--Exhibit A
As reported by author Charles Shook, after being excommunicated from the Mormon Church, Cowdery moved to Ohio, where he set up a law practice. According to his close friend and law firm colleague, Judge W. Lang, Cowdery admitted that the Book of Mormon was a hoax, manufactured from Solomon Spaulding's unpublished novel, "Manuscript Found.” In a letter from Lang to Thomas Gregg, 5 November 1881, Lang wrote: "Dear Sir: . . . Once for all I desire to be strictly understood when I say to you that I cannot violate any confidence of a friend though he be dead. This I will say that Mr. Cowdery never spoke of his connection with the Mormons to anybody except to me. We were intimate friends. The plates were never translated and could not be, were never intended to be. What is claimed to be a translation is the 'Manuscript Found' worked over by C[owdery] . He was the best scholar amongst them. Rigdon got the original at the job printing office in Pittsburgh, as I have stated. I often expressed my objection to the frequent repetition of 'And it came to pass' to Mr. Cowdery and said that a true scholar ought to have avoided that, which only provoked a gentle smile from C[owdery]. Without going into detail or disclosing a confided word, I say to you that I do know, as well as can now be known, that C[owdery]. revised the 'Manuscript' and Smith and Rigdon approved of it before it became the 'Book of Mormon.' I have no knowledge of what became of the original. Never heard C[owdery] say as to that. . . . C[owdery] never gave me a full history of the troubles of the Mormons in Missouri and Illinois, but I am sure that the doctrine of polygamy was advocated by Smith and opposed by Cowdery. Then when they became rivals for the leadership, Smith made use of this opposition by Cowdery to destroy his popularity and influence, and which finally culminated in the mob that demolished Cowdery's house the night when he fled. This Whitmer you speak of must be the brother-in-law of Cowdery whose wife was a Whitmer. . . .
“Now as to whether C[owdery] ever openly denounced Mormonism let me say this to you; no man ever knew better than he how to keep one's own counsel. He would never allow any man to drag him into a conversation on the subject. Cowdery was a Democrat and a most powerful advocate of the principles of the party on the stump. For this he became the target of the Whig stumpers and press, who denounced him as a Mormon and made free use of C[owdery's] certificate at the end of the Mormon Bible to crush his influence. He suffered great abuse for this while he lived here on that account. In the second year of his residence here he and his family attached themselves to the Methodist Protestant Church, where they held fellowship to the time they left for Elkhorn. . . . .”
Writer Stephen Van Eck offers this telling interpretation of Lang's account to Gregg: "Apparently Cowdery had admitted the hoax to Lang, but took all the credit for it. This is not consistent with Cowdery being the servile follower of Smith that he had been. Had Cowdery given Smith the completed manuscript, furthermore, losing the first 116 pages of the dictated 'translation' would have scarcely been a problem. Cowdery, despite his apparent boasting to Lang, can be considered a collaborator at best, but a conspirator at least."
_____
--Exhibit B
After Smith temporarily fled Kirtland, Ohio, to avoid rising discontent over a banking swindle that victimized members of his own flock, Cowdery's loyalties were tested--and found wanting. First, some background to Cowdery's disloyalty: In 1837, Smith faced the wrath of his local Kirtland following due to of his clumsy financial scheming, otherwise known as the “Kirtland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company.” The Ohio state legislature had refused Smith's request to incorporate this trash-cash creation of his but a determined Smith chose to illegally run it anyway. It soon went under and Smith, along with co-criminal Sidney Rigdon, were eventually found guilty of violating state banking laws, fined and ordered to pay court costs.
Author Richard Abanes sums up why the scam failed: “Smith actually believed that his debts, along with those of his followers, could be wiped out by merely printing . . . notes [i.e., paper currency] and using them to pay creditors. The bills, however, were practically worthless because Smith had virtually no silver/gold coinage to back up the paper he issued. His entire capital stock consisted of nothing but land valued at inflated prices. . . . He pleaded with followers to support the financial association, leading them to believe that God have given hm the idea and that it would 'become the greatest of all institutions on Earth.' To augment their confidence in the organization, Smith resorted to a rather ingenious deception: 'Lining the shelves of the bank vault . . . were many boxes, each marked $1,000. Actually these boxes were filled with “sand, lead, old iron, stone ad combustibles,” but each had a top layer of bright 50-cent silver coins. Anyone suspicious of the bank's stability was allowed to lift and count the boxes. “The effect of those boxes was like magic,” said C.G. Webb. “They created general confidence in the solidity of the bank and that beautiful paper money went like hot cakes,. For about a month it was the best money in the country.'”
Smith's financial shenanigans led to him being sued by several non-Mormon creditors, while some of his LDS followers saw their invested monies evaporate before their eyes. Brodie reports that Kirtland Saints began attacking Smith, whose “prophesy” (so described by the local LDS newspaper the “Latter-day Saint Messenger and Advocate,” which had declared that those who contracted with him on speculative land deals would get rich) was proven by events to be an uninspired flop. Half the Quorum of the Twelve went into open revolt, with Apostle Parley P. Pratt labeling Smith as “wicked,” accusing him of taking “[him]self and the Church . . . down to hell,” and threatening to sue Smith if he didn't pay Pratt what he was owed. Smith responded by counter-threatening to excommunicate any Mormon who filed suit against a fellow Church member and tried unsuccessfully to have Pratt stand trial before a divided High Council.
The hounded, debt-ridden Smith's ultimate solution to this mounting mayhem was to make himself scarce, opting to leave on a five-week proselytizing mission to Canada--a ploy which historian Brodie described as Smith's hope “that in his absence the enmity against him would be still[ed].” Smith's hopes in that regard were not realized. Brodie reports that upon returning, he discovered that while he was gone the magic-minded Cowdery had (along with fellow Book of Mormon witnesses David Whitmer and Martin Harris) become enamored with “a young girl who claimed to be a seeress by virtue of a black stone in which she read the future. . . . [Cowdery], whose faith in seer stones had not diminished when Joseph stopped using them, pledged her their loyalty, and F. G. Williams, formerly Joseph's First Counselor, became her scribe. Patterning herself after the Shakers, the new prophetess would dance herself into a state of exhaustion before her followers, fall upon the floor and burst forth with revelations.“ Brodie writes that “before long Smith effectively silenced the dancing seeress” and managed to bring Cowdery's wandering eye back into line. But Cowdery wasn't exactly the model of repentance. He (along with Whitmer) “came back into the fold half-contrite, half-suspicious and shortly thereafter went off to Missouri.”
_____
--Exhibit C
Author Richard S. Van Wagoner maintains that Ethan Smith's “View of the Hebrews” novel “was probably a principal source . . . from which Smith and Cowdery . . . formulated the book of Mormon narrative.” Published seven years prior to the Book of Mormon, Van Wagoner observes that “[t]he similarities between the two works seem to be too substantial to be mere coincidence. The major thesis of each is to explain the origin of the American Indian: Chapters in each relate to the destruction of Jerusalem and the scattering of Israel, then predict a regathering in the Promised Land. Vast portions of the Book of Isaiah are quoted extensively in each work . . . . Both discuss polygamy, seers and prophets, and the use of breastplates and Urim and Thummim. In each account, sacred records, handed down from generation to generation, are buried in a hill,then discovered years later. The characters on the gold plates of the Book of Mormon were reportedly 'Reformed Egyptian,' whereas 'View of the Hebrews' discusses evidence of 'Egyptian Hieroglyphics.' Perhaps the most important parallel is that both Ethan Smith's and Joseph Smith's works detail in similar fashion two classes of people in ancient America, one barbarous and the other civilized. . . . Both authors identify American Indians as the 'stick of Joseph or Ephraim' (the northern Ten Tribes of Israel) that are expected to be reunited with the 'stick of Judah' (the Jews of the Southern kingdom of Judah). Furthermore, each work defines the mission of the American (Gentile) nation in the last days as calling to gather these native American remnants of the House of Israel, convert them to Christianity and bring them to the 'place of the Lord of Hosts, the Mt. Zion.' After years of intensive investigation into the Book of Mormon, particularly the possibility that much of the framework to 'View of the Hebrews' can be seen in the Book of Mormon, [LDS General Authority] B.H. Roberts in a 24 October 1927 letter asked, 'Did Ethan Smith's 'View of the Hebrews, published . . . years before Joseph Smith's Book of Mormon, supply the structural outline and some of the subject matter of the alleged Nephrite record? ' After noting 18 remarkable parallels between the two works, he commented that many others were just as 'striking.' One of the principal conclusions of Roberts' work, 'Studies of the Book of Mormon,' was that 'it is more than likely that the Smith family possessed a copy of this book by Ethan Smith, that either by reading it or hearing it and its contents frequently discussed, Joseph Smith became acquainted with its contents. . . . I say this with great confidence.'” Van Wagoner then notes that there is a tangible connection between “View of the Hebrews” and Oliver Cowdery, observing that it “was published in Poultney, Vermont, where Oliver Cowdery, principle scribe during the production of the Book of Mormon, also resided from 1803 to 1825.” Van Wagoner explains Cowdery's personal connection to Ethan Smith: “At the time Ethan Smith was writing his volume, he was minister of Poultney's Congregational church where he served from 21 November 1831 until December 1826. Cowdery's stepmother and three of his sisters ere members of the congregation, according to Poultney church records. Presumably Oliver Cowdery, a school teacher and highly literate for his day, would have been familiar with his family minister's book. The first edition, which was advertised in the 'Northern Spectator,' the local newspaper, quickly sold out.” Van Wagoner concludes that the notion that “Cowdery was unfamiliar with Ethan Smith's 'View of the Hebrews' seems improbable.”
Author Grant Palmer agrees that there is both a connection between “View of the Hebrews” and the Book of Mormon, as well as one between Ethan Smith and Oliver Cowdery. As with Wagoner, he reports that B.H. Roberts believed that the Reverend Ethan Smith's 1823 book provided “an inspiration for some of the basic structural material on which the Book of Mormon hangs . . . . He [Roberts] concluded that there was 'a great probability' that the Smith family had read or possessed a knowledge of 'View of the Hebrews.' The book was written, published and widely distributed in New England and New York where the Smith family lived, two editions rapidly selling out.” Palmer cites Roberts' assessment that Cowdery was a conduit to Smith on the “View of the Hebrews” tale: “Roberts believed that if the Smiths did not purchase a copy [of 'View of the Hebrews'], it could easily have been supplied by Oliver Cowdery . . . . Cowdery lived in the same small town as the author, Reverend [Ethan] smith, who was the Cowdery family's Congregationalist pastor from 1821 to 1826.”
_____
--Exhibit D
Shook notes that Cowdery's law partner Lang, in a letter to Gregg, described Cowdery's departure from Mormonism in favor of Methodism: “Now as to whether C[owdery] ever openly denounced Mormonism, let me say this to you; No man ever knew better than he how to keep one's own counsel. He would never allow any man to drag him into a conversation on the subject. Cowdery was a Democrat and a most powerful advocate of the principles of the party on the stump. For this he became the target of the Whig stumpers and press, who denounced him as a Mormon and made free use of C[owdery's] certificate at the end of the Mormon Bible to crush his influence. He suffered great abuse for this while he lived here on that account. In the second year of his residence here he and his family attached themselves to the Methodist Protestant Church, where they held fellowship to the time they left for Elkhorn. . . . .”
Cowdery, in abandoning Mormonism and converting to Methodism, cautiously expressed a willingness to a Methodist Church membership review board to take his apostasy public, if that was what was required. As author Don Simpson rhetorically observes, why would a supposedly lifelong “special witness” for the Book of Mormon end up abandoning the Mormon Church and end up joining another one? Indeed, “[i]f Cowdery never denied his testimony,, why did he join the Methodist [Protestant] Church [of Tiffin, Seneca County, Ohio] after his excommunication?”
The evidence indicates that Cowdery did, in fact, push off from the Mormon Church and climbed aboard the Methodist one. In that respect, official court documents reveal where Cowdery's true sentiments resided--and it wasn't in the house that Joe built. A sworn affidavit from C. J. Keen (a noted citizen of Tiffin, Seneca County, Ohio, and close professional associate of Cowdery) sheds light on Cowdery's post-Mormon Methodist religious faith and his real feelings about the Book of Mormon. By way of background, Keen had initially decided to employ Cowdery to edit a local Democratic party newspaper; however, when it became known to the newspaper's investors that Cowdery came with Mormon baggage, the hiring process ground to a halt. Cowdery went on to set up a law practice in Tiffin, where he joined the Methodist Church and eventually came clean on the Book of Mormon---but for professional reasons wished, if possible, to keep his views on Mormon matters private. Keen swore to the details of Cowdery's journey from Mormonism to Methodism as follows: "I was well acquainted with Oliver Cowdery who formerly resided in this city . . . Some time after Mr. Cowdery's arrival in Tiffin, we became acquainted with his (Cowdery's) connection with Mormonism. We immediately called a meeting of our Democratic friends, and having the Book of Mormon with us, it was unanimously agreed that Mr. Cowdery could not he permitted to edit said paper. Mr. Cowdery opened a law office in Tiffin, and soon effected a partnership with Joel W. Wilson. In a few years Mr. Cowdery expressed a desire to associate. himself with a Methodist Protestant church of this city. Rev. John Souder and myself were appointed a committee to wait on Mr. Cowdery and confer with him respecting his connection with Mormonism and the Book of Mormon. . . . We then inquired of him if he had any objection to making a public recantation. He replied that he had objections; that, in the first place, it could do no good; that he had known several to do so and they always regretted it. And, in the second place, it would have a tendency to draw public attention, invite criticism and bring him into contempt. 'But,' said he, 'nevertheless, if the [Methodist] church require it, I will submit to it, but I authorize and desire you and the church to publish and make known my recantation.' We did not demand it, but submitted his name to the church, and he was unanimously admitted a member thereof. At that time he arose and addressed the audience present, admitted his error and implored forgiveness, and said he was sorry and ashamed of his connection with Mormonism. He continued his membership while he resided in Tiffin, and became superintendent of the Sabbath-school, and led an exemplary the while he resided with us. . . . "
Cowdery was later appointed,by a committee of that Methodist Church, to serve as its secretary. It seems completely incongruous that Cowdery would not have been appointed to that position had he not already been a member of the Methodist Church. As Shook observes, Cowdery would not have become a secretary for a Methodist Church committee "if he [Cowdery] was not a member of that church; and it is not at all likely that he would have been a member of that church if he had not renounced Mormonism.”
Cowdery not only became a Methodist, he apparently became a good and dedicated one. A long-time acquaintance of Cowdery, Judge W. .H. Gibson, described Cowdery as “an able lawyer, a fine orator, a ready debater and led a blameless life, while residing in this city. He united with the Methodist Protestant Church, and was a consistent, active member. “
Moreover, Cowdery's adopted daughter, Adeline M. Bernard, confirmed that after his bout with Mormonism, Cowdery renounced the Mormon Church and subsequently joined the Methodist ranks--this occurring barely 10 years after Cowdery had conspired with Joseph Smith to found the Mormon fraud: “ . . . I know that Mr. Cowdery joined the Protestant Methodist Church in 1841 . . . . W. M. Lang, of Tiffin, Ohio, . . . will search the [Methodist] Ch[urch]. records and send you a transcript of his, O[liver]. C[owdery]'s membership. . . . I don't think that any of the family connection belong to the M[ormon] C[hurch] except David Whitmer . . . who RENOUNCED M[ormonism] when O[liver] C[owdery] did. “ (emphasis added)
So, was Cowdery (as LDS “historians” insist) behaving at all like he possessed a “lifelong commitment” to Mormonism? Shook answers: ”With these facts before us, it is sheer folly for Mormonism any longer to deny that Oliver Cowdery did at one time in his history renounce the faith and did connect himself with the Methodist Protestant Church of Tiffin, Ohio.”
_____
--Exhibit E
LDS apologists have desperately attempted to dismiss Cowdery's anti-Mormon apostasy with the the spurious claim that his separation from Mormonism was neither meaningful or lasting. LDS writer Richard L. Anderson insists that while "the cessation of his [Cowdery's] activity in the [Mormon] Church meant a suspension of his role as a witness of the Book of Mormon," it did not mean "that his conviction ceased . . . ." Anderson attempts to attribute Cowdery's hiatus from being a Book of Mormon witness to Cowdery “working out a successful legal and political career in non-Mormon society and avoid[ing] its prejudiced antagonism by creating as little conflict as possible. “ In other words, Cowdery never abandoned his “special witness” faith; he understandably kept quiet about it in order to make money. Anderson shrugs off Cowdery's joining of a Methodist Church as a choice "logically associated with a Christian congregation for a time, the Methodist Protestant Church at Tiffin, Ohio,” since, Anderson argues, “faith in Jesus Christ was the foundation of his religion." Anderson attempts to portray this hypothetical explanation as having “no more inconsistency . . . than Paul, worshiping in the Jewish synagogue, or Joseph Smith becoming a Mason in order to steam prejudice.”
But Simpson counters that such a strained explanation is absurd. Cowdery did not merely “associate” with the Methodist Church; he became a member of the Methodist Church: “[The apostle] Paul did not worship in the Jewish synagogue due to excommunication from the Christian faith. Smith did not become a Mason for the same reason Cowdery joined the Methodist Church. Cowdery did not join the Methodists just to stem prejudice and protect the Mormon Church. The fact is that he had been excommunicated on serious charges. Indeed, therefore, his role as a witness to the Book of Mormon could not longer be legally sound. Oliver Cowdery did deny his testimony.”
Further contradicting the LDS line that Cowdery never repudiated his Mormon faith is a Mormon poem that appeared in the LDS Church's publication "Times and Seasons,” reflecting the views of faithful Latter-day Saints living in Nauvoo, Illinois, at the time of Cowdery's apostasy. To be sure, the poem was published during the period when Cowdery had rejected the Mormon Church in favor of joining the Methodist membership rolls. The poem, in no uncertain terms, declares that Cowdery had , in fact, denied his Mormon testimony:
"Amazed with wonder! I look round
To see most people of our day
Reject the glorious gospel sound
Because the simple turn away:
But does it prove there is no time,
Because some watches wilt not go?
"Or prove that Christ was not the Lord
Because that Peter cursed and swore,
OR BOOK OF MORMON NOT HIS WORD
BECAUSE DENIED BY OLIVER?
Or prove that Joseph Smith is false
Because apostates say 'tis so?" (emphasis added)
_____
--Exhibit F
Palmer writes that as Cowdery approached the end of his life, he continued to dabble, even if on the edges, with other religious movements, until he prematurely died at age 43. Just three years before his death, Cowdery moved to Elkhorn, Wisconsin, a relatively short 12 miles from the Voree church headquarters of one James J. Strang. Strang was a disaffected Mormon who claimed to be Joseph Smith's rightful heir to the throne after Smith was assassinated in 1844. (Oliver's father, William, had converted to Strang's offshoot movement in the summer of 1846). Why the possible attraction of Oliver Cowdery to Strang's strange sect? Perhaps for Oliver familiarity bred contentment--but a contentment that still certainly did not reflect t full-bore Mormonism. Perhaps Strang's religious message appealed to Cowdery's inherently magical mindset. Palmer writes, for example, that Strang, “like Joseph [Smith], produced 11 signatories who testified that they, too, had seen and inspected ancient metal plates. . . . On 1 September 1845, he further reported that he had been visited by an angel regarding 'the record which was sealed from my servant Joseph. Unto thee it is reserved,' the angel said. Strang said he received the 'Urim and Thummim,' which revealed the location of a record of 'an ancient people.' Two weeks later, four witnesses . . . unearthed these plates under Strang's direction In a joint affirmation, the signatories reported how they found the plates and testified that they saw and examined them. The plates were covered with 'characters but in a language of which we have no knowledge.' . . . Sometime after Strang had translated these writings, he announced that it had been revealed to him where the ancient plates of Laban were buried. . . . From these records, Strang translated 47 chapters of what he called the 'Book of the Law of the Lord.' Seven signatories testified in the preface of the first edition . . . 'that James J. Strang has the plates . . . and has shown them to us. We examined them with our eyes and handled them with our hands. The engravings are beautiful antique workmanship, bearing a striking resemblance to the ancient oriental languages . . . .'” Palmer notes that while Cowdery (following his father's conversion to the Strang sect), relocated within a few miles of its Wisconsin headquarters, he (Oliver) remained “[t]he one living witness [to the Book of Mormon] who had not yet joined with Strang . . . . [I]t is unknown how close his [Cowdery's] affiliation was with th[at] church.” Palmer nonetheless adds that “Strang's leadership, angelic call, metal plates and his translation of these plates as authentic” constituted a “replication of an earlier pattern of belief [which] confirms that it must have been relatively easy for the witnesses to accept Joseph's golden plates as an ancient record. Appreciating their mindset helps us understand Mormon origins in their terms.”
_____
--Exhibit G
Mormonism's storytellers claim that Cowdery eventually, and faithfully, returned to the Mormon fold, citing David Whitmer's account of Cowdery's alleged death-bed revival. Whitmer (who, with Cowdery, was one of the “Three Witnesses” to the Book of Mormon and who, like Cowdery, had at one point left the Mormon Church) is reported to have told Apostles Joseph F. Smith and Orson Pratt the following on 8 September 1878, regarding Cowdery's demise: "Oliver died the happiest man I ever saw. After shaking hands with the family and kissing his wife and daughter, he said, ‘Now I lay down for the last time; I am going to my Savior,' and he died immediately with a smile on his face.'” Adding the the drama, Mormon writer Andrew Jenson dramatically presents Cowdery's dying moments as a declaration of his undying faith in Mormonism: “Oliver Cowdery just before breathing his last, asked his attendants to raise him up in bed that he might talk to the family and his friends, who were present. He then told them to live according to the teachings contained in the Book of Mormon, and promised them, if they would do this, that they would meet him in heaven. He then said, ‘Lay me down and let me fall asleep.’ A few moments later he died without a struggle.”
The historical record, however, seems peculiarly out of step with Mormonism's lock-step rewriters. Historian D. Michael Quinn notes that Cowdery was re-baptized into the LDS Church on 12 November 1848. However, just three years before his death Cowdery was of the opinion that the wrong man--Brigham Young--was holding the reins of the Mormon Church. Quinn notes that on 28 July 1847 “Cowdery wr[ote] David Whitmer (. . . a previously-ordained successor), that 'we have the authority and do hold the keys. It is important, should we not be permitted to act in that authority, that we confer them upon some man or men, whom God may appoint . . . .'” Quinn adds, however, that “[a] year later Cowdery . . . disavow[ed] his succession claim and accept[ed] baptism in the church Young was leading in Utah.” But complicating the claim of LDS apologists that Cowdery died fully converted to Mormonism is the fact, as recorded in the diaries of Smith loyalist Hosea Stout, that following his Mormon re-baptism in 1848, the Mormon Church (later that same year) accused him of trying to “raise up the Kingdom again” with the aid of apostate and former LDS apostle William E. McLellin.
It bears remembering, as Simpson points out, that despite Cowdery's eventual re-baptism, the inconvenient question lingers: “If Cowdery was restored to the LDS Church, why did a Methodist preacher preach at his funeral?” Moreover, as noted in a text of the “Gatewood-Farnsworth Debate” of 1942, even though Cowdery returned in full devotion to Mormonism, “[a]ny statements that Cowdery was said to have made [about his allegedly abiding faith in Mormonism]. . . were published after his death, and were made [not by Cowdery] but by other men. . . . [W]e never have anything in Oliver Cowdery's own words.'”
In actuality, Mormon-generated reports of Cowdery supposedly dying a contented follower of the prophet Joseph Smith are certainly misleading. Whitmer (Cowdery's brother-in-law) forcefully asserted that Cowdery, in actuality, died an apostate. Citing Whitmer as a source, authors Jerald and Sandra Tanner observe that "Whitmer claimed Cowdery DIED believing Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet and that his revelations in the 'Doctrine and Covenants' must be rejected." Indeed, Whitmer said as much and in no uncertain terms in his "An Address to Believers in the Book of Mormon": "I did not say that Oliver Cowdery and John Whitmer had not endorsed the Doctrine and Covenants in 1836. They did endorse it in 1836; I stated that they 'came out of their errors (discard the Doctrine and Covenants), repented of them and DIED believing as I do today,' and I have the proof to verify my statement. If anyone chooses to doubt my word, let them come to my home in Richmond [Missouri] and be satisfied. In the winter of 1848, after Oliver Cowdery had been baptized at Council Bluffs, he came back to Richmond to live. [where Cowdery died of consumption in Whitmer's home on 3 March 1850] . . . Now, in 1849 the Lord saw fit to manifest unto John Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and myself nearly all the errors in doctrine into which we had bee led by the heads of the old church. We were shown that the Book of Doctrine and Covenants continued many doctrines of error and that it must be laid aside. . . . They were led out of their errors and are upon record to this effect, rejecting the Book of Doctrine and Covenants." (emphasis added)
_____
--Summation
Oliver Cowdery was no brave, believing, devoted, consistent, testifying Mormon throughout or at the end of his life.
He was excommunicated. He fought with Joseph Smith and accused him of adultery with a teenage girl. He confessed that the Book of Mormon was a fraud (after having initially conspired with Smith in creating lies and fairy tales to co-invent the Mormon Church in the first place). He diverted his devotion to a competing peepstoner and a local seeress. He abandoned the Mormon Church and became a Methodist. Even after rejoining the LDS Church, he sought to wrest control of it away from Brigham Young and take authority unto himself. Even one of his fellow “special witness” cohorts said he died an apostate.
Mormons can claim Cowdery was faithful until the cows come home. But you know what they say about the head of a cow: There's a point here and a point there--with a lot of bull in-between.
_____
Recommended Sources/References
--Richard Abanes, “One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church”[New York, New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2002]
--Richard L. Anderson, "Improvement Era," January 1969
--Adeline M. Bernard, letter to Thomas Gregg, 3 October 1881
--Fawn Brodie, “No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet,” 2nd ed. [New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983]
--Juanita Brooks, ed., "The Mormon Frontier: Diary of Hosea Stout, 1844-1889,” Vol. 2 [Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press, 2009]
--Oliver Cowdery, official first version of LDS Church history, in “Latter-day Saint Messenger and Advocate,” Letter IV, February 1835 [1834-35], Kirtland, Ohio
--Oliver Cowdery, minutes of meeting of male members of the Methodist Protestant Church of Tiffin, Seneca County, Ohio, held pursuant to adjournment, recorded by “Oliver Cowdery, Secretary,” 18 January 1844
--Stephen Van Eck, “The Book of Mormon: One Too Many M's,” on “The Secular Web,” at :
http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article716.html--O. Gatewood and K.E. Farnsworth, “Gatewood-Farnsworth Debate” [Gatewood: Salt Lake City, Utah, 1942]
--W. H. Gibson, letter to Thomas Gregg, 3 August 1832, Tiffin, Ohio
--Joseph Hyrum Greenhalgh, “Oliver Cowdery: The Man Outstanding” [Phoenix, Arizona, 1965]
--Stanley R. Gunn, “Oliver Cowdery Second Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Division of Religion," Brigham Young University,” 1942
--Andrew Jenson, editor and publisher, “The Historical Record,” Vol. 6, No. 3-5 [Salt Lake City, Utah, May 1887]
--Andrew Jenson, “LDS Biographical Encyclopedia,” Vol. 1 [Salt Lake City, Utah: Andrew Jenson History Company, 1901]
--J.H. Johnson, poem in “Times and Seasons,” Vol. 2
--G.C. Keen, sworn affidavit signed in presence of Frank L. Emich, Notary Public, Seneca Ohio, 14 April 1885
--“The Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star,” Vol. 40, No. 50 [Liverpool, England: William Budge, publisher], 9 December 1878
--Grant H. Palmer, “An Insider's View of Mormon Origins” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 2002]
--D. Michael Quinn, “Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, in association with Smith Research Associates, 1994]
--B. H. Roberts, ed., "Comprehensive History of the Church," vol. 1, [Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1965]
--Charles Shook, “The True Origins of the Book of Mormon” [Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Co., 1914]; for an online version of Shook's book, see:
http://solomonspalding.com/docs2/1914Shk1.htm#pgvii)
--Don Simpson, “The Golden Myth of Mormonism” (Wichita Falls, Texas: Western Christian Foundation, Inc., 1980]
--Joseph F. Smith and Orson Pratt, letter to Mormon Church president John Taylor, 17 September 1878, New York City, published in the “Deseret News,” 16 November 1878
--Jerald and Sandra Tanner, “Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987]
--Jerald and Sandra Tanner, “The Changing World of Mormonism: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Changes in Mormon Doctrine and Practice” [Chicago, Illinois: Moody Press, 1980-81]
--Richard S. Van Wagoner, “Sidney Rigdon: A Portrait of Religious Excess” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1994]
--David Whitmer, “To Believers in the Book of Mormon,” Richmond, Missouri, 1 April 1887
Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2013 11:22AM by steve benson.