DAN VOGEL DISCUSSES THE SPALDING/RIGDON THEORY

[_why me]

were Sidney, I would claim it as my work and create a Joseph Smith type story behind it...

Almost to his dying breath, Sidney Rigdon expressed the unwavering conviction that there must be two
latter day leaders -- one an oracle and the other the spokesman for that oracle. This was a Moses-Aaron
relationship in the "restored church" that Rigdon never departed from --- (though in his old age he seems
to have been ready to see Stephen Post become the spokesman for a Rigdon-oracle).

Had Rigdon operated on his own -- claiming to have discovered the book -- how would he have introduced
his much-needed oracle into the picture? He would have been an Amulek without an Alma -- an announcer
with nothing more than the book itself to announce.

But there would have been additional problems for Rigdon. According to several old sources, Rigdon himself
was predicting a new revelation forthcoming -- was professing that the Campbell-Scott brand of Christian
primitivism had been taught in America in ancient times, etc. etc. For Rigdon to have proclaimed himself as
the finder of the new revelation would have reminded far too many nay-sayers that it was Rigdon who was
promoting this "restored religion" well before he made the wonderful discovery.

Add to all of that, the fact that Rigdon was an educated man, and additional problems arise. He reportedly
taught Greek to Zeb Rudolph and other early Campbellites -- he seems to have known some Hebrew as well.
Rigdon was schooled in divinity (and languages?) by the noted Rev. Andrew Clark, but Rigdon was also
self-educated in history, politics, science, etc. He was far "too learned" to have been trusted by the religionists
of his day as one of "the weak things of the earth" God made use of in such situations. It would be far, far
better to have the "finder and translator" be an uneducated man -- a simple farmer, with no knowledge of
ancient history and ancient languages -- a fellow who had NOT been proclaiming the forthcoming millennium,
restoration of apostolic spiritual gifts and an "ancient gospel" once before preached in the Americas.

What if.........

What if Rigdon, in 1826, believed Smith to be a true prophet -- and Smith believed that Rigdon had a true
"second witness for Jesus Christ" of ancient origin -- a book nearly finished, but needing more revelations????

What might have come of an 1826 cooperation between two such visionaries, each of whom believed the
other to possess the needed "keys of the Kingdom" ????

UD

All this is well and good, uncle dale, but the fact remains that poor sidney failed in his mission. He left a beaten man and allowed Joe to continue the work. This can be just a little problematic. No one succeeded in theri mission. Joe was murdered...sidney was beaten and left just alittle out of it. Plus, we have all the other actors who come into play in Book of Mormon translation and in the priesthood restoration. Quite a picture of deceit emerges if one buys into the ridgon/spaulding theory. We need to remember that not just the book was introduced but also a whole new way of doing the christian religion. A book is one thing....but to restore a 'true church' is quite another.

And here is where the problem is located. A book can be just a book but to have people claiming visitations is quite another.

I don't think that it will be possible to give an absolute finding that ridgon wrote the book. Too much time has passed. But you do create a tangled web of speculation.

[_why me]

I think Dan that the Ridgonites do have difficulties in explaining the Ridgon Theory. It does seem almost impossible that Sidney had something to do with the writing of the Book of Mormon but since at that time, people had difficulties in believing Joseph Smith authorship because of his perceived limited intelligence this theory of Rigdon authorship will continue to have play. But how it could have been done (Rigdon authorship) and then get others involved in it does seem to be nearly impossible in my opinion.

The theory was got up by those who knew neither Joseph Smith nor the content of the Book of Mormon. Some may have had the rationale you posit, but that's not the rationale that began the theory.

I suppose that many rationales can begin a theory but that does not make it true as you know. How did theridgon theory emerge? Also, have you changed your opinion of the ridgon theory now that you have tangled with uncle dale's ridgonites?

For now, I can't buy into the ridgon theory. Too many people would be in on the plot for it to succeed and the church restoration is too elaborate for it to have happened in my opinion. If it was just a book involved, well, who knows but with all the other twists in the early church, I just see too many bugbears.

[_Dan Vogel]

I think Dan that the Ridgonites do have difficulties in explaining the Ridgon Theory. It does seem almost impossible that Sidney had something to do with the writing of the Book of Mormon but since at that time, people had difficulties in believing Joseph Smith authorship because of his perceived limited intelligence this theory of Rigdon authorship will continue to have play. But how it could have been done (Rigdon authorship) and then get others involved in it does seem to be nearly impossible in my opinion.

The theory was got up by those who knew neither Joseph Smith nor the content of the Book of Mormon. Some may have had the rationale you posit, but that's not the rationale that began the theory.

I suppose that many rationales can begin a theory but that does not make it true as you know. How did theridgon theory emerge? Also, have you changed your opinion of the ridgon theory now that you have tangled with uncle dale's ridgonites?

For now, I can't buy into the ridgon theory. Too many people would be in on the plot for it to succeed and the church restoration is too elaborate for it to have happened in my opinion. If it was just a book involved, well, who knows but with all the other twists in the early church, I just see too many bugbears.

As one who does know Joseph Smith and the content of the Book of Mormon, the Spalding theory makes no sense whatsoever. Joseph Smith dictated revelation after revealtion in the same manner as he dictated the Book of Mormon, before witnesses and without the aid of MSS. I think it's quite clear Joseph Smith had the ability.

[_Uncle Dale]

All this is well and good, uncle dale, but the fact remains that poor sidney failed in his mission.
He left a beaten man and allowed Joe to continue the work.

Not excactly -- as late as 1839 Rigdon was still running the Church. That came to an abrupt
end when the Smith brothers got out of Liberty Jail -- but Rigdon remained a powerful figure
through the year 1840. His failure to secure the hoped-for federal redress for Mormon losses
in Missouri marked the beginning of his decline ---- not exactly leaving "a beaten man."

When Rigdon did leave, in the late spring of 1844, it was in the re-instated position of counsellor
(albeit he had slipped in authority to behind Hyrum), and as Joseph Smith's Vice-Presidential running-mate.
He gave a major address at the Spring 1844 Nauvoo General Conference and in some ways
was at the height of his post-Missouri power then.

Only after his excommunication later that year was he anything like a "beaten man" -- but
even then he managed to gather about him several notable Mormons and a few hundred
followers -- he started up a newspaper of his own in Pittsburgh and had the makings of a
successful splinter group. All this was several months after Joseph Smith died -- so your summary is not
exactly correct. The part that is true, is that Rigdon lacked the charisma Joseph Smith had enjoyed for
so many years. Joseph Smith could get followers to believe in him, and continue trusting in him, even after
numerous mis-steps and disappointments ---- Rigdon never commanded that level of loyalty
and authority. Which is yet another reason why he probably did not try to "make it on his own"
back in 1829-30, after splitting with the Campbellites.

This can be just a little problematic. No one succeeded in theri mission. Joe was murdered...
sidney was beaten and left just alittle out of it. Plus, we have all the other actors who come into play
in Book of Mormon translation and in the priesthood restoration.

I think it must have been a MAJOR source of disappointment to Rigdon, that the Second Coming of
Christ and the Millennium did not appear during the 1830s --- and that the Missouri "Zion" was never
"redeemed" during his career as a Mormon leader. THAT was his failure, I think --- for everything I
can fathom about the man tells me he truly believed the "end times" were at hand, and that he was
destined to play a very major role un setting up the Kingdom spoken of un the Book of Daniel.

Quite a picture of deceit emerges if one buys into the ridgon/spaulding theory. We need to remember
that not just the book was introduced but also a whole new way of doing the christian religion. A book
is one thing....but to restore a 'true church' is quite another.

Indeed -- which is why I'm fairly certain that Rigdon did not have in mind the goal of establishing a new
"restored" church until 1826 (when I think he first crossed paths with Joseph Smith in Ohio). The notion that Rigdon
copied some of Spalding's writings in order to have material useful in the establishment of a new church
strikes me as being utterly ridiculous. I'm convinced that through 1824-25-26 his goal was merely to
"reform" the Campbellite movement, so as to include spiritual gifts and radical apostolic primitivism.

The concept of actually restoring the long-defunt Apostolic Church had its roots in Rigdon and Scott setting
up the "Church of Christ" in Pittsburgh, in 1823-24 --- but that "restoration" was purposely a limited one,
without any new revelation, new scriptures, or exclusive priesthood authority.

As I said, I do not think such things flooded Rigdon's brain until 1826, after encountering his "Alma" in Joseph Smith.

And here is where the problem is located. A book can be just a book but to have people claiming
visitations is quite another.

I don't think that it will be possible to give an absolute finding that ridgon wrote the book. Too much time
has passed. But you do create a tangled web of speculation.

I approched some folks in Provo with an enlargement of an idea first voiced by Matthew J. Tandy -- and that
entails our producing a Rigdon book with alternating chapters written by loyal LDS scholars as well as my
own "friends." It might make for an interesting volume -----

A book showing Rigdon's probable contributions to Mormonism, with the LDS writers focused on 1830-1844,
and the anti-Mormons focused on 1820-1829. The LDS affirming the D&C section, saying that Rigdon paved
the way for Mormonism, but "he knew it not;" while the antis would be focused on the idea that he very well
"knew it."

We shall see.....

UD

[_Uncle Dale]

We shall see.....

UD

Below you will see a tabulation of the pioneer settlers of Auburn Twp., Geauga County, Ohio, whose
names appear in the public records between 1820 and 1830.

This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but it should cover about 90% of the adult males who
lived there for at least a year during that period.

These were all neighbors of Elder Sidney Rigdon, who lived a couple of miles west fo the Auburn line.
About 20% of these pioneers came from the area imemdiately surrounding the Joseph Smith, Sr. farm
in Manchester, NY. This 20% of the Auburn population (many of whom must have been acquainted with
the Manchester Smiths on a personal basis) tended to clister in the center, to a little west of the center
of the township.

For example, when riding his horse east from his home, Elder Sidney Rigdon would have crossed the
property of Arnold Harrington soon after entering Auburn township. Harrington was a former near neighbor
of what became the Joseph Smith, Sr. farm, back in NY. His name appears in the local road records
and those of his relatives appear in other Manchester/Farmington area public documents. Harrington was
a Baptist (as was Rigdon during the 1820s) and Harrington was an Aubirn representative to Baptist meetings
during the 1830s. It is fairly certain that Arnold Harrington would have known Sidney Rigdon on a personal
basis throughout the 1826-32 period, when Rigdon made frequent trips into Auburn.




A larger, clearer version of this tabulation is here:
http://sidneyrigdon.com/PICS/1820-30a.gif


UD

[_Uncle Dale]

These were all neighbors of Elder Sidney Rigdon...

UD

An e-mail correspondent send me his message, saying "I'm surprise that your investigations do not
show Gad Stafford in Ohio before 1829. He could have had nothing to do with the Book of Mormon."

In response, let me say that I never accused Gad Stafford of writing (or facilitating the writing of) the book.
I have merely pointed out the fact, that a reported "follower" of Joseph Smith was living in Sidney Rigdon's
neighborhood before the Book of Mormon was published.

Although Mr. Stafford (the first of the Manchester Staffords to move to Auburn) does not appear on the
tax rolls in Ohio before 1829, that fact is no proof of his either being there, or not being there, at an earlier
date, when Rigdon had his cabin a short distance away.

Several early settlers in the area related how they first came to Auburn from the east, made preparations
for settlement there, and then returned to their eastern homes for a while, before permanently relocating
to Ohio. Isaac Butts, who knew both Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith was one of these transient settlers, who
moved back and forth between Auburn and Manchester/Farmington at least once during the 1820s.

I present the tabulation of names simply to provide other researchers with a possibly useful resource. In the
near future I will identify each Auburn pioneer who had formerly lived near the Smiths in New York, and who
became neighbors of Rigdon in Ohio during the 1820s. That list (when it is ready) may also be of use to my
fellow historical researchers.

For example, the person who sold Gad Stafford his fram in Auburn was Ephraim Wright -- who also came from
the Farmington/Manchester area, and whose name also appears there in the early road records. Mr. Wright,
while living in Auburn, acted as a witness to some land transfer papers drawn up by Pardon Wilber, the father
of George Wilber, the early eye-witness who says that Rigdon and Joseph Smith met in that area before 1830.
We thus can identify at least one human link between reported Smith follower, Gad Stafford, and George Wilber,
who claimed to have special knowledge of Mormonism's secret beginnings in Ohio.
http://sidneyrigdon.com/books/Hnry1942.htm

Not only that, but one piece of property owned by George Wilber was immediately adjacent to Gad's property.
Another piece of property owned by the Wilber family in Auburn was immediately adjacent to the farm owned
by the son of the same Mr. Capron who gave a statement in 1833 to D. P. Hurlbut, regarding the NY Smiths.
If it seems odd that the Wilbers had so many Farmington/Manchester neighbors in Ohio, that seeming
coincidence may be explained by the fact that the Wilbers themselves moved to Auburn, Ohio from Ontario Co.,
NY, and were likely neighbors of some of those same people, back in the Palmyra area, well before 1830.

More to come --

[[added: here is the url for my NY Smith neighbors: http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/smithmap.htm
I'll post 1820s maps showing area residemts in the near future -- also will show those who moved to Ohio]]

UD



.

[_why me]

Uncle Dale,

When I wrote that sidney was a beaten man, I meant that he really was a beaten man. I was referring to his beating by the mob that also beat and tarred Joseph Smith. Also, I believe that although Joseph Smith showed some charisma, I have this understanding that many of the new converts would hear of the Book of Mormon first, be convinced, and then head to the locations where the saints were living. In this I can refer to converts who were baptized before they ever met Joseph Smith. And then of course, we have the saints who joined in europe.

Yes, Joseph Smith was quite a personality but that cannot explain the baptisms of saints before meeting Smith.

In regards to the Book of Mormon authorship, many people would be in on the con if a person believes in the sidney/Joseph connection. And the hope that all would keep their mouths shut tight as a can of beans. The conspiracy theory can run amuck in this regard.

And Dan can have problems in this regard also. The witnesses were certainly needed to counter the 21st century claims of authorship by mere men of the 19th century.

I do hope that you will find the smoking gun. But so far, you haven't. In my opinion, the Book of Mormon was a failed enterprise for all concerned involved in it, if it were a 'fraud' and there was no greater failure than Joseph Smith if so. For after all, he was murdered for his 'fraud' and there can be no greater failure than that.

And yet, the book itself still prevails, if the book is what it claims to be and hence, god has succeeded.

[_Uncle Dale]

In regards to the Book of Mormon authorship, many people would be in on the con if a person believes in the sidney/Joseph connection. And the hope that all would keep their mouths shut tight as a can of beans. The conspiracy theory can run amuck in this regard....

If we start out with the probablity that both Rigdon and Smith thought that what they were doing was God's will;
and that their method of working out things in their own minds and then seeking divine confirmation was a
reliable one --- then we need not attribute the Book of Mormon, nor the JST, nor the early revelations to a vicious "con."

The RLDS went through a similar process, in being told a false religious history by their leaders. Much of what the
leaders said and did in the late 1850s and early 1860s had a sort of internal consistency and was believable to
nearly all of the members. The RLDS leaders were sincere in their motives, but not entirely truthful in their efforts
to establish JSIII as the rightful heir to a non-polygamous church.

How many of the early RLDS were "in on the con?" Certainly Emma Smith, Joseph Smith's surviving adult family, and several
of the topmost RLDS members knew that there had been polygamy among the Smiths at Nauvoo -- that there had
really been Danites -- that there had really been a Council of Fifty -- etc. etc.

But each of those people (say, William Marks, or William Smith, or another Nauvooite) only knew a part of the
larger story of what had really happened -- the "con" was not an agreed conspiracy of many people to tell lies --
it was a pattern of telling less than the full truth, set as an example by the RLDS leaders (not all of whom know
even most of the story).

Substitute the words "secrecy about polygamy" for the words "secrecy about Book of Mormon authorship" and you will have
two parallel examples of religious beliefs and experiences being led and formed by what a very few leaders
wanted believed. There was nobody to "spill the beans" among the RLDS, because when even a leader of the
rank of Presidnet of the Twelve (Jason Briggs) tried to speak candidly about the past, nobody believed him.

We have a report of Sidney Rigdon "spilling the beans" on Book of Mormon orgins, while he was passing through St. Louis,
on his way back east after his excommunication in 1844. He says that the Book of Mormon "con" originated between him and
Smith in Ohio in Sundays, well before 1830. But when Rigdon spoke candidly about the past, nobody believed him.

As I've been saying, we need not take Rigdon's confession as proof -- nor need we take the old reports of the
several people who say that the "con" began with Rigdon in Ohio before 1830. We can set that evidence in the
shelf, and carry out some investigations of our own. Either that is a worthwhile endeavor, or it is not.

Everybody seems to be telling me such stuff is a waste of time. What am I to do?

UD

[_DonBradley]

Per Bond's wise suggestion, I am posting the OP from another thread here, so it can be preserved as part of this thread, which wil be (or should be) archived in a Mormon Discussions Hall of Fame


A Suggestion for Spalding Theorists: Look at Martin Harris

Those pursuing a Spalding explanation for the Book of Mormon tend to look closely at the possible early relationships among Solomon Spalding, Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith, and Oliver Cowdery, relationships that are largely hypothetical, while largely ignoring the relationship between Joseph Smith and Martin Harris, and any possible connection between Solomon Spalding and Martin Harris. This is probably because some 19th-century sources asserted that Sidney Rigdon was the key man, and because Oliver Cowdery was alleged to have had earlier experience with printing.

However, I can see several reasons a Spalding theorist should further explore for possible Spalding-Harris relationships, and for Harris's possible role in an early Book of Mormon "conspiracy":

First, unlike Cowdery and Rigdon, whose pre-1829 and pre-1830 relationships to Joseph Smith (respectively), must be hypothesized, Harris's relationship to Smith from 1827, and even earlier, is fully documented--it rises to the level of simple historical fact.

Second, Harris was, all-along, the anticipated financier of the book's publication, and is known to have voiced his desire to acquire wealth from it. He was therefore in a good position to know the plans for the book, and had enough of a stake in it that he certainly should have known the plans for it quite well. Indeed, he was a likely person to have initiated the entire book project.

Third, Harris is known to have been an early mover in the project and to have initiated at least one of the watershed incidents in the book's origin--the Anthon incident. In Smith's 1832 history, he reports that a "transcript" of the Book of Mormon characters was made at Harris's instigation, allegedly because of a vision Harris had in which Jesus commanded that a transcript be made and taken to "the learned."

Fourth, Harris sometimes claimed to know more about the origin of the Book of Mormon than Smith did, and for decades promoted his own claim to be a biblical figure at least on par with Smith--the prophesied "marred servant."


These facts would certainly warrant a great deal of Spalding research on Martin Harris, his role in the origin of the Book of Mormon, and his possible connections (e.g., through family, location, business, etc.) to Solomon Spalding.

Don

[_Uncle Dale]

...
These facts would certainly warrant a great deal of Spalding research on Martin Harris, his role in the origin of
the Book of Mormon, and his possible connections (e.g., through family, location, business, etc.) to Solomon Spalding.

Don

I know of no connections -- Heber C. Kimball's mother at least grew up among Solomon's kinfolk,
in the same small New England village. Oliver Cowdery's uncle married the Rev. Ethan Smith and
his wife -- and Solomon Spalding's widow is buried next to the same Smith family's plot in the
Congregational churchyard in Belchertown, MA.

It seems like everybody was related to everybody else back then, and everybody eventually crossed
paths with everybody else. I would look for Martin Harris among the auditors of a Jacob Cochran
sermon given in the Palmyra area between the death of Alvin and the kidnapping of William Morgan --
but then again, that's just an item on my research wish-list and not something I can now prove true.

UD