been baptized into the church by men who held only that office. Whitmer outlines other doctrinal problems in his booklet, and states 'If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; . . . then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to "separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints."'

"18. FACT: The manuscript of 'Manuscript Found' was FOUND in Hawaii in 1884, and is now at Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio.

"19. FACT: The manuscript body is handwritten by Spaulding, and is 116 pages long (does that number ring a bell?). The Book of Mormon is about 538 pages long. ( There would have been over two years of time that Rigdon and Smith had to collaborate on and expand the manuscript, according to the above-mentioned records and testimony).

"20. FACT: There are many parallels between the two documents:

"Both have the same content or story line. The Book of Mormon has much more religious or doctrinal content. Both documents purport to give a condensed history of the extinct inhabitants of ancient America.

"Both manuscripts describe in similar terms how the author came by the ancient records upon which the story is based. Spaulding says the records are found in an artificial cave on the top of a mound near his home. A lever is used to lift the heavy stone which covers the entrance to the cave. The Book of Mormon says the records were in a stone box buried in the ground near the top of a hill not far from his home. He, too, uses a lever to lift a large stone that serves as a cover to the box.

"Both tell that the author encounters supernatural difficulties in removing the records from their hiding place.

"Both relate that the author made a 'translation' of the Old World language used in the records and that this translation is a condensation of earlier civil and sacred records.

"Both state that the condensed version thus produced will be reburied along with the original so that it will remain preserved to come forth in the future when the Gentiles (Europeans) inhabit America.

"Both describe a sea voyage with a great storm which causes them to pray for deliverance; both describe light and dark-skinned people, the same arts and sciences being known to the ancient people, a God-person who is white, the use of seer stones, a war to the death between two nations who were once brothers, and a final battle fought on a hill.

"Even in some details we see resemblance: Both Spalding and Smith have the group of travelers of about the same number; both find America teeming with wild beasts; both groups appoint judges, have all things in common, and urge each other not to intermarry with the natives. In both accounts, the native Americans wear animal skins about their loins, shave their heads and paint them red, and carry slings, bows and arrows as weapons.

"Both writers make the same mistake of stating that the planets revolve about the sun, long before such knowledge would have been known by humans. Both stories describe modern horses, domesticated mammoths or elephants, the use of steel, and the cultivation of wheat in ancient America, even though there is no archaeological evidence of any of this.

"Theological concepts that are similar are presented in the same order.

"The first quarter of Spalding’s manuscript is written in the first person, and the rest in the third person. The Book of Mormon follows that pattern, and the change occurs at the same place in both stories.

"To quote Vernal Holley, who wrote 'Book of Mormon Authorship: A Closer Look,' p. 38:

"Identical or similar word combinations, redundant sentences, parallelisms, contradictory thoughts in sentence structure, indecision in the use of words, poor sentence composition, the use of lengthy runs, biblical-like metaphors, and the use of King James Bible English by both Spaulding and the Book of Mormon author are all further arguments that Spaulding may have been the author of the Book of Mormon."

"21. FACT: In 1839, Spaulding’s widow, Matilda Spaulding Davison, made this statement:

"'After the "Book of Mormon" came out, a copy of it was taken to New Salem, the place of Mr. Spaulding’s former residence, and the very place where the "Manuscript Found" was written. A Mormon preacher appointed a meeting there and in the meeting read and repeated copious extracts from the "Book of Mormon." The historical part was immediately recognized by all the older inhabitants, as the identical work of Mr. Spaulding in which they had been so deeply interested years before." (New Hampshire Patriot and State Gazette, Concord, N.H., May 6, 1839)

"22. FACT: 11 of Spaulding’s relatives and friends, a former employee and landlord, and others all gave signed statements of their belief that Spaulding’s writings were connected with Smith’s Book of Mormon (E.D. Howe, 'Mormonism Unveiled,' Painesville, Ohio, 1834).

"23. FACT: Many of Smith’s neighbors, in their testimony about him, also stated that he was lazy, was a liar, and in the mid 1820’s often engaged in digging at nighttime for buried treasures, using a seer stone or peep-stone. Court records show he was convicted of being a 'glass-looker' (he was charging for fortune-telling about treasures that did not materialize when dug for) in 1826. It is also a fact that as soon as he had a good number of converts, he led them to sell their homes and farms and give the money to the church (him) and go to Ohio. (OPINION: It would appear that Smith found the treasure that enabled him to live the rest of his life without having to do any manual labor.)

"24. Before his death, Rigdon’s final words on this subject were, 'My lips are forever sealed.' (Think, dear reader: Innocent people have nothing to hide!)

"While I understand the Mormon person’s NEED to discredit all of the above, I would suggest that it is simply unreasonable to suggest that EVERY ONE of the above people whose testimony is mentioned above conspired against Joseph Smith in an ORGANIZED way to create such a dovetailed story of fraud, and he ALONE is to be believed. May I suggest that God has not asked us to make a PERSON the object of our faith.

"While there are many differences between Spalding's book and the Book of Mormon, it is also true that Sidney Rigdon's pastor wrote a book called 'View of Hebrews,' and it presented the same ideas regarding the Indians being Jews, and the idea of a 'restored' church was being taught in Smith's day as well. . . . "

("Amazing Hidden Facts about the Book of Mormon's Origins," original emphasis, at: http://www.mormonsinshock.com/Origins.htm)



Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 10:33AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: L Tom Petty ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 08:10AM

Can it be demonstrated that Spalding or Rigdon might have been familiar with The Late War? Or would the portions that Cowdery or Smith may have written be saturated with phrases from The Late War?

I'm not sure I've ever seen this aspect of the Spalding-Rigdon theory addressed.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 08:28AM

" . . . [L]inguistic and narrative elements of the BoM are probably descended, at least in part, from Gilbert Hunt’s pseudo-biblical account of the War of 1812. The relationship between these two literary works is relatively strong, suggesting that the book had quite a memorable impact on Joseph Smith. But Smith did not borrow directly from the LW (at least for the majority of the narrative content) during the process of composing the Book of Mormon."

("The Book of Mormon and the Late War: Direct Literary Dependence?," at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2013/10/the-book-of-mormon-and-the-late-war-direct-literary-dependence/#ixzz3E2xjID6c)
_____


"The Late War demonstrates that writing done in the biblical style, complete with integrated Hebraism’s, was a genre employed during the time, and in the place, of Joseph Smith’s youth. Therefore, Hebraism’s do not persuasively attest to an ancient origin for the Book of Mormon."

("THe Late War and the Book of Mormon," at: http://blog.mrm.org/2013/11/the-late-war-and-the-book-of-mormon/)

(see also, the following RfM thread on the Book of Mormon, the Spalding Manuscript and the Late War, at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1057554,1057554#msg-1057554)



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2014 12:55AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 08:44AM

Because the link between Rigdon and the writing of the Book of Mormon is relatively weak, there is an alternative, that, through a network of Dartmouth people, Ethan Smith got wind of Rigdon reworking the Spalding manuscript. He used Oliver Cowdery as a pipeline to the Smith family, who mangled HIS reworking.

E. Smith was very interested in the European wars of the time, and could even have had access to the Napoleon book. He was extremely literate, and probably much more competent at writing in the biblical style.

Rigdon then re-inserted himself into the game.

There are many possibilities which can fit the given evidence.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:00AM

As noted by the references in the OP, it is impressively strong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:05AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:07AM

We can always agree to disagree.

I am simply pointing out that there are so many linkages that any arguments against multiple authorship fade to insignificance. There is evidence that E. Smith did contribute-- beyond the influence of "View of the Hebrews"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:10AM by me.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:08AM

I would agree with you, however, that the Book of Mormon evidences multiple 19th-century sources. Spalding just happens to be one that I, and others, regard as pretty damn strong.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:11AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:13AM

Yep-- old strategy of divide and conquer.

And the evidence for the Spalding contribution plays into both Spalding-Rigdon-J. Smith and Spalding-Rigdon-E. Smith-J. Smith. E. Smith's intellectual pride prevented him from claiming any involvement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:17AM by me.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:16AM

. . . with its text copied straight out of the KJV into the Book of Mormon, complete with all those translation errors made by its English translators.

Reminds me of when Dallin Oaks tried to explain to me in the privacy of Neal Maxwell's office all the obvious KJV lifts that appear n the Book of Mormon--especially from the KJV's Book of Isaiah and the KJV's text fomr the New Testament--all showing up in the Book of Mormon within the context of the Book of Mormon timeline from 600 BC to 1 BC (you know, when the words of the New Testament had not yet been written).

Then, showing Oaks 17 parallels between the lives of the Book of Mormon prophet Alma and the New Testament apostle Paul--with special attention given to the wording in Alma's letters that is found in exactly the same language in Paul's New Testament story. Oaks' reply: "Well, you know, as you've thumbed through your book, it only appears to me that 5% of your book has been marked, so I would say don't throw out the 95% because of the 5%. Don't take the 5% that you have serious questions about and cast out the 95% that is unexplained or divinely inspired."

Oaks continued: "It's like being married to our wives. I'm sure there's more than 5% of me that my wife finds disagreement with, but she puts up with it anyway. It's kind of like being married to the Book of Mormon. Don't let your doubts keep you out of the mainstream."

Oaks' attention was also pointed to Moroni 10, which speaks of gifts of the spirit (to one is given one gift; to someone else is given another, etc). Verse by verse--comparing Moroni 10 to First Corinthians 12--the texts were shown to be almost exactly the same. Oaks' reply: "Well, it's not word-for-word and it's not the whole chapter." (Oaks was reminded that except for some minor variations--such as the oft-repeated phrase, "and again"--it was, for all intents and purposes, word-for-word).

When asked to explain how Moroni used the same language found in the King James version of the Bible, written hundreds of years after the Book of Mormon was recorded, Oaks replied that he himself had had the same question while preparing a talk on gifts of the spirit, as outlined in the Doctrine and Covenants, the Book of Mormon and the New Testament. Oaks said he concluded that all three authors were "impressed by the Holy Ghost" to record their thoughts "in this particular manner and in these particular words.

Yeah, right, Dallin. How dumb do you think we are? (Answer: Not as dumb as you). Remember Occam's Razor: The simplest explanation is usually the best. The simplest explanation: Joseph Smith was a lying plagiarist.



Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:57AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: L Tom Petty ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:28PM

I guess intellectual integrity doesn't mean much to Oaks. Amazing that a former state supreme court justice would be so quick to resort to obvious logical fallacies.

It seems to me he gets too much out of being worshiped as a member of the 12 and potential profit to care about honesty.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:30PM


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 04:30PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: archytas ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 12:04PM

At this point, the hypothetical second manuscript largely irrelevant. Once you take the KJV, Methodist camp meetings, Joseph Smith's life, The First Book of Napoleon, The Late War, and the Whitmer's theological views into account, what is left for Spaulding or Rigdon? Is there anything in the Book of Mormon that can't be explained with the sources I've just listed?

Brent Metcalfe has pointed out that the Book of Mormon manuscript contains evidence of the text being invented as it is being dictated. There are run-on sentences and hints of a frontier dialect. This doesn't fit with your theory. We already know that a lot of the BoM was dictated without the aid of reference material. This also doesn't fit with your theory. The lost 116 pages incident shouldn't have been a problem if he was working off of an already existing manuscript. The evidence seems to show that JS had to re-create this from scratch, and that he experienced writer's fatigue toward the end and leaned on the Bible to fill in the gaps.

The evidence you've presented reminds me of the "evidence" that 9/11 truthers try to present. It's a collection of circumstantial anomalies that ignore the big picture.

Do we need a hypothetical manuscript to explain the Book of Mormon? No.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 09:52PM by archytas.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 12:24PM

. . . as sourced for your review in the OP:

Posted by: Uncle Dale
Date: March 08, 2013 10:27PM
Re: Evidence implicating Rigdon as a major contributor to the Book of Mormon

archytas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The alleged second manuscript is huge weakness to
> me. It's an ad hoc adjustment to the theory which
> was only proposed after the first manuscript was
> shown to not work.
>
> That being said. Although I'm skeptical about the
> theory, I am interested in your ongoing computer
> analysis.

I suppose it all depends upon the date we might want to
assign to "only proposed after the first manuscript
was shown to not work."

If we assign that date as Dec. 31, 1833, and the place
as being the Aaron Wright grocery store in Ashtabula
County, Ohio -- then we'd at least have a starting point.

After D. P. Hurlbut had published in Joseph Smith's
hometown newspaper, that he had indeed located and
secured a Spalding manuscript identical to portions
of the Book of Mormon, he was recorded displaying
that same document in northern Ohio, to various groups
of onlookers. However, the first documentary proof
of his having anything actually written by Spalding's
hand, came a few days later, in Wright's grocery store.

There Mr. Wright composed a statement, stating that
Spalding had written a story like the Book of Mormon,
but that it was NOT the document that Hurlbut was then
exhibiting to him. Wright did not say whether the item
he then saw was the same manuscript Hurlbut had lately
been displaying before assembled crowds in nearby
Geauga County.

So, if that's the date we've settled upon, we can try
to trace backwards (and forwards) from that event
whatever other evidence we might wish to examine.

UD
_____


Posted by: Craig C
Date: March 08, 2013 11:06PM

Spalding wrote several manuscripts. This was known before discovery of the Oberlin Manuscript.

In August 1833, Aaron Wright, one of Spalding’s neighbours, recalled his memories of Spalding’s “Manuscript Found”, then added: "Spalding had many other manuscripts, which I expect to see when Smith translates his other plate" (Howe 1834, p. 283-84).

John Miller, an employee and tenant of Spalding’s in 1811, said that Spalding wrote “two or three books or pamphlets on different subjects”. This was confirmed by Rachel Derby, daughter of John Miller, a Spalding employee who lived for a time with the Spalding family. Describing the visit of D. Hurlburt to collect her father’s testimony, Derby said “Father told him [Hurlburt] that the "Manuscript Found" was not near all of Spaulding's writings and that probably there would soon be another prophecy out.” Joseph Miller, Spalding’s neighbor in Amity, PA from 1814 to 1816, also declared that “Manuscript Found was not near all of Spaldings writings”.

Some of the Spalding witnesses (Hiram Lake, Matilda Spalding, Jason Briggs) reported reading "Manuscript Found" and a second manuscript written by Spalding.

Hiram Lake was one of the 8 Conneaut witnesses who gave testimony of Manuscript Found in Howe's "Mormonism Unveiled" (1834). In 1914 Mrs. Hiram Lake, daughter-in-law of Henry Lake, donated two documents to the New York Public Library. One of these is a draft copy of an unsigned statement, dated 31 December 1833, which reads: "this is therefore to inform you that I have made a statement to D P Hurlbut relative to Writings of S Spalding Esq. SD Hurlbut is now at my store I have examined the writings which he has obtained from SD Spaldings widowe I recognize them to be the writings handwriting of SD Spalding but not the Manuscript I had refferance to in my statement before alluded to as he informed me he wrote in the first place he wrote for his own amusement and then altered his plan and commenced writing a history of the first Settlement of America the particulars you will find in my testimony." dated Sept 18 August 1833. (Cowdrey et al. 2000).

From its context, it is clear that Hurlbut showed Henry Lake a Spalding manuscript in 1833, and that Lake recognized that it was not the manuscript he had previously identified as the basis for the Book of Mormon.

A similar statement is found in an unsigned letter attributed to Aaron Wright, another of the Conneaut witnesses:

"Dear Sir, Whereas I have been informed that you have been appointed with others to investigate the subject of mormonism and a resolution has been past to ascertain the real orrigin of the sd Book this is therefore to inform you that I have made a statement to D P Hurlbut relative to writings of S Spalding Esq sd Hurlbut is now at my store I have examined the writings which he has obtained from sd Spaldings widowe I recognise them to be the writings hand writing of sd Spalding but not the manuscript I had refferance to in my statement before alluded to as he informed me he wrote in the first place he wrote for his own amusement and then altered his plan and commenced writing a history of the first Settlement of America the particulars you will find in my testimony Dated Sept 1833 August 1833 -- for years before he left this place I was quite intimate with sd S Spalding we had many private interviews the history he was writing was the topic of his conversation relating his progress and Contemplating the avails of the same I also contemplated reading his history but never saw it in print untill I saw the Book of Mormon where I find much of the history and the names verbatim the Book of mormon does not contain all the writings sd Spladings I expect to see them if Smith is permitted to go on and as he says get his other plates the first time that Mr Hyde a mormon Preacher from Kirtland preached in the centre School house in this place the Hon Nehmiah King attended as soon as Hyde had got through King left the house and said that Hide had preached from the writings of S Spalding. In conclusion I will observe that the names and most of the historical part of the Book of Mormon is as familiar to me as Most modern history if if is not Spaldings writings copied it is the same as he wrote and if Smith was inspired I think it was by the same Spirit that Spalding possessed which he confessed to be the love of money"

Matilda Spalding McKinstry was 10 years old when her father (Solomon Spalding) died. After his death , she read through her father's manuscripts in the hair-covered chest where he had stored his manuscripts. Matilda later recalled many details about the manuscripts, and many of these details have been confirmed. Among other things, she recalled that the Oberlin manuscript was a precursor to Manuscript Found:

“But touching these I will give below his daughter's [Mrs. McKinstry's] recollections, recently narrated by her to me [Redick McKee], which I think more full and explanatory than my own. This lady is still residing in Washington, D.C., with the family of her late son-in-law, Col. Seaton of the Census Bureau, in remarkably good health for a lady of her age. She corroborated her father's statement about his removal to Conneaut in 1809, his examining the Indian mounds &c, and distinctly recollected that he wrote two or more stories in support of the theory that the Indians of North America were lineal descendants of the Jews from Palestine. In the first of these he brought the Jews from Palestine to America via Italy during the reign of Constantine, and set forth that at Rome they engaged shipping to convey them to some place in Great Britain, but encountered stormy weather and were finally wrecked somewhere on the coast of New England. What became of the manuscript of this story she did not know with certainty but understood that it was published in some Eastern review or magazine. This romance he afterwards abandoned and set about writing a more probable story founded on the history of the ten lost tribes of Israel. She thought her father must have had wonderful powers of imagination and memory, great command of language and facility of description. Many of his descriptions were of a historical and religious character. Others were grotesque and ludicrous in the extreme.

She remembered that in one of them, touching the mode of warfare in that day, (being hand to hand or man to man) he represented one of the parties having streaks of red paint upon their cheeks and foreheads to distinguish them from enemies in battle. The story he called "The Manuscript Found."

On November 20, 1886, Matilda wrote this letter to Deming:

Mr. A. B. Deming,

Dear Sir,

I have read much of the Manuscript Story Conneaut Creek which you sent me. I know that it is not the Manuscript Found which contained the words "Nephi, Mormon, Maroni, and Lamanites." Do the Mormons expect to deceive the public by leaving off the title page -- Conneaut Creek and calling it Manuscript Found and Manuscript Story?

Mrs. M. S. McKinstry.

See: http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/CA/natr1988.htm#120088-1c2

James A. Briggs, the lawyer for D. P. Hurlburt, claimed that Hurlbut recovered both Manuscript Found and the Oberlin Manuscript from the Spalding widow, and that Hurlbut compared Manuscript Found to the Book of Mormon at the home of Warren Corning, jr. in Mentor, in December 1833. On March 22, 1886, Briggs wrote to Arthur B. Deming to say that the Spalding manuscript at Oberlin College was not Manuscript Found, and was of inferior writing quality: "…I have just read the Manuscript Story [The Oberlin Manuscript] sent me a few days ago, by request of my old and much valued friend, Mr. L.L. Rice, of Honolulu, and in my opinion it settles nothing, save that the author of the story was a very weak brother, and if written by Rev. Solomon Spaulding, he was a man of indigent talents, and the money paid for his college expenses was wasted. Allow me to doubt if he wrote it. You must get some better and more positive link in the chain of evidence than this story, recently printed, to convince the world that the original "Manuscript Found," written by Solomon Spaulding, was not the basis for the historical portion of your Mormon Bible. I have no doubt we had the "Manuscript Found" before us, that we compared it with the Mormon Bible, that the style in which the "Manuscript Found" was written was the same as that of the Mormon Bible. The names -- peculiar -- were the same, not to be forgotten. The names Lehi, Nephi, Maroni, etc., and the expression "and it came to pass" often repeated. This manuscript did not go to Mr. Howe. What did Hurlbut do with it? Some few years ago I wrote to him and asked him who had it -- what he did with it. He did not answer my letter. He received it, as [it was] not returned to me. Dr. Hurlbut died in Ohio two years ago last June. He is silent now, the grave closed over him . . ."

See: http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/SRP13p2.htm#Refs2
_____


Posted by: Uncle Dale ( )
Date: March 08, 2013 11:21PM
Re: Spalding wrote several manuscripts. This was known before discovery of the Oberlin Manuscript.

Craig C Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
...
> Spalding wrote several manuscripts.
> This was known before discovery of
> the Oberlin Manuscript.
...

I suppose that Mormon polemicists would dispute that statement.
Probably they would say that NOTHING relating to Spalding was
published (or readily available for publication) before Mr.
Hurlbut had his Dec. 1833 letter published in Joseph Smith's
hometown newspaper.

If we agree with this assertion, then the probable response
would be, that we cannot consider anything promulgated
AFTER that date as being confirmatory evidence. Anything
truly authentic and germane must have been produced BEFORE
December of 1833.

In other words, if we could locate a letter sent by Spalding
to some known publisher, outlining his proposed "Nephite
story," then THAT sort of old evidence would be worthwhile
to look over. Perhaps that is the sort of thing Richard L.
Anderson was looking for when he visited Cherry Valley,
New York in the 1960s and left his BYU calling card there.

I do not necessarily agree with this line of reasoning,
but I do understand why LDS apologists would want to
lead us off in that direction of investigation.

"The 'second manuscript' ploy was only invented by you
anti-Mormons after 1885, when James H. Fairchild found
the _real_ Spalding tale; and now you try to pawn off
this ad hoc addition to your original persecution of
God's Chosen People! For shame!" etc. etc. etc.

UD

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,819013,819013#msg-819013

*********


Oh, wait, everyone who doesn't believe like you do on the "second manuscript" thinks the Twin Towers were blown up by our government.

Chuckle.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 12:28PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: archytas ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 12:42PM

You're still ignoring the big picture.

Why couldn't the lost 116 pages be re-produced? The burden is on you to account for that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 01:49PM

. . . at least that's where you put the Craig Criddles of this world.

You, of course, have completely ignored the fact that Spalding produced several manuscripts. Do the math. That would make room for a "second manuscript."

Is there precedence for the production, and then the loss, of certain problematic Mormon Church history exhibits? Of course.

The "lost" 116 pages were presumably destroyed by Martin Harris's wife, Lucy, out of Martin's presence, with those pages at the time of their abrupt disappearance being out of his personal possession.

Joseph and Emma Smith burned the original 1843 copy of his polygamy "revelation."

Then, of course, there was the effort by the Boys at the Top--led by GA bagman Hugh Pinnock under orders from Hinckley--to buy and then bury the Hofmann "salamander" documents--an effort that ended only when Hofmann blew his fingers off after blowing up some accomplices he feared were ready to rat him out. When I asked Dallin Oaks directly about the details behind the caper, he claimed he didn't know anything--from behind his conveniently cleaned-off Church office desk.

In other words, those in the higher ranks of the Mormon Church chain of command with access to incriminating docs have a track record of orchestrating the timely "disappearance" of the inconvenient ones.

Mock the suggestion of "conspiracy" all you want. They actually occur in real life. As proof, read some history--particularly the Mormon variety. (You can start with the poisoning death of Joseph Smith's younger brother, Samuel Harrison Smith, the direct-line heir to the throne after Joe's assassination, who suddenly and mysteriously died before getting there). The Cult does what it has to do, as the historical record amply demonstrates.



Edited 19 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 03:15PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:14PM

Poisoning death of Samuel? It makes perfect sense. However, could you reference your evidence on that?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:23PM

--The Strange Death of Samuel H. Smith, Brother of Joseph Smith and Heir Apparent to the Assassination-Emptied Mormon Throne--

In another thread, RfM poster offers the following theory about the suspicious death of Samuel Harrison Smith:

". . . [A]young 36-year-old Samuel [Smith] . . . [died] . . . while being simultaneously sick with another who stopped taking his prescribed medicine, but Sam didn't, and Sam died but the other didn't. Sam's daughter later claims that his father was poisoned.

"Does my theory seem to far out there, or has anyone else

("Brigham Young May Have Killed the Smiths," by "ontheDownLow," on "Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board, 13 April, 2011)


In a earlier thread, RfM poster “Charley” also mentioned the puzzling death of Samuel Harrison Smith, younger sibling of Joseph Smith.


As with circumstances surrounding the agonizing and mysterious death of Brigham Young, allegations have been made over the years that Samuel, too, was the victim of deliberate poisoning deviously administered by those angling for power in the time period following the assassination of Joseph Smith.

Notes “Charley”:

“There's . . . the rumor that Brigham Young was behind the suspicious death of Samuel Smith who is also believed to have been poisoned. Instant Karma's gonna get you.”

(“Re: Hard to Swallow: Mormon Apologists Refuse to Consider That Brigham Young May Have Been Deliberately Poisoned In His Own Household . . .,” posted by “Charley,” on “Recovery from Mormonism” board, 20 June 2011, 9:39 p.m.; see also, "Hard to Swallow: Mormon Apologists Refuse to Consider That Brigham Young May Have Been Deliberately Poisoned In His Own Household," by Steve Benson, on "Recovery from Mormonism" board, 20 June 2011, 2:08 p.m.)

That rumor appears to be well-grounded.

Samuel Harrison Smith was an early baptized member of the Mormon Church, one of its original founders and one of the so-called "Eight Witnesses." He was also one of the Church's first missionaries and served on the Kirtland, Ohio, High Council.

That apparently wasn't enough to protect him, however.

Samauel died under mysterious circumstances on 30 July 1844, at the age of 36, barely a month after Joseph and Hyrum Smith were shot to death in the jailhouse siege at Carthage, Illinois.

Perhaps not coincidentally, Joseph Smith had chosen his brother Samuel to take on the leadership mantle for the Church if both he and Hyrum were killed. According to Joseph Smith's private secretary William Clayton, Joseph had "said that if he and Hyrum were taken away, Samuel H. Smith would be his successor."

After their deaths in Carthage, Samuel personally transported Joseph's body by wagon--lain in a plain pine box covered with prairie grass--back to Nauvoo.

Soon thereafter, he became violently ill and was himself dead in a matter of weeks.

(see: H. Michael Marquardt, “The Rise of Mormonism: 1816-1844” [Longwood, Florida: Xulon Press, 2005], p. 635; Dallin H. Oaks and Marvin S. Hill, “Carthage Conspiracy: The Trial of the Accused Assassins of Joseph Smith” (Urbana, Illinois, University of Illinois Press, 1976], p. 21); and Ernest H. Taves, “Trouble Enough: Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon” [Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books,1984], p. 216)
_____


--Cries of Foul Play from Members of Joseph Smith's Family--

Despite efforts by the Mormon Church to dismiss allegations that Samuel Harrison Smith was a victim of a murder plot at the hands of LDS Church leaders conspiring to succeed Joseph Smith, members of the Smith family vigorously contended that Samuel had been purposely killed in a power grab that took place in the aftermath of Joseph's assassination.

Five years after Samuel's death, published media accounts by the only Smith brother to survive the Nauvoo period, William, charged that Samuel had been deliberately poisoned:

"In the October 1849 issue of his newspaper, the 'Melchisedek & Aaronic Herald,' William Smith publishe[d] a list of Mormon martyrs, including Samuel H. [Smith], 'who died from the effects of poison administered to him. He died within one month after the martyrdom of his brother.'"

("Martyrs of the Latter Day Saints," in 'Melchisedek & Aaronic Herald' [Covington, Kentucky] 1, no. 7, October 1849)


A few years later, in a letter to the “New York Tribune,” William Smith provided further details on the suspicious death of his brother, Samuel, pointing a direct finger at Brigham Young and Willard Richards, accusing them of orchestrating Samuel's murder:

"I have good reason for believing that my brother Samuel H. Smith, died of poison at Nauvoo, administered by order of Brigham Young and Willard Richards, only a few weeks subsequent to the unlawful murder of my other brothers, Joseph and Hiram Smith, while incarcerated in Carthage jail.

"Several other persons who were presumed to stand between Brigham Young and the accomplishment of his ambitions and wicked designs, mysteriously disappeared from Nauvoo about the same time, and have never been heard from since."

(William Smith, "Mormonism," letter to the “New York Tribune,” 28 May 1857)


In private correspondence in 1892, William Smith further asserted that Willard Richards asked Hosea Stout (who happened to be Samuel's caretaker) to kill Samuel in order to prevent Samuel from taking office as Mormon Church president before the Quorum of the Twelve (which happened to be led by Brigham Young) could convene to handpick a successor.

(William Smith, letter to "Bro. [ . . . ] Kelley,” 1 June 1892)


Samuel H. Smith's own daughter, Mary B. Smith, expressed her belief that her father and her uncle Arthur Milliken were simultaneously poisoned through the administration of a powdery toxin purported to be medicine--noting, as well, that the same doctors attended both men.

According to Mary, Milliken stopped taking the fatal substance but Samuel continued to the last dose, which "he spit out and said he was poisoned. But it was too late--he died."

(Mary B. Smith Norman, letter to Ina Coolbrith, 27 March 1908; the above citations found in "Samuel H. Smith (1808-1844)," under “Death and Succession Crisis")


Moreover, Samuel H. Smith's wife, Levira Clark Smith, also concluded that her popular husband had, in reality, been murdered--and proceeded to name the murderer.

Writes author Richard Abanes:

"[In the wake of Josepsh Smith's death,] Samuel Smith . . . seemed a reasonable choice to many Saints [for the Church's next president]. In fact, he nearly took control of the Church before the Twelve had returned [to Nauvoo], much to the irritation of Willard Richards, who wanted no leader to be named until all the Apostles were present.

"Richards may have gone so far as to have Samuel murdered to prevent any succession. Samuel's wife believed this to be the case, naming as her husband's murderer the Chief of Police--Hosea Stout, a Danite widely known for having a violent streak and a cold-hearted disposition.

"Everyone knew he was more than capable of homicide. He had already been, and would continue to be, connected with several murders and assaults involving apostates and Church critics. . . .

"In the case of Samuel Smith, Stout had acted as Samuel's care-giver when he fell ill, and in that capacity had given Samuel 'white powder' medicine daily until his death. Samuel's wife, daughter, and brother . . . all believed the powder to be poison."

(Richard Abanes, "One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church" [New York, New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2002], p. 207)
_____


--Brigham Young Denies Ordering the Murder of Samuel Smith--

Brigham Young hotly denied allegations that he had also been involved in the death of Samuel H. Smith, instead offering up a questionable alibi:

". . . William Smith has asserted that I was the cause of the death of his brother Samuel when brother Woodruff, who is here to day, knows that we were waiting at the depôt in Boston to take passage east at the very time when Joseph and Hyrum were killed.

"Brother Taylor was nearly killed at the time and Doctor Richards had his whiskers nearly singed off by the blaze from the guns. In a few weeks after, Samuel Smith died and I am blamed as the cause of his death.'"

(Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," vol. 5, July 1857, p.77)
_____


--Dissecting Young's Shaky Denial--

Former “Recovery from Mormonism” poster "Perry Noid" raises serious questions about the truthfulness of Young's denial of involvement in the death of Samuel H. Smith:

" . . . I [am] struck at how weak [Young's] defense [is].

"He simply seem[s] to be relying on the 'Hey. I was out of town' alibi that Mafia types like to rely on after giving instructions to an agent who just happens to be 'in town.'

"It seems like he's counting on suckers not asking the next obvious question, i.e., '[S]ince [Young] and his pro-polygamy faction obviously were the prime beneficiaries of Sam[uel] Smith's untimely demise, doesn't it stand to reason that [Young] could have given instructions to a subordinate or have knowingly approved of the plan in advance?

"At the very least, isn't it possible that [Young] knew what happened after the fact and covered it up because it worked out so nicely for himself?'

"The pattern of denial by [Young] in this instance sure does feel similar to that used in the Mountain Meadows Massacre case.

"But it's also highly likely that [Young] literally got a 'taste of his own medicine' since his own death followed a prolonged episode of painful, violent vomiting and discomfort that may have been the result of a revenge poisoning."

"Perry Noid" offers additional intriguing and compelling information which makes it entirely possible to conclude that Samuel H. Smith could well have been seen as a dire threat to the interests of Young's conniving inner circle of power-mongering polygamists:

" . . . Samuel was probably the last best hope that the Smith clan had to maintain a dominant leadership position in the Church.

"If he had succeeded Hyrum to the office of Patriarch, that position could have been leveraged into a hereditary presidency that only Smiths were eligible to attain.

"Samuel probably wasn't capable of being a strong leader like Joseph, or even Hyrum, but the Smith clan was likely hoping that he would be able to hold things together long enough for Joe III to ascend to the throne.

"Samuel's claim, in addition to being supported by the fact that he was the eldest Smith male in line after Joe and Hyrum, was also supported by the fact that he was the third official convert to Mormonism, after Joe and Oliver.

"So, I believe that, first and foremost, he was a serious obstacle to the ambitions of the strong pro-polygamy faction that was coalescing behind Brigham.

"I don't know whether or not Samuel would have continued to go along with polygamy but my impression was that he was not an enthusiastic supporter and the remainder of the Smith clan would probably have intended to dump it all together, knowing that it would be a continuing source of trouble for their Church.

"One biography of Samuel indicates that he had no plural wives, but only married his second wife after his first wife had died."

“Perry Noid” further adds that Hosea Stout, former police chief of Nauvoo, may indeed have been the administrator of deadly toxins to Samuel Smith during a power struggle over the issue of polygamy:

“ . . . Samuel was possibly intentionally poisoned by an agent of Brigham Young in 1844. (Samuel was considered by many to be well ahead of Brigham Young in the contest for succession to Joseph Smith, but suddenly fell ill and died on July 30, 1844--barely a month after the deaths of his brothers, Joseph and Hyrum.) . . .

“[Historian D. Michael] Quinn argues that Willard Richards instructed Hosea Stout, a former Danite and police chief of Nauvoo, to poison Samuel Smith. He died not long after Joseph died. While most of the Church leaders were away from Nauvoo at the time, the Church leadership quickly split along the lines of polygamy. Those who favored the continued practice of polygamy and secret ordinances were partial to Brigham Young and wanted to wait until the Quorum of Twelve Apostles returned to Nauvoo before choosing a successor.

"Those who were opposed to the practice of polygamy and secret ordinances favored the leadership of William Marks. Sidney Rigdon quickly made a proposal to become guardian of the Church and Marks threw his support behind Rigdon. However, the day before the meeting to decide whether Rigdon should be appointed guardian, the Apostles returned to Nauvoo.” (Garn LeBaron, Jr., “'The Mormon Hierachy: Origins of Power'--A Review,” 1995, at: http://www.exmormon.org/hierarch.htm )”

("Thanks for the Re-post," by "Perry Noid," on"Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board, 5 June, year unknown; and "My understanding of the situation . . .," idem, RfM board, 5 June, year unknown, at http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon248.htm )
_____


--Further Reasons to Question Brigham Young's Attempts at Distancing Himself from the Dastardly Deed--

Noting the documentation amassed by historian D. Michael Quinn as well as others, avid student of Mormon history and former RfM poster "Deconstructor" asks, "Why would such an accusation be laid against Brigham Young?," then explains:

“This troubling piece of information came from a Church talk Brigham Young gave in 1857:

"'And William Smith has asserted that I was the cause of the death of his brother Samuel, when brother Woodruff, who is here to day, knows that we were waiting at the depôt in Boston to take passage east at the very time when Joseph and Hyrum were killed. Brother Taylor was nearly killed at the time, and Doctor Richards had his whiskers nearly singed off by the blaze from the guns. In a few weeks after, Samuel Smith died, and I am blamed as the cause of his death."

(Prophet Brigham Young, July 1857, 'Journal of Discourses,' vol. 5, p.c77)


“I checked Church history sources and found these clues about the death of Joseph Smith's brother [Samuel] in Navuoo, who died little over a month after Joseph was killed:

"'Samuel Harrison Smith, born in Tunbridge, Vt., March 13, 1808. Died July 30, 1844, broken-hearted and worn out with persecution. Aged 36. The righteous are removed from the evils to come.'

(“Times and Seasons,” Vol.5, No.24, p. 760)


"'Hyrum & Joseph w[ere] murdered in Carthage Jail in Hancock Co[,] Illinois. Samuel Smith died in Nauvoo, supposed to have been the subject of conspiricy by Brigham Young.' (“Joseph Smith Family Testimony, William Smith Notes,” circa 1875, in Vogel, “Early Mormon Documents,” p. 488)


"Deconstructor" observes;

"To understand the context, you have to remember that after Smith and Hyrum were killed, there was some conflict over who should be his successor.

"Brigham Young was not in Nauvoo when Smith was killed but started to head back as soon as he heard the news.

"Meanwhile in Nauvoo, several potential leaders were positioning to take the reins of leadership. The most popular replacement was Samuel Smith, the brother of Joseph Smith. William Clayton had recorded Joseph declaring his brother William his successor if both he and Hyrum were killed.

"But Brigham Young's first cousin and Church apostle, William Richards, insisted that nothing should be decided until Brigham Young could return to Nauvoo.

"However, many members did not want to wait, and more and more support was gathering behind Samuel Smith, Joseph Smith's brother, to become the next Prophet and leader of the Church.

"For a select few, this presented a problem because Samuel was violently against polygamy. It was looking like Samuel Smith would become the next prophet and promised to denounce the practice of plural marriage.

"Michael Quinn, from 'The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power,' explains what happened next:

"'Then Samuel Smith suddenly became violently ill and died on 30 July 1844. This added suspicion of murder to the escalating drama.

"'Council of Fifty member and physician John M. Bernhisel told William Smith that anti-Mormons had somehow poisoned his brother.

"'William learned from Samuel's widow that Hosea Stout, a Missouri Danite and senior officer of Nauvoo's police, had acted as his brother's nurse. Stout had given him "white powder" medicine daily until his death. Samuel became ill within days of the discussion of his succession right, and by 24 July was "very sick."

"'There had been enough talk about Samuel's succession claims that the newspaper in Springfield, Illinois, reported, "A son of Joe Smith [Sr.] it is said, had received the revelation that he was to be the successor of the prophet."

"'William Smith eventually concluded that Apostle Willard Richards asked [Hosea] Stout to murder (his brother) Samuel H. Smith.

"'The motive was to prevent Samuel from becoming Church president before Brigham Young and the full Quorum of Twelve arrived (in Nauvoo).

"William's suspicions about Stout are believable since Brigham Young allowed William Clayton to go with the pioneer company to Utah three years later only because Stout threatened to murder Clayton as soon as the apostles left.

"Clayton regarded Hosea Stout as capable of homicide and recorded no attempt by Young to dispute that assessment concerning the former Danite.

"One could dismiss William Smith's charge as a self-serving argument for his own succession claim, yet Samuel's daughter also believed her father was murdered.

"'My father was undoubtedly poisoned,' she wrote. 'Uncle Arthur Millikin was poisoned at the same time--the same doctors were treating my father and Uncle Arthur at the same time. Uncle Arthur discontinued the medicine-without letting them know that he was doing so. (Aunt Lucy [Smith Millikin] threw it in the fire).

"'Father continued taking it until the last dose [which] he spit out and said he was poisoned. But it was too late--he died.'

"Nauvoo's sexton recorded that Samuel Smith died of 'bilious fever,' [which was] the cause of death listed for two children but no other adults that summer.

"This troubling allegation should not be ignored but cannot be verified.

"Nevertheless, Clayton's diary confirms the efforts of Richards to avoid the appointment of a successor before his first cousin Brigham Young arrived.

"'Stout's diary also describes several occasions when Brigham Young and the apostles seriously discussed having Hosea "rid ourselves" of various Church members considered dangerous to the Church and the apostles. Stout referred to this as "cut him off--behind the ears--according to the law of God in such cases."

"'Stout's daily diary also makes no reference whatever to his threat to murder Clayton in 1847. When the Salt Lake "municipal high council" tried Hosea Stout for attempted murder, he protested that "it has been my duty to hunt out the rotten spots in the Kingdom." He added that he had "tried not to handle a man's case until it was right."

"'Evidence does not exist to prove if the prophet's brother was such a "case" Stout handled."'

(D. Michael Quinn, “The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1994], pp.152-53)."


(“Did Brigham Young Murder Joseph Smith's Brother? (References),” posted by “Deconstructor,” on “Recovery from Mormonism” board, 6 April, year unknown, at: http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon248.htm)


In support of William Smith's charge that Samuel H. Smith was rubbed out on the orders of Brigham Young in order to prevent him from becoming head of the LDS Church, historian Dan Vogel repeats testimony from members of Joseph Smith's own family:

"'Hyrum & Joseph w[ere] murdered Carthage Jail in Hancock Co[,] Illinois. Samuel Smith died in Nauvoo, supposed to have been the subject of conspiracy by Brigham Young.'"

(Dan Vogel, "Joseph Smith Family Testimony, William Smith Notes," circa 1875, in "Early Mormon Documents," p. 488; and "Was Joseph Smith's brother Samuel Murdered?," by "Deconstructor," at: http://www.i4m.com/think/leaders/brigham_murder.htm)
_____


--Mormon Supporters Claim Samuel Smith's Death Was Due to Accidental Injury or Fever--

Despite numerous indications fueling deep suspicions that Samuel H. Smith may have died of deliberate poisoning at the hands of an inner Mormon circle cabal, the LDS Church-owned and -published "Encyclopedia of Mormonism" makes the suggestion that he actually died from a conveniently unidentified horse-riding injury, supposedly sustained during Samuel's dramatic effort to save the lives of his brothers Joseph and Hyrum:

"Upon hearing of the dangers to his brothers at Carthage, Samuel attempted to ride to their aid, but arrived too late to intervene. He died within the month, apparently of an injury sustained in that ride."

(Sydney Smith Reynolds, "Smith Family," in "Encyclopedia of Mormonism: The History, Scriptures, Doctrine, and Procedure of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," vol. 3 (New York, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1992], p. 1360)
_____


--Other Mormon Historians Don't Parrot the LDS Apologist Spin--

LDS historian Donna Hill mentions nothing about Samuel suffering a riding injury, claiming instead that in his gallop to Carthage to save his brothers, he was chased by a mob, arrived too late to rescue them, carried the murdered bodies of Joseph and Hyrum back to Nauvoo and, amid this ordeal, "[c] ontracted a fever and survived his brothers by only a few weeks."

Fellow LDS historians Leonard J. Arrington and Davis Bitton agree with Hill's explanation of Samuel Smith's death, adding only that the mob that chased Samuel on his ride to Nauvoo had "mud-daubed faces."

(Donna Hill, “Joseph Smith, the First Mormon: The Definitive Story of a Complex and Charismatic Man and the People Who Knew Him” [Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1977], p. 448; and Leonard J. Arrington and Davis Bitton, “The Mormon Experience: A History of the Latter-day Saints” [New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979], p. 82)
_____


--The Assessment of Samuel Harrison Smith's Death from Non-Mormon Historical Circles--

Other professional observers--notably the non-Mormon variety--aren't as willing to shrug off Samuel H. Smith's death to a riding injury or a fever.

Richard N. and Joan K. Ostling, in their book, “The Power and the Promise: Mormon America,“ note that Joseph Smith designated his brother Samuel to be his successor, adding that Samuel "would have succeeded [his assassinated brother] Hyrum as [Church] Patriarch and thus had a claim [to succeed Joseph as prophet], but died just weeks after Joseph and Hyrum, amid rumors he had been poisoned."

(Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling, “The Power and the Promise: Mormon America” [San Francisco, California: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999], p. 337)
_____


--Conclusion: In Mormonism, the Living Prophets Are More Important Than the Dead Prophets--

Could it be that some of the dead prophets became dead at the hands of those who wanted to become the living prophets?

You might be inclined to drink to that.

Just don't swallow.

**********


For the possible poisoning death of Brigham Young, see: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1051678

For the possible poisoning of Joseph Smith by Emma Smith, see: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1051674

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: archytas ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 10:03PM

I'm in complete agreement that the church has tried to suppress information in both the past and present.

---

Going back to the lost 116 pages though. I think it's likely that Lucy Harris destroyed them. If JS were working off of a manuscript, I think he would have been able to re-produce the lost pages. Since he wasn't able to do so, it seems like he was made it up as he went along and used Isaiah as filler.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: exodus ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 10:43PM

> Going back to the lost 116 pages though. I think
> it's likely that Lucy Harris destroyed them.

Poor Lucy. She knew it was fake from the beginning... but if she could blow the lid off of what it is today with those 116 pages... then that would have been epic.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 10:49PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 07:20AM

I know what you are doing there.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 12:28PM

"Do we need a hypothetical manuscript to explain the Book of Mormon? No."


The E. Smith theory also covers people like Archytas. Spalding's lost manuscript becomes just one aspect, which the individual can accept or reject. Although, as Steve shows, it is difficult to reject.

http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Origins-Mormon-Edition/dp/078640826X



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2014 12:30PM by me.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chump ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 12:05PM

"1. Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt and Oliver Cowdery all swore that Rigdon knew absolutely nothing about Joseph Smith, the golden plates, or Mormonism, before Cowdery and Pratt presented Sidney with the BoM late in 1830."

Some of these denials strongly suggest, at least to me, that the opposite is true. Joseph also wrote in his history that he had never before met Oliver before he came to act as scribe. In my opinion, no honest person would write these details into their history this way. They sound like they're hiding something.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rt ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:29PM

So you want us to believe that (1) Joe and Sidney had contact before the fall of 1830 AND (2) that there is a lost Spalding manuscript?

Sorry, that's too much for me. I'll stick with the angel, the golden plates and the magic stones.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 04:31PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: archytas ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 09:55PM

Oh, there's a third way.

It requires no supernatural events and no mysterious committee of writers, and it can explain why the lost 116 couldn't be re-dictated (JS made it up as he went along).

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 10:39PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 10:46PM

That cannot be contested with I and II Nephi and Jacob. We all agree with that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Outsider not logged in ( )
Date: September 22, 2014 11:44PM

I just listened to the Brent Metcalfe interview on MormonStories concerning the BoM, and his take is that JS could very well have done it by himself.

He points out that Lucy Mack wrote about Joseph entertaining the family back in 1823 (the year Alvin died) with tales which the angel had told him about the ancient inhabitants of America) as if he had lived with him his whole life.

The BoM is simply bad Bible fan fiction. Smith grew up in the Burnt out district in a period of great excitement -- and hence the subject of many conversations -- concerning which church was "correct" and in a family whose parents were very much into religion.

Joe Sr. had a number of religious experiences and "visions." He was part of the money digging projects and was into the whole mystic stuff.

Living overseas, I don't have as ready access to all the books which I'd love to study, but it just seems that there is a reasonably logical flow for Joe Jr. to start off in money digging, finding out that he gets attention and followers.

He had been making up stories about the BoM characters for years before he actually started to write stuff down.

I don't see the need for a really complex situation. All the elements of the book were readily at hand. People thought that the Indians were part of the lost tribes. People thought that the Indians couldn't have made the mounds so there had to have been someone else.

If people come from Israel, they are going to have to travel by boat. They will have to change skin color. It's not that complicated.

Given that the theology of the BoM what very common at the time, it wouldn't take a genius to put it together.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: archytas ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 08:49AM

It's a great interview.

I like his point about how the original BoM manuscript contains textual clues that point an author creating the text as he dictates it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2014 08:50AM by archytas.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: mindog ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 12:44AM

I love how the opening sentence opens with a false dichotomy and goes on from there...

It's pretty clear that Joseph was more than capable by himself, while there may be lots of other possibilities, they require a lot of fortuitous coincidence. I'll accept whichever is true or has the most evidence, I just don't know that any other author is necessary.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 07:03AM

Lucy Mack Smith was as much in on the con as her son. She was the one who charged for viewing the mummies. I have some further evidence of such activities on her part. She was perfectly capable of lying about the fireside stories Joseph told. In fact, Alvin may have told them. Remember, they had pinned all their hopes on Alvin, and he may have been the first choice for the role.

Sh did admit that Joseph was the least academic of her children. At the time Joseph made the most contributions to the writing of the BoM, his stories were derived from his own life. See the stories in I and II Nephi and Jacob. The stories in later books (earlier) were much richer, and had stronger parallels with a wide range of literature available at the time. Thus, E. Smith is worth examining. Sol didn't quite make the cut.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2014 07:04AM by me.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: smo ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 10:52AM

After going down the rabbit hole with the real history of how tscc got started, i.e. the poisonings, positionings, etc. I've lately wondered about Alvin's untimely death.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jefecito ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 10:57AM

Along these line, since 1st Nephi has autobiographical elements, I have wondered if there was a true-life "Laban", who might have been a victim of Smith family scheming. Or is that plot line from one of the other source books? (Not expecting any answer, just something I wonder about.)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: me ( )
Date: September 23, 2014 01:15PM

Again, Lucy could give you the hints on that. One of Joseph's uncles was strongly opposed to their enterprise.

I pretty well subscribe to the story. They apparently grieved a lot. In today's world, the would probably have sued the doctor.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2014 01:17PM by me.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed. Please start another thread and continue the conversation.