Yes, it was his little secret to keep and he was the master of that great secret.
So Oliver was in on Joseph’s ‘secrets’ but Wilford Woodruff wasn’t? Why one and not the other?
Regards,
MG
NO, that is not what I've said and never implied that. The geography of DELMARVA as Smith's template was a secret in which he never revealed to anyone. Joseph Smith took that secret to his grave and for good reason as I've discussed in the main thread.
Smith revealed to Cowdery that the bones at the vale of Cumorah would rise again through the resurrection of Christ. The dead at Cumorah will live yet again. That was my message and that is what the dedicatory prayer offered by Cowdery was all about.
But remember, these maps and this narrative come to us through the dark pages of history.
If I read you correctly you are asking us to remember that the Book of Mormon maps and narrative come from ancient history. Not so. It was first conceived and written in 1829 by Joseph Smith. There is nothing ancient about the Book of Mormon other than the plagiarism contained therein. It is NOT ancient. Even the biblical writings that Smith copied and pasted are no older than 1611 AD.
Mormons may believe the Book of Mormon is from ancient history but the rest of the world certainly does not.
So Oliver was in on Joseph’s ‘secrets’ but Wilford Woodruff wasn’t? Why one and not the other?
Regards,
MG
NO, that is not what I've said and never implied that.
So you’re saying that during the Book of Mormon translation period/translation Oliver wasn’t ‘in’ on the so called con? If he was, wouldn’t that include Joseph’s use of the Delmarva map?
I didn’t say they were the same. Two sides of the same coin.
Regards,
MG
What does that mean? You have stumped the mighty Shulem.
I don't get it.
Marcus had asked, “ Mentalgymnast. I have posted multiple excerpts showing Brandley's theory is not the same as Shulem's. You have posted nothing to support your position. Why are you continuing to argue they are the same?”
Grand ambitions for someone that started in Delmarva. And Woodruff just goes right along with the ‘big con’. Wow. Joseph was a rascal.
Long scam.
There are times when the critics seem hellbent on making Joseph into a greater genius than he may have been.
I read these creative interpolations that you and others put out there and I am absolutely amazed at the lengths folks will go to in order to dishonor/disgrace those that claim to speak in the name of God.
But maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised.
It’s interesting that you don’t see a disconnect between Joseph and his early ‘non views’ in respect to Book of Mormon geography (and creating a false map to boot) and his later interest in the same. You really do have to stick to the narrative that from day one he was designing and implementing the ‘long con’.
The traditional narrative, honestly, doesn’t have as many hoops to jump through.
Except for the fact that there are claims of God in the picture.
Again I would ask, if Oliver was in on the con, was Wilford Woodruff also? If not, why? And if he wasn’t, that REALLY makes Joseph into a purposeful and wicked and purposeful deceiver.
Right?
You’re forced into that box. The whole ‘Joe Smith’ thing. Black and white views and positions.
But there is enough evidence to give one pause in thinking this was the case.
Yes, Joseph was a rascal and conned everyone. He went along with his game and played it to the end. He was a genius -- very intelligent. Of that I’m sure. He was also a man of many passions. He was convincing and sincere in creating his pious fraud in scamming others.
Have you seen my thread in the Celestial Forum on the First Vision?
But remember, these maps and this narrative come to us through the dark pages of history.
If I read you correctly you are asking us to remember that the Book of Mormon maps and narrative come from ancient history. Not so. It was first conceived and written in 1829 by Joseph Smith. There is nothing ancient about the Book of Mormon other than the plagiarism contained therein. It is NOT ancient. Even the biblical writings that Smith copied and pasted are no older than 1611 AD.
Mormons may believe the Book of Mormon is from ancient history but the rest of the world certainly does not.
You, of course, are entitled to have that position.
The mighty Shulem, huh?
There is this thing. Once one accepts either the fact or the possibility that the Book of Mormon is an artifact from the ancient world, that leaves someone with a choice as to whether or not they’re gonna get baptized.
There may be quite a few folks don’t want to take the dip.
NO, that is not what I've said and never implied that.
So you’re saying that during the Book of Mormon translation period/translation Oliver wasn’t ‘in’ on the so called con? If he was, wouldn’t that include Joseph’s use of the Delmarva map?
Regards,
MG
I have never said that Oliver was in on the con. Oliver was FOOLED by a conman. He went along with it thinking that Smith really was channeling God through a stone in a hat.
No, it does not help. A coin has two sides. There are many Book of Mormon geography theories and some of them are so different they couldn't possibly share the same side of a coin.