I am looking for a church reference for Joe Smith trying to sell the copyright to the BoM.

I have looked a little, but thought someone might have it.

Thanks

"Another interesting development from work on the Revelations and Translations Series has been the identification of a previously unpublished revelation on securing a copyright for the Book of Mormon in Canada. David Whitmer, after he left the Church, recalled that the revelation promised success in selling the copyright, but upon return of the men charged with the duty, Joseph Smith and others were disappointed by what seemed like failure. Historians have relied upon statements of David Whitmer, Hiram Page, and William McLellin for decades but have not had the actual text of the revelation. Revelation Book 1 will provide that.

"Although we still do not know the whole story, particularly Joseph Smith’s own view of the situation, we do know that calling the divine communication a 'failed revelation' is not warranted. The Lord’s directive clearly conditions the successful sale of the copyright on the worthiness of those seeking to make the sale as well as on the spiritual receptivity of the potential purchasers."

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=e5d0a593fc7dd110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 08:04PM by Fetal Deity.

Oh yeah - and they would've had to have actually gone to the right city where there was actually someone who could have bought the copyright if they wanted to...

Whose fault was that mopologists?

I like how on LDS.org it says it is okay the revelation failed because it was contingent on the faithfullness of the men sent to obtain the copyright.

So funny, it is always us frail evil humans disrupting the best laid plans of the almighty.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:43PM by twirlnwhirl.

And the "spiritual receptivity" of the potential purchasers.

So when the sorry manuscript was refused, the "spiritual receptivity" of the refuser was found to be the trouble. Not that the book was a hopeless, meandering fraud. No, blame the "receiver."