True Doctrine

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_marg

Post by _marg »

Jason
I do not own the book nor do I plan on buying it. If you have weblinks I will look at those. On the other point, destroy may be too strong. But let's look at it in a court of law. You want to convict Rigdon of using Smith as his Book of Mormon pawn. In order to to so the lynch pin is whether Rigdon had contact with Smith prior to 1830. To completely dismiss the theory, yes one may need to show it impossible. But to convict Rigdon one must have convincing evidence and the burden of proof is on the prosecutor as the prosecutor is making the accusation. That really is what the issue is, and as far as I have seen I see very little or no evidence. Can you post some here instead of sending me to some book I do not want to buy?



Jason...the main issue here is the claims made regarding the Book of Mormon by religious organizations who claim it as sacred text. No one would care who wrote the Book of Mormon were it not for its use as a sacred text by religious organizations and cult groups and its impact currently and historically on millions of individuals.

The Spalding-Rigdon theory is one theory among a few on how the Book of Mormon came about. I consider it the best theory which fits the available data, from what I’ve read. If you have a better theory, then present it. In the meantime…your characterization that evidence of Rigdon meeting Smith must be established or the theory fails is incorrect. It is not a necessary component of the Spalding-Rigdon theory. Witness statements strengthen the theory but if there were no witness statements it wouldn’t destroy the theory.

It is to be expected in any case in which participants have reason to hide evidence that evidence will be lacking. Despite this though, there is good evidence that Rigdon did meet Smith, but unfortunately I can not do justice on a message board to what is presented in a fairly large chapter of a book. Nor do I get the sense you are interested and open-minded being as you were so eager to dismiss the theory for an unjustifiable reason.

There is one bit of information I find interesting. It’s a 2 part newpaper article on Dale Broadhurst’s site http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NY/courier.htm

I’ll post the first part only:

Mormonism -- RELIGIOUS FANATICISM --
CHURCH AND STATE PARTY.
Canandaigua, Aug. 15th, 1831.

New York has been celebrated for her parties -- her sects -- her explosions -- her curiosities of human character her fanaticism political and religious. The strangest parties and wildest opinions originate among us. The human mind in our rich vales -- on our sunny hills -- in our crowded cities or thousand villages -- or along the shores of our translucent lakes bursts beyond all ordinary trammels; throws aside with equal fastiduousness the maxims of ages and the discipline of generations, and strikes out new paths for itself. In politics -- in religion -- in all the great concerns of man, New York has a character peculiarly her own; strikingly original, purely American -- energetic and wild to the very farthest boundaries of imagination. The centre of the state is quiet comparatively, and grave to a degree; but its two extremities, Eastern and Western; the city of the Atlantic, and the continuous villages of the Lakes, contain all that is curious in human character -- daring in conception -- wild in invention, and singular in practical good sense as well as in solemn foolery.

You have heard of Mormonism -- who has not? Paragraph has followed paragraph in the newspapers, recounting the movements, detailing their opinions and surprising distant readers with the traits of a singularly new religious sect which had its origin in this state. Mormonism is the latest device of roguery, ingenuity, ignorance and religious excitement combined, and acting on materials prepared by those who ought to know better. It is one of the mental exhalations of Western New York.

The individuals who gave birth to this species of fanaticism are very simple personages, and not known until this thrust them into notice. They are the old and young Joe Smith's Harris a farmer, Ringdon a sort of preacher on general religion from Ohio, together with several other persons equally infatuated, cunning, and hypocritic. The first of these persons, Smith, resided on the borders of Wayne and Ontario counties on the road leading from Canandaigua to Palmyra. Old Joe Smith had been a country pedlar in his younger days, and possessed all the shrewdness, cunning, and small intrigue which are generally and justly attributed to that description of persons. He was a great story teller, full of anecdotes picked up in his peregrinations -- and possessed a tongue as smooth as oil and as quick as lightning. He had been quite a speculator in a small way in his younger days, but had been more fortunate in picking up materials for his tongue than stuff for the purse. Of late years he picked up his living somewhere in the town of Manchester by following a branch of the "American System" -- the manufacture of gingerbread and such like domestic wares. In this article he was a considerable speculator, having on hand during a fall of price no less than two baskets full, and I believe his son, Joe, Junior, was at times a partner in the concern. What their dividends were I could not learn, but they used considerable molasses, and were against the duty on that article. Young Joe, who afterwards figured so largely in the Mormon religion, was at that period a careless, indolent, idle, and shiftless fellow. He hung round the villages and strolled round the taverns without any end or aim -- without any positive defect or as little merit in his character. He was rather a stout able bodied fellow, and might have made a good living in such a country as this where any one who is willing to work, can soon get on in the world. He was however, the son of a speculative Yankee pedlar, and was brought up to live by his wits. Harris also one of the fathers of Mormonism was a substantial farmer near Palmyra -- full of passages of the scriptures -- rather wild and flighty in his talk occasionally -- but holding a very respectable character in his neighborhood for sobriety, sense and hard working.

A few years ago the Smith's and others who were influenced by their notions, caught an idea that money was hid in several of the hills which give variety to the country between the Canandaigua Lake and Palmyra on the Erie Canal. Old Smith had in his pedling excursions picked up many stories of men getting rich in New England by digging in certain places and stumbling upon chests of money. The fellow excited the imagination of his few auditors, and made them all anxious to lay hold of the bilk axe and the shovel. As yet no fanatical or religious character had been assumed by the Smith's. They exhibited the simple and ordinary desire of getting rich by some short cut if possible. With this view the Smith's and their associates commenced digging, in the numerous hills which diversify the face of the country in the town of Manchester. The sensible country people paid slight attention to them at first. They knew them to be a thriftless set, more addicted to exerting their wits than their industry, readier at inventing stories and tales than attending church or engaging in any industrious trade. On the sides & in the slopes of several of these hills, these excavations are still to be seen. They Would occasionally conceal their purposes, and at other times reveal them by such snatches as might excite curiosity. They dug these holes by day, and at night talked and dreamed over the counties' riches they should enjoy, if they could only hit upon an iron chest full of dollars. In excavating the grounds, they began by taking up the green sod in the form of a circle of six feet diameter--then would continue to dig to the depth of ten, twenty, and sometimes thirty feet. At last some person who joined them spoke of a person in Ohio near Painesville, who had a particular felicity in finding out the spots of ground where money is hid and riches obtained. He related long stories how this person had been along shore in the east -- how he had much experience in money digging -- how he dreamt of the very spots where it could be found. "Can we get that man here?" asked the enthusiastic Smiths. "Why," said the other, "I guess as how we could by going for him." "How far off?" "I guess some two hundred miles -- I would go for him myself but I want a little change to bear my expenses." To work the whole money-digging crew went to get some money to pay the expenses of bringing on a man who could dream out the exact and particular spots where money in iron chests was hid under ground. Old Smith returned to his gingerbread factory -- young Smith to his financing faculties, and after some time, by hook or by crook, they contrived to scrape together a little "change" sufficient to fetch on the money dreamer from Ohio.

After the lapse of some weeks the expedition was completed, and the famous Ohio man made his appearance among them. This recruit was the most cunning, intelligent, and odd of the whole. He had been a preacher of almost every religion -- a teacher of all sorts of morals. -- He was perfectly au fait with every species of prejudice, folly or fanaticism, which governs the mass of enthusiasts. In the course of his experience, he had attended all sorts of camp-meetings, prayer meetings, anxious meetings, and revival meetings. He knew every turn of the human mind in relation to these matters. He had a superior knowledge of human nature, considerable talent, great plausibility, and knew how to work the passions as exactly as a Cape Cod sailor knows how to work a whale ship. His name I believe is Henry Rangdon or Ringdon, or some such word. About the time that this person appeared among them, a splendid excavation was begun in a long narrow hill, between Manchester and Palmyra. This hill has since been called by some, the Golden Bible Hill. The road from Canandaigua to Palmyra, runs along its western base. At the northern extremity the hill is quite abrupt and narrow. It runs to the south for a half mile and then spreads out into a piece of broad table land, covered with beautiful orchards and wheat fields. On the east, the Canandaigua outlet runs past it on its way to the beautiful village of Vienna in Phelps. It is profusely covered to the top with Beech, Maple, Bass, and White-wood -- the northern extremity is quite bare of trees. In the face of this hill, the money diggers renewed their work with fresh ardour, Ringdon partly uniting with them in their operations.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

marg wrote:Jason
I do not own the book nor do I plan on buying it. If you have weblinks I will look at those. On the other point, destroy may be too strong. But let's look at it in a court of law. You want to convict Rigdon of using Smith as his Book of Mormon pawn. In order to to so the lynch pin is whether Rigdon had contact with Smith prior to 1830. To completely dismiss the theory, yes one may need to show it impossible. But to convict Rigdon one must have convincing evidence and the burden of proof is on the prosecutor as the prosecutor is making the accusation. That really is what the issue is, and as far as I have seen I see very little or no evidence. Can you post some here instead of sending me to some book I do not want to buy?



Jason...the main issue here is the claims made regarding the Book of Mormon by religious organizations who claim it as sacred text. No one would care who wrote the Book of Mormon were it not for its use as a sacred text by religious organizations and cult groups and its impact currently and historically on millions of individuals.

The Spalding-Rigdon theory is one theory among a few on how the Book of Mormon came about. I consider it the best theory which fits the available data, from what I’ve read. If you have a better theory, then present it. In the meantime…your characterization that evidence of Rigdon meeting Smith must be established or the theory fails is incorrect. It is not a necessary component of the Spalding-Rigdon theory. Witness statements strengthen the theory but if there were no witness statements it wouldn’t destroy the theory.

It is to be expected in any case in which participants have reason to hide evidence that evidence will be lacking. Despite this though, there is good evidence that Rigdon did meet Smith, but unfortunately I can not do justice on a message board to what is presented in a fairly large chapter of a book. Nor do I get the sense you are interested and open-minded being as you were so eager to dismiss the theory for an unjustifiable reason.

There is one bit of information I find interesting. It’s a 2 part newpaper article on Dale Broadhurst’s site http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NY/courier.htm

I’ll post the first part only:

Mormonism -- RELIGIOUS FANATICISM --
CHURCH AND STATE PARTY.
Canandaigua, Aug. 15th, 1831.

New York has been celebrated for her parties -- her sects -- her explosions -- her curiosities of human character her fanaticism political and religious. The strangest parties and wildest opinions originate among us. The human mind in our rich vales -- on our sunny hills -- in our crowded cities or thousand villages -- or along the shores of our translucent lakes bursts beyond all ordinary trammels; throws aside with equal fastiduousness the maxims of ages and the discipline of generations, and strikes out new paths for itself. In politics -- in religion -- in all the great concerns of man, New York has a character peculiarly her own; strikingly original, purely American -- energetic and wild to the very farthest boundaries of imagination. The centre of the state is quiet comparatively, and grave to a degree; but its two extremities, Eastern and Western; the city of the Atlantic, and the continuous villages of the Lakes, contain all that is curious in human character -- daring in conception -- wild in invention, and singular in practical good sense as well as in solemn foolery.

You have heard of Mormonism -- who has not? Paragraph has followed paragraph in the newspapers, recounting the movements, detailing their opinions and surprising distant readers with the traits of a singularly new religious sect which had its origin in this state. Mormonism is the latest device of roguery, ingenuity, ignorance and religious excitement combined, and acting on materials prepared by those who ought to know better. It is one of the mental exhalations of Western New York.

The individuals who gave birth to this species of fanaticism are very simple personages, and not known until this thrust them into notice. They are the old and young Joe Smith's Harris a farmer, Ringdon a sort of preacher on general religion from Ohio, together with several other persons equally infatuated, cunning, and hypocritic. The first of these persons, Smith, resided on the borders of Wayne and Ontario counties on the road leading from Canandaigua to Palmyra. Old Joe Smith had been a country pedlar in his younger days, and possessed all the shrewdness, cunning, and small intrigue which are generally and justly attributed to that description of persons. He was a great story teller, full of anecdotes picked up in his peregrinations -- and possessed a tongue as smooth as oil and as quick as lightning. He had been quite a speculator in a small way in his younger days, but had been more fortunate in picking up materials for his tongue than stuff for the purse. Of late years he picked up his living somewhere in the town of Manchester by following a branch of the "American System" -- the manufacture of gingerbread and such like domestic wares. In this article he was a considerable speculator, having on hand during a fall of price no less than two baskets full, and I believe his son, Joe, Junior, was at times a partner in the concern. What their dividends were I could not learn, but they used considerable molasses, and were against the duty on that article. Young Joe, who afterwards figured so largely in the Mormon religion, was at that period a careless, indolent, idle, and shiftless fellow. He hung round the villages and strolled round the taverns without any end or aim -- without any positive defect or as little merit in his character. He was rather a stout able bodied fellow, and might have made a good living in such a country as this where any one who is willing to work, can soon get on in the world. He was however, the son of a speculative Yankee pedlar, and was brought up to live by his wits. Harris also one of the fathers of Mormonism was a substantial farmer near Palmyra -- full of passages of the scriptures -- rather wild and flighty in his talk occasionally -- but holding a very respectable character in his neighborhood for sobriety, sense and hard working.

A few years ago the Smith's and others who were influenced by their notions, caught an idea that money was hid in several of the hills which give variety to the country between the Canandaigua Lake and Palmyra on the Erie Canal. Old Smith had in his pedling excursions picked up many stories of men getting rich in New England by digging in certain places and stumbling upon chests of money. The fellow excited the imagination of his few auditors, and made them all anxious to lay hold of the bilk axe and the shovel. As yet no fanatical or religious character had been assumed by the Smith's. They exhibited the simple and ordinary desire of getting rich by some short cut if possible. With this view the Smith's and their associates commenced digging, in the numerous hills which diversify the face of the country in the town of Manchester. The sensible country people paid slight attention to them at first. They knew them to be a thriftless set, more addicted to exerting their wits than their industry, readier at inventing stories and tales than attending church or engaging in any industrious trade. On the sides & in the slopes of several of these hills, these excavations are still to be seen. They Would occasionally conceal their purposes, and at other times reveal them by such snatches as might excite curiosity. They dug these holes by day, and at night talked and dreamed over the counties' riches they should enjoy, if they could only hit upon an iron chest full of dollars. In excavating the grounds, they began by taking up the green sod in the form of a circle of six feet diameter--then would continue to dig to the depth of ten, twenty, and sometimes thirty feet. At last some person who joined them spoke of a person in Ohio near Painesville, who had a particular felicity in finding out the spots of ground where money is hid and riches obtained. He related long stories how this person had been along shore in the east -- how he had much experience in money digging -- how he dreamt of the very spots where it could be found. "Can we get that man here?" asked the enthusiastic Smiths. "Why," said the other, "I guess as how we could by going for him." "How far off?" "I guess some two hundred miles -- I would go for him myself but I want a little change to bear my expenses." To work the whole money-digging crew went to get some money to pay the expenses of bringing on a man who could dream out the exact and particular spots where money in iron chests was hid under ground. Old Smith returned to his gingerbread factory -- young Smith to his financing faculties, and after some time, by hook or by crook, they contrived to scrape together a little "change" sufficient to fetch on the money dreamer from Ohio.

After the lapse of some weeks the expedition was completed, and the famous Ohio man made his appearance among them. This recruit was the most cunning, intelligent, and odd of the whole. He had been a preacher of almost every religion -- a teacher of all sorts of morals. -- He was perfectly au fait with every species of prejudice, folly or fanaticism, which governs the mass of enthusiasts. In the course of his experience, he had attended all sorts of camp-meetings, prayer meetings, anxious meetings, and revival meetings. He knew every turn of the human mind in relation to these matters. He had a superior knowledge of human nature, considerable talent, great plausibility, and knew how to work the passions as exactly as a Cape Cod sailor knows how to work a whale ship. His name I believe is Henry Rangdon or Ringdon, or some such word. About the time that this person appeared among them, a splendid excavation was begun in a long narrow hill, between Manchester and Palmyra. This hill has since been called by some, the Golden Bible Hill. The road from Canandaigua to Palmyra, runs along its western base. At the northern extremity the hill is quite abrupt and narrow. It runs to the south for a half mile and then spreads out into a piece of broad table land, covered with beautiful orchards and wheat fields. On the east, the Canandaigua outlet runs past it on its way to the beautiful village of Vienna in Phelps. It is profusely covered to the top with Beech, Maple, Bass, and White-wood -- the northern extremity is quite bare of trees. In the face of this hill, the money diggers renewed their work with fresh ardour, Ringdon partly uniting with them in their operations.


This speculative yellow journalism is your evidence of Rigdon being involved with Smith prior to 1830? Weak evidence in a court of law.

by the way, I you have now revised the issue. I spoke to the issue of Rigdon being the author of the Book of Mormon which I believe was in your initial comments. If Rigdon wrote the Book of Mormon then knowing and meeting Smith prior to 1830 is critical to its being true.

As for other theories, why do I need to propose one simply because I reject yours? I can tell you I find your pet weak without the need to propose another.

Jason
_Polygamy Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am

Post by _Polygamy Porter »

TBMs will not look at anything on the left side of the equation which might alter the right side from remaining the same answer of "the choich is twoooo"


116 pages... LOST, and Spaulding's work ....116 pages

The pages were "lost" and god conveniently told Joe to skip RE TRANSLATING what was lost... no, the "lost 116 pages" WAS spaldings manuscript, it was "lost" after Rigdon realized too many of Spaulding's close friends would recognize it if it were published and call his bluff.

Rigdon was placed at locations where the manuscript had been taken for review..

Rigdon climbed the ranks of LDS quickly..

Rigdon was largely rewritten out of Mormon history after Joseph Smith's death.
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Harmony - Polygamy

Post by _Gazelam »

You have some interesting points you make, I'll try to take them one by one where applicable.

Plural Mariage: D&C 49:15-17 states 15 And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.
16 Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation;
17 And that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made.

Similar scriptures are found elsewhere. This is the Law of God to the General assembly, but despite this we know that God has commanded men in the past to take more than one wife. Such was the case in Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - among others (D&C 132.) This ennobling and exalting principle was practised throughout the whole history of ancient Israel and was a divinely acceptad and approved form of matrimony.This practise was also a part of the restoration of all things, and was practised in righteousness until 1890. At that time the Lord by revelation withdrew the command to practice this Law.

Plural Marriage is not essential to salvation and exaltation. To the righteous Men and Women who practice this Law there are great blessings associated with it. Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom is the continuation of the Family Unit in the Eternities. Those inheriting this are the sons and daughters of God, members of his family, and have their calings and election made sure.

D&C 132: 34-37
34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.
35 Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it.
36 Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was written: Thou shalt not kill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness.
37 Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Harmony - Restoration prior to Atonement

Post by _Gazelam »

This is one I can't see that you have any problem with. The Gospel of Jesus Christ was the same that was taught to Adam, Enoch, Noah and Abraham. the Gospel as they lived it is the same as we practice now. there was no change until the time of Moses.

You may have to re-state what the focus of this particular issue is.

Gaz
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Harmony - mandatory titheing

Post by _Gazelam »

"Righteous Saints in all ages have consecrated their time, talents, strength, properties, and monies to the establishment of the Lord's work and kingdom in their respective days. As circumstances have required, these saints - having set their hearts on righteousness and having actually put first in their lives the things of God's kingdom - have been and are called upon to serve missions, colonize wilderness areas, build temples, go to the ends of the earth on the Lord's errand, magnify calls in their ministry, and contribute of their means in the great welfare and building projects of the church." (Mormon Doctrine p.157.)

Titheing is a part of this. Titheing is not mandatory as a member of the church. Titheing is mandatory to attend the Temple. A Temple recommend is a fair standard of your acceptablility to the Lord. Not paying titheing will not keep you out of heaven, but disobedience will, an unconcecrated heart will.

"The law of titheing is a test by which the people as individuals shall be proved. Any man who fails to observe this principle shall be known as a man who is indifferent to the welfare of Zion, who neglects his duty as a member of the Church... He neglects to do that which would entitle him to receive the blessings and ordinances of the gospel." (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. pp. 225-226.)

Mal. 3:8-10

8 ¶ Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Harmony - non scriptural Temple ceremonies

Post by _Gazelam »

Aside from Law of Moses temple ordinances, there are no Temple ordinances listed in the scriptures. The Higher or Melchezidek Temple ordinances are not set to record aside from some Apocryphal scripture, particularly a book called the Ginza, as well as others.

This is another that you may have to clarify as a question for me.

Gaz
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_marg

Post by _marg »

Jason Bourne wrote:
This speculative yellow journalism is your evidence of Rigdon being involved with Smith prior to 1830? Weak evidence in a court of law.


Most definitely this would be weak evidence in a court of law. A lot more questions and evidence would be required. I'd want to know more about the journalist, where he got his information and I'd want to hear from those he questioned for his article. I happen to find this bit of evidence interesting and it speaks to whether Ridgon could (had the means and time) to have come in contact with Smith pre the Book of Mormon publication, which addressed your point..that Ridgon could not have met Smith pre Book of Mormon. As far as the Chap 11 in the book Who wrote the Book of Mormon which I pointed out as laying out a case for a Rigdon/Smith meeting pre Book of Mormon ...this article was only briefly mentioned and only a portion of it was quoted.

by the way, I you have now revised the issue. I spoke to the issue of Rigdon being the author of the Book of Mormon which I believe was in your initial comments.


The issue I brought up Jason was that religions/cults are typically started up by men in the age group of 30 - 40. Since this board is about Mormonism I mentioned Rigdon as the main creator behind Mormonism, he was 37. As you know you asked for evidence and I told you I'm not about to spend my time laying it out for you. There is tons of evidence but it takes a book's worth at a minimum to do justice to presenting a case for the Spalding-Rigdon theory.

If Rigdon wrote the Book of Mormon then knowing and meeting Smith prior to 1830 is critical to its being true.


Of course, an actual meeting of the two men is critical, but the actual meeting versus evidence of the meeting are different things. A compelling case could still be presented even it no evidence existed. However, I'm talking theoretical, in fact there is evidence of them meeting.

As for other theories, why do I need to propose one simply because I reject yours? I can tell you I find your pet weak without the need to propose another.


Here is what I wrote Jason "If you have a better theory, then present it. In the meantime…"

Am I telling you ..you NEED to present me your theory? I've told I'm not interested in laying out the case for you. Of course you find what I tell you to be weak...I have told you virtually nothing about the Spalding-Rigdon theory.

All I have said is that your dismissal of the theory was unjustifiably based. You do not have evidence that Rigdon and Smith didn't meet pre the Book of Mormon publication. You have not established that a meeting of the 2 men was an impossibility or even unlikely for particular reasons. And you've not suggested a better theory.

So I'm not about to reject the Spalding - Ridgon theory because you say you don't think the men ever met, pre the Book of Mormon publication.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

TBMs will not look at anything on the left side of the equation which might alter the right side from remaining the same answer of "the choich is twoooo"



Some will, some won't.



Rigdon was placed at locations where the manuscript had been taken for review..


Evidence please.

Rigdon climbed the ranks of LDS quickly..


As did dozens of others. Gee, the Church was new, no many members, needed leaders. This is weak.


Rigdon was largely rewritten out of Mormon history after Joseph Smith's death.


He was? He is still in every history I have ever read.

Jason
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

All I have said is that your dismissal of the theory was unjustifiably based. You do not have evidence that Rigdon and Smith didn't meet pre the Book of Mormon publication. You have not established that a meeting of the 2 men was an impossibility or even unlikely for particular reasons. And you've not suggested a better theory.



I do not need to provide evidence for something that is a double negative nor do I need to provide evidence that they did not meet when someone else accuses that they did. This is like me saying to you prove that you do not beat your kid. I make the accusation and now you have to prove me wrong. It does not work that way. Since Rigdon meeting Smith prior to 1830 is critical to the Spalding theory those making the accusation have the burden of proof that it did happen. I have seen scant evidence to conclude that he did. Of course it is possible. They only lived 300 miles apart. But those making the claim need to demonstrate it is probable not just possible and I have seen nothing to convince me it was probable.

So I'm not about to reject the Spalding - Ridgon theory because you say you don't think the men ever met, pre the Book of Mormon publication.


Did I say you have to? I just think the key issue is rather tentative.

Jason
Post Reply