If plates then God

[Morley]

My main problem with you doing this is that you aren't even willing to put your points into your own words.

My main problem with you is that you fail at understanding what I’m saying in my own words.

But you’re not alone.

Regards,
MG

This is a disingenuous response. You isolated one sentence so that you could pretend that I was saying something else. You do this all the time. Here’s the whole paragraph, if you want to really respond:

My main problem with you doing this is that you aren't even willing to put your points into your own words. Often the site you link doesn't back up the discussion the way that you imagine it does. There've been times when you've had to finally admit that you hadn't even read the material you assigned to everyone else.

[Morley]

If I did believe that God could be involved, that wouldn't mean that I'd buy the whole restoration story. There are a hundred thousand things that could go wrong along the road from the golden book to the presidency of Russell M. Nelson.

That’s where we differ. I think that once God would have set things in motion He might be more than likely to see things through rather than leaving everything on the cutting room floor.

Again, disingenuous.

Here was the whole thought that was expressed:

If I did believe that God could be involved, that wouldn't mean that I'd buy the whole restoration story. There are a hundred thousand things that could go wrong along the road from the golden book to the presidency of Russell M. Nelson.

Why would God have Joseph create a work of fiction that testifies of itself. Historically and otherwise?

Why wouldn't he? If God, an angel, or even a demon was involved at one point, it wouldn't mean that they were involved in everything. God didn't "have" Joseph do anything. Joseph had the free agency to do whatever he wanted. If child rapes and beheadings are allowed in order to ensure free agency, then so would be mistranslations of books. You, after all, believe that God allowed the Bible to be mistranslated. Why wouldn't he allow a piece of American frontier fiction like the Book of Mormon?

[Gadianton]

Why wouldn't he? If God, an angel, or even a demon was involved at one point, it wouldn't mean that they were involved in everything. God didn't "have" Joseph do anything. Joseph had the free agency to do whatever he wanted. If child rapes and beheadings are allowed in order to ensure free agency, then so would be mistranslations of books. You, after all, believe that God allowed the Bible to be mistranslated. Why wouldn't he allow a piece of American frontier fiction like the Book of Mormon?

I've appreciated you and tagriffy explaining this but he seems incapable of comprehending the point.

Even within Mormonism's own beliefs the point can be made, even though leaders and apologists would tie themselves in knots in order to avoid it. Mormonism teaches God has influenced the world in countless ways, but never has that involvement led to anything being "absolutely true" until Joseph Smith. And so it's possible, just as you say, that God or an angel could get involved in something but that something isn't everything. In fact, This is nearly always the case. Mormonism teaches God led the reformation. God got involved with Martin Luther, but that doesn't mean Lutheranism is the only true church. As a Mormon, it's trivial to see the truth of this point for everyone else's beliefs aside from one's own. God works in mysterious ways. It's entirely possible that the plates were real but just a prop, or that they really were the Book of Mormon, but the Book of Mormon is fiction, or that they were the Book of Mormon and real history, but the Church was entirely Joseph's creation. In terms reality, if a angelic being really did give Joseph plates, it could have been (and more likely would be) an alien.

MG and Mormonism in general pushes the point relentlessly that all you need is one divine spark and that ignites a chain reaction that ensures everything else about the Church is true. It can't be any other way in their minds, even though they themselves would accept a million other divine sparks that fizzled somewhere.

[Physics Guy]

I think it's clear Smith couldn't author the Book of Mormon on his own or he would have. It required Oliver Cowdery to produce it.

I don't know much about Oliver Cowdery, and I could well be wrong about my sweeping judgement that Smith could obviously have done it all himself. My reaction at this point, though, is that the Book of Mormon production timeline really doesn't say anything about whether Smith could have produced the Book by himself. It only shows that maybe he didn't.

If Smith was really stalled for a long time until Cowdery joined him, then I'll agree that this does suggest that Smith needed something from Cowdery. My guess, though, would be that all he really needed was some kind of encouragement. As far as I know, the subsequent careers of the two guys don't make it look as though Smith owed all that much to Cowdery.

My impression is more that Cowdery was riding Smith's coattails. But maybe I just know too little about him.

[Moksha]

If Joseph required an amanuensis to put his thoughts to paper, there is no harm in that. Perhaps it was the same with Paul and Tertius of Iconium, or Lenny and Squiggy of Milwaukee.

[I Have Questions]

I think it's clear Smith couldn't author the Book of Mormon on his own or he would have. It required Oliver Cowdery to produce it.

Was it Smith’s mother who said he had quite the imagination but could barely write a legible letter? Cowdrey was a school teacher. I think you’re joining two very clear dots.

[honorentheos]

I think it's clear Smith couldn't author the Book of Mormon on his own or he would have. It required Oliver Cowdery to produce it.

I don't know much about Oliver Cowdery, and I could well be wrong about my sweeping judgement that Smith could obviously have done it all himself. My reaction at this point, though, is that the Book of Mormon production timeline really doesn't say anything about whether Smith could have produced the Book by himself. It only shows that maybe he didn't.

If Smith was really stalled for a long time until Cowdery joined him, then I'll agree that this does suggest that Smith needed something from Cowdery. My guess, though, would be that all he really needed was some kind of encouragement. As far as I know, the subsequent careers of the two guys don't make it look as though Smith owed all that much to Cowdery.

My impression is more that Cowdery was riding Smith's coattails. But maybe I just know too little about him.

Folks don't seem to realize Smith never did anything on his own and needed capable people his entire career. Cowdery and the Whitmers, primarily David and John, were essential to the founding of the church. Cowdery composed the first draft of the articles of the church in 1929. Specifically WROTE them, not just copied what Smith told him to write. Smith and Cowdery were sharing leadership, Smith as the charismatic face and Cowdery as the intellect. Smith found a replacement for Cowdery in Sidney Rigdon in 1831. The tension caused the church to split in to two geographic groups between Ohio (Smith/Rigdon) and Cowdery/Whitmers in Missouri. After the Kirkland Bank debacle and implosion of the Ohio church, Smith and Rigdon pushed Cowdery and the Whitmers out and rebuilt on the more successful stock they (Cowdery and John and David Whitmer) had established. Smith would go on to abandon Rigdon for Bennett when he needed someone even less principled in the rise of spiritual wifery, ousted him to save himself and was lynched.

After his excommunication, Cowdery went on to practice law and some small political role.

Smith had gifts. But he never did anything on his own and it is pretty clear he attempted to get the Book of Mormon project off the ground with Harris but failed. Then on his own with Emma assisting but barely produced anything in that time. I'm very confident had Cowdery not arrived the book we have would have never been produced. There would be no Mormon church. We wouldn't be on this message board as it would never have existed. I'd probably never have been born. Same result if Cowdery and the Whitmers hadn't been successful in Missouri which allowed Smith and Rigdon to rebuild after their failure in Ohio.

[honorentheos]

https://olivercowdery.com/

Dale Broadhurst was a regular participant on the boards when I began to participate and his website is a treasure trove of historic information. It's interesting to read non-Salt Lake oriented material, read folks words as they wrote them, and see a picture of the people behind the glossy one the church has made of the early leadership. The more one reads Cowdery, and realizes what he was doing between 1829 and 1837, the less one can see him as riding Smiths coattails. Smith clearly was a charismatic and inventive guy. He was capable in many ways. But he absolutely relied on capable people to make the Mormon church project work. The Book of Mormon NEEDED Cowdery. That's a hill I'll fight atop all day long because the more one looks into the details and facts, the more apparent it becomes.

Given the circumstances around the three witnesses, it's pretty clear Cowdery and the Whitmers brothers were in on the scheme. The Book of Mormon was written at the Whitmers farm. The use of stones in hats, etc., were props pulled out for show when needed, but the actually work was largely Smith and Cowdery talking at a table. This is apparent when one reads how their discussions on the Book of Mormon led to their invention of the priesthood, their baptism accounts, some of the other "revelations" presented based on them discussing a topic and voila, here's a revelation on that.

[honorentheos]

I think it's clear Smith couldn't author the Book of Mormon on his own or he would have. It required Oliver Cowdery to produce it.

Was it Smith’s mother who said he had quite the imagination but could barely write a legible letter? Cowdrey was a school teacher. I think you’re joining two very clear dots.

Yep. Cowdery wasn't going to produce the Book of Mormon on his own, either. They were two different talents with each being needed for the Book of Mormon project to be completed.

[honorentheos]

There are four primary periods we could divide the production of the Book of Mormon into: From when Smith claims to have received the plates to when Martin Harris arrived to serve as scribe (Sept 1827-April 1828), the period when Martin Harris served as scribe (April - June 1828), the period after the 116 pages were lost to when Oliver Cowdery arrived (June 1828-April 1829), and the period when Oliver Cowdery served as scribe (April 1829-June/July 1829).

Its valuable to recognize each of there four periods are smashed into our modern view of the production of the Book of Mormon, but what we actually have was almost entirely composed in the last period. The various accounts are more often than not describing the production of the Book of Lehi which we don't have to read in order to assess the quality of what was produced.

Understanding the early relationship between Smith and Cowdery as collaborators illuminates the early revelations in the D&C and the dynamic between them as they prepared their venture&s first public facing marketing. There is tension in the Lord telling Smith not to pretend to any other gift besides translating the Book of Mormon. There is unity in calling Harris a wicked man in D&C 10.

ETA: it's also valuable to recognize how much spin is on the headings of the D&C, how much of that was produced in the 1850's after the church was in Utah and their history being reinvented. Orson Pratt could almost be considered a co-author of the D&C