Lars Nielsen's "How the Book of Mormon Came to Pass"

[Dr. Shades]

How can you have read that book but still make the rookie mistake of conflating the rough draft found in the trunk with the finished Manuscript Found?

[Kishkumen]

How can you have read that book but still make the rookie mistake of conflating the rough draft found in the trunk with the finished Manuscript Found?

How can you make silly assumptions?

[Dr. Shades]

How can you have read that book but still make the rookie mistake of conflating the rough draft found in the trunk with the finished Manuscript Found?

How can you make silly assumptions?

It wasn't a silly assumption. You said that "the Book of Mormon bears a generic and rough narrative resemblance to Manuscript Found." The extant manuscript to which we can compare the Book of Mormon is the rough draft recovered from Ms. McKinstry's trunk. You can't say that regarding Manuscript Found, because it's still lost and therefore the only comparison to be made was by the Conneaut Witnesses, not us.

So, was I wrong, and you indeed are NOT buying into the mopologetic B.S. that the trunk manuscript and Manuscript Found are the same thing?

[Kishkumen]

It wasn't a silly assumption. You said that "the Book of Mormon bears a generic and rough narrative resemblance to Manuscript Found." The extant manuscript to which we can compare the Book of Mormon is the rough draft recovered from Ms. McKinstry's trunk. You can't say that regarding Manuscript Found, because it's still lost and therefore the only comparison to be made was by the Conneaut Witnesses, not us.

So, was I wrong, and you indeed are NOT buying into the mopologetic B.S. that the trunk manuscript and Manuscript Found are the same thing?

It is the manuscript we have. I don’t believe that ANY Spalding manuscript is the source of the Book of Mormon. In any case, the Book of Mormon is its own distinct work that belongs to a literary category similar to Manuscript Found. You might call both colonial prose epics.

[Gadianton]

Dr. Shades,

What would be the difference between believing there is a longer Manuscript Found as a critic, and believing in a longer Book of Abraham scroll destroyed in the Chicago fire as an apologist?

[Kishkumen]

Dr. Shades,

What would be the difference between believing there is a longer Manuscript Found as a critic, and believing in a longer Book of Abraham scroll destroyed in the Chicago fire as an apologist?

Thank you! I was thinking the very same thing yesterday. By the time I got back to the thread this morning, asking about this had slipped my mind. With the long scroll there are these remembrances, years after the fact, of seeing a very long scroll unfurled on the floor. The Spalding witnesses are recalling something they have not seen in a while with memories contaminated by awareness of the Book of Mormon. They cannot go back to Spalding’s original work to check their own accuracy. We cannot check their accuracy against the claimed final draft of the Spalding manuscript.

The same standards need to be applied in every case.

[Fence Sitter]

Maybe Don Bradley could reconstruct the lost Spalding manuscript?


By the way, for an excellent unbiased summary of the Lost Spalding manuscript theory see:
The Spalding-Rigdon Theory: Did a Dartmouth Man Author a Divine Text?

[Dr. Shades]

So, was I wrong, and you indeed are NOT buying into the mopologetic B.S. that the trunk manuscript and Manuscript Found are the same thing?

It is the manuscript we have.

That doesn't answer the question. Just because we have a manuscript doesn't mean it's the same as another manuscript that is missing. For example, just because we have The Fellowship of the Ring doesn't mean it's actually the original version of Beowulf. . . feel free to disagree, of course.

So, to summarize, it looks like your answer to the question of whether you've bought into the mopologetic B.S. that the Oberlin Manuscript and Manuscript Found are the same--hook, line, and sinker--is "yes."

Besides, as I wrote in The Spalding-Rigdon theory, "it must be noted that the recovered document, arbitrarily dubbed 'Manuscript Story,' contains plenty of strikeouts and additions. Not only that, but the document ends with a sudden cut-off in mid-sentence, suggesting that the recovered document was, at the very most, only a first draft, and that the final version, 'Manuscript Found,' is still missing." No author in his right mind would take a rough draft--especially one that was only half-written!--to a publishing house and negotiate to get it published. And of course, the fact that Sidney Rigdon was the tanner contracted by that publishing house to do their book binding isn't suspicious at all.

Dr. Shades,

What would be the difference between believing there is a longer Manuscript Found as a critic, and believing in a longer Book of Abraham scroll destroyed in the Chicago fire as an apologist?

Easy. The witnesses to the supposed "longer scroll" didn't describe any unique features that aren't in the papyrii that we still have. The only supposedly unique feature was that the scroll was "long." Now, "long" is an extremely subjective descriptor. Two unrolled scrolls would look "long" to a child in the mid-1800s who had never seen a sheet of paper longer than those found between the covers of a book, whereas it wouldn't appear "long" to a modern trained Egyptologist familiar with the standard lengths of the Book of Breathings and the Book of the Dead (mopologists conveniently sidestep this fact). Same length; different perceptions of whether it counts as "long." Contrast this with the unique features of Manuscript Found described by some of those who were familiar with it, reproduced below.

The Spalding witnesses are recalling something they have not seen in a while with memories contaminated by awareness of the Book of Mormon.

There's no evidence whatsoever that any of the Conneaut Witnesses' memories were "contaminated" by exposure to the Book of Mormon.

Take me for example. Back when I was in 7th grade, in about 1982, I read the first eight "Tarzan" books and part of the ninth. I remember the eighth one as being my favorite. Tarzan swims across a morass and encounters an unspoiled wilderness where dinosaurs still roamed. There were two sentient rival races there--one called the Waz-Don and the other the Ho-Don--who were human-like races with tails. The Waz-Don lived in caves in cliffs and thought that the great God, "Jad-Ben-Otho," had a tail like they did, whereas the Ho-Don lived on an island in the river and believed Jad-Ben-Otho had no tail. Tarzan's rival eventually goes insane and floats naked on a boat into the Ho-Don capital and fools them into believing that he is indeed the great God. He denounces Tarzan to the group--who had previously held him in esteem because of his lack of a tail--and much conflict ensues. Later, Tarzan's son swims across the same morass and saves the day.

So, how's my recollection from nearly DOUBLE the time between when the Conneaut Witnesses became familiar with Manuscript Found and when they gave their statements regarding it? With that in mind, although I've never read any of the Twilight books, my memory has been "contaminated" by multiple references to them in movies and popular culture. Despite this contamination, there is absolutely, utterly NO WAY IN HELL I would possibly think that the eighth Tarzan book was about a girl in Washington State named Bella who encounters a fellow student named Edward who is actually a vampire who is nearly a century old who becomes obsessed with her because he can't read her mind like he can with anyone else. NO WAY IN HELL.

Can you say the same? Think of the last book you read: Did it "contaminate" your memory of a book you read 22 years prior to the point that you thought the recent book was ripped off from the previous book, with the same names, same theme, etc.? If it wouldn't happen to you, why would you conveniently assume that that's what magically happened to the Conneaut Witnesses?

Let's take a closer look at what those familiar with both Manuscript Found and the Book of Mormon had to say. Their words are in blue; boldfacing is mine to draw your eye to the most important parts. My words are in black and in [brackets]:

• The statement of John Spalding:
  

  Solomon Spalding was born in Ashford, Conn. in 1761, and in early life contracted a taste for literary pursuits. After he left school, he entered Plainfield Academy, where he made great proficiency in study, and excelled most of his classmates. He next commenced the study of Law, in Windham county, in which he made little progress, having in the mean time turned his attention to religious subjects. He soon after entered Dartmouth College, with the intention of qualifying himself for the ministry, where he obtained the degree of A. M. and was afterwards regularly ordained. After preaching three or four years, he gave it up, removed to Cherry Valley, N. Y., and commenced the mercantile business in company with his brother Josiah. --
  
  In a few years he failed in business, and in the year 1809 removed to Conneaut, in Ohio. The year following, I removed to Ohio, and found him engaged in building a forge. I made him a visit in about three years after; and found that he had failed, and considerably involved in debt. He then told me had he been writing a book, which he intended to have printed, the avails of which he thought would enable him to pay all his debts. The book was entitled the "Manuscript Found," of which he read to me many passages. -- It was a historical romance of the first settlers of America, endeavoring to show that the American Indians are the descendants of the Jews, or the lost tribes. It gave a detailed account of their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till they arrived inn America, under the command of NEPHI AND LEHI. They afterwards had quarrels and contentions, and separated into two distinct nations, one of which he denominated Nephites and the other Lamanites. Cruel and bloody wars ensued, in which great multitudes were slain. They buried their dead in large heaps, which caused the mounds so common in this country. Their arts, sciences and civilization were brought into view, in order to account for all the curious antiquities, found in various parts of North and South America. I have recently read the Book of Mormon, and to my great surprize I find nearly the same historical matter, names, &c.; as they were in my brother's writings. I well remember that he wrote in the old style, and commenced about every sentence with "and it came to pass," or "now it came to pass," the same as in the Book of Mormon, [The phrase "it came to pass" is NOT FOUND in the Oberlin Manuscript, which the mopologists so desperately want you to believe--and you have obliged them--is the same thing as Manuscript Found. Therefore, familiarity with the Book of Mormon can't possibly cause them to magically believe the phrase was in Spalding's original when it actually wasn't.] and according to the best of my recollection and belief, it is the same as my brother Solomon wrote, with the exception of the religious matter. -- By what means it has fallen into the hands of Joseph Smith, Jr. I am unable to determine.

• The statement of Martha Spalding:
  

  I was personally acquainted with Solomon Spalding, about twenty years ago. I was at his house a short time before he left Conneaut; he was then writing a historical novel founded upon the first settlers of America. He represented them as an enlightened and warlike people. He had for many years contended that the aborigines of America were the descendants of some of the lost tribes of Israel, and this idea he carried out in the book in question. --
  
  The lapse of time which has intervened, prevents my recollecting but few of the leading incidents of his writings; but the names of Nephi and Lehi are yet fresh in my memory, as being the principal heroes of his tale. They were officers of the company which first came off from Jerusalem. He gave a particular account of their journey by land and sea, till they arrived in America, after which, disputes arose between the chiefs, which caused them to separate into different lands, one of which was called Lamanites and the other Nephites. Between these were recounted tremendous battles, which frequently covered the ground with the slain; and their being buried in large heaps was the cause of the numerous mounds in the country. -- Some of these people he represented as being very large.
  
  I have read the Book of Mormon, which has brought fresh to my recollection the writings of Solomon Spalding; and I have no manner of doubt that the historical part of it, is the same that I read and heard read, more than 20 years ago. The old, obsolete style, and the phrases of "and it came to pass," &c.; are the same.

• The statement of John N. Miller:
  

  In the year 1811, I was in the employ of Henry Lake and Solomon Spalding, at Conneaut, engaged in rebuilding a forge. While there, I boarded and lodged in the family of said Spalding, for several months. I was soon introduced to the manuscript of Spalding, and perused them as often as I had leisure. He had written two or three books or pamphlets on different subjects; [There you go. Mopologists love to peddle the fiction that Spalding only wrote one thing. . . because an author cannot POSSIBLY write more than one thing, of course--but here is someone who acknowledges that Spalding penned more than one work. Just because we have one doesn't mean we have them all, which should be common sense.] but that which more particularly drew my attention, was one which he called the "Manuscript Found." From this he would frequently read some humorous passages to the company present. It purported to be the history of the first settlement of America, before discovered by Columbus. He brought them off from Jerusalem, under their leaders; detailing their travels by land and water, their manners, customs, laws, wars, &c.; He said that he designed it as a historical novel, and that in after years it would be believed by many people as much as the history of England. He soon after failed in business, and told me he should retire from the din of his creditors, finish his book and have it published, which would enable him to pay his debts and support his family. He soon after removed to Pittsburgh, as I understood.
  
  I have recently examined the Book of Mormon, and find in it the writings of Solomon Spalding, from beginning to end, but mixed up with scripture and other religious matter, which I did not meet with in the "Manuscript Found." [This is a repeating pattern. If their memory of Manuscript Found really was contaminated by their reading of The Book of Mormon, they would've falsely recalled the religious parts being there, too--but they didn't.] Many of the passages in the Mormon Book are verbatim from Spalding, and others in part. The names of Nephi, Lehi, Moroni, and in fact all the principal names, are bro't fresh to my recollection, by the Gold Bible. When Spalding divested his history of its fabulous names, by a verbal explanation, he landed his people near the Straits of Darien, which I am very confident he called Zarahemla, they were marched about that country for a length of time, in which wars and great blood shed ensued, he brought them across North America in a north east direction.

• The statement of Henry Lake:
  

  I left the state of New York, late in the year 1810, and arrived at this place, about the 1st of Jan. following. Soon after my arrival, I formed a co-partnership with Solomon Spalding, for the purpose of re-building a forge which he had commenced a year or two before. He very frequently read to me from a manuscript which he was writing, which he entitled the "Manuscript Found," and which he represented as being found in this town. I spent many hours in hearing him read said writings, and became well acquainted with its contents. He wished me to assist him in getting his production printed, alleging that a book of that kind would meet with a rapid sale. I designed doing so, but the forge not meeting our anticipations, we failed in business, when I declined having any thing to do with the publication of the book. This book represented the American Indians as the descendants of the lost tribes, gave an account of their leaving Jerusalem, their contentions and wars, which were many and great. One time, when he was reading to me the tragic account of Laban, I pointed out to him what I considered an inconsistency, which he promised to correct; but by referring to the Book of Mormon, I find to my surprise that it stands there just as he read it to me then. -- [I can't recall where I read it, but Mr. Lake later said what the error was. It was the passage wherein an Angel stops Laman and Lemuel from beating Nephi and Sam, saying, "Why do ye smite your younger brother with a rod?" Both Nephi and Sam were being beaten, so it should've read "brotherS," plural. Sure enough, the error still stands.]
  
  Some months ago I borrowed the Golden Bible, put it into my pocket, carried it home, and thought no more of it. -- About a week after, my wife found the book in my coat pocket, as it hung up, and commenced reading it aloud as I lay upon the bed. She had not read 20 minutes till I was astonished to find the same passages in it that Spalding had read to me more, than twenty years before, from his "Manuscript Found." Since that, I have more fully examined the said Golden Bible, and have no hesitation in saying that the historical part of it is principally, if not wholly taken from the "Manuscript Found." I well recollect telling Mr. Spalding, that the so frequent use of the words "And it came to pass," "Now it came to pass," rendered it ridiculous. Spalding left here in 1812, and I furnished him the means to carry him to Pittsburgh, where he said he would get the book printed, and pay me. But I never heard any more from him or his writings, till I saw them in the Book of Mormon.

• The statement of Aaron Wright:
  

  I first became acquainted with Solomon Spalding in 1808 or 9, when he commenced building a forge on Conneaut creek. When at his house, one day, he showed and read to me a history he was writing, of the lost tribes of Israel, purporting that they were the first settlers of America, and that the Indians were their decendants. Upon this subject we had frequent conversations. He traced their journey from Jerusalem to America, as it is given in the Book of Mormon, excepting the religious matter. The historical part of the Book of Mormon, I know to be the same as I read and heard read from the writings of Spalding, more than twenty years ago; the names more especially are the same without any alteration. He told me his object was to account for all the fortifications, &c.; to be found in this country, and said that in time it would be fully believed by all, except learned men and historians. I once anticipated reading his writings in print, but little expected to see them in a new Bible. Spalding had many other manuscripts, which I expect to see when Smith translates his other plate. In conclusion, I will observe, that the names of, and most of the historical part of the Book of Mormon, were as familiar to me before I read it, as most modern history. If it is not Spalding's writing, it is the same as he wrote; and if Smith was inspired, I think it was by the same spirit that Spalding was, which he confessed to be the love of money.

• The statement of Oliver Smith:
  

  When Solomon Spalding first came to this place, he purchased a tract of land, surveyed it out and commenced telling it. While engaged in this business, he boarded at my house, in all nearly six months. All his leisure hours were occupied in writing a historical novel, founded upon the first settlers of this country. He said he intended to trace their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till their arrival in America, give an account of their arts, sciences, civilization, wars and contentions. In this way, he would give a satisfactory account of all of the old mounds, so common to this country. [Here is a detail that is NOT found in the Book of Mormon, so the Book of Mormon cannot have made him believe that this detail was in Manuscript Found.] During the time he was at my house, I read and heard read one hundred pages or more. Nephi and Lehi were by him represented as leading characters, when they first started for America. Their main object was to escape the judgments which they supposed were coming upon the old world. But no religious matter was introduced, as I now recollect. Just before he left this place, Spalding sent for me to call on him, which I did. --
  
  He then said, that although he was in my debt, he intended to leave the country, and hoped I would not prevent him, for, says he, you know I have been writing the history of the first settlement of America, and I intend to go to Pittsburgh, and there live a retired life, till I have completed the work, and when it is printed, it will bring me a fine sum of money, which will enable me to return and pay off all my debts -- the book, you know will sell, as every one is anxious to learn something upon that subject. This was the last I heard of Spalding or his book, until the Book of Mormon came into the neighborhood. When I heard the historical part of it related, I at once said it was the writings of old Solomon Spalding. Soon after, I obtained the book, and on reading it, found much of it the same as Spalding had written, more than twenty years before.

• The statement of Nahum Howard:
  

  I first became acquainted with Solomon Spalding, in Dec. 1810. After that time I frequently saw him at his house, and also at my house. I once in conversation with him expressed a surprise at not having any account of the inhabitants once in this country, who erected the old forts, mounds, &c.; He then told me that he was writing a history of that race of people; and afterwards frequently showed me his writings, which I read. I have lately read the Book of Mormon, and believe it to be the same as Spalding wrote, except the religious part. He told me that he intended to get his writings published in Pittsburgh, and he thought that in one century from that time, it would be believed as much as any other history.

• The statement of Artemas Cunningham:
  

  In the month of October, 1811, I went from the township of Madison to Conneaut, for the purpose of securing a debt due me from Solomon Spalding. I tarried with him nearly two days, for the purpose of accomplishing my object, which I was finally unable to do. I found him destitute of the means of paying his debts. His only hope of ever paying his debts, appeared to be upon the sale of a book, which he had been writing. He endeavored to convince me from the nature and character of the work, that it would meet with a ready sale. Before showing me his manuscripts, he went into a verbal relation of its outlines, saying that it was a fabulous or romantic history of the first settlement of this country, and as it purported to have been a record found buried in the earth, or in a cave, he had adopted the ancient or scripture style of writing. He then presented his manuscripts, when we sat down and spent a good share of the night, in reading them, and conversing upon them. I well remember the name of Nephi, which appeared to be the principal hero of the story.
  
  The frequent repetition of the phrase, "I Nephi," I recollect as distinctly as though it was but yesterday, although the general features of the story have passed from my memory, through the lapse of 22 years. He attempted to account for the numerous antiquities which are found upon this continent, and remarked that, after this generation had passed away, his account of the first inhabitants of America would be considered as authentic as any other history. The Mormon Bible I have partially examined, and am fully of the opinion that Solomon Spalding had written its outlines before he left Conneaut.

Not only this, but there was at least one, maybe two other witnesses (I can't recall the specific websites that reproduced their testimonies), who stated outright that Spalding decided to scrap what he was working on and totally redo it in "the scriptural style" to be more authentic. That explains the shift from the Oberlin Manuscript to Manuscript Found.

[Kishkumen]

Shades, I can tell you how these people could have experienced memory contamination: Spalding’s writing sucks. It is boring as hell, and as tedious as parts of the Book of Mormon can be, its opening chapters are much more engaging than Spalding’s extant work.

[Dr. Shades]

Shades, I can tell you how these people could have experienced memory contamination: Spalding’s writing sucks. It is boring as hell, and as tedious as parts of the Book of Mormon can be, its opening chapters are much more engaging than Spalding’s extant work.

So if an author’s two works are boring, then that accounts for why everyone magically remembers the names “Nephi” and “Lehi” even though they didn’t actually exist in the first one?

Please explain the connection, ‘cause I don’t see how.