And why is that theory more plausible to you?

By that do you mean another Native Americans are Hebrews thing?

None of those ideas are remotely believable; DNA evidence disproves them.

Or am I on the wrong track and you mean something else?

No I'm talking about something completely different.

Okay, sorry, I have a hard time with all the names and associated ideas in the history sometimes.

This is something I've studied for over 15 years. Much of the evidence us summarized at http://mormonleaks.com

Episode 2 summarizes Spalding evidence:
http://mormonleaks.com/library/episode-02/

Episode 3 summarizes Rigdon evidence:
http://mormonleaks.com/library/episode-03/

Episode 4 explains how Smith and Rigdon came together:
http://mormonleaks.com/library/episode-04/

Your work is so well done and fascinating--clearly laid out. I haven't read all the episodes yet, just the ones mentioned here, so maybe this is answered in another episode. One question that keeps coming to my mind is Why would Sidney Rigdon let Joseph Smith have all the glory? Let him be the prophet and all that? Get all the praise?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2016 11:58AM by liesarenotuseful.

> One question that keeps coming to my mind is Why would Sidney Rigdon let Joseph Smith have all the glory? Let him be the prophet and all that? Get all the praise?

Rigdon did not plan to give Smith all the glory. This was something that happened gradually over a period of years.

In 1825-26, Rigdon modified a Spalding base text to include his own theology. His likely motive was to counteract the efforts of Alexander Campbell, his former mentor, who was then publishing his own new translation of the New Testament.

In 1827, Rigdon needed a way to publish the re-worked Spalding document as a new American Bible. If he were to disclose his role in its production, he would almost certainly be unmasked by Campbell. So Rigdon needed someone else to reveal the book, a good actor, someone who could pretend to have discovered and translated the record by miraculous means. Smith fit the bill.


Rigdon did not envision that the young actor would become more powerful than him. Based on our authorship attribution studies at mormonleaks, it appears that, on several occasions, Rigdon actually empowered Smith further. On one occasion, he empowered Smith to prevent Cowdery from following Hiram Page who claimed to be receiving revelations through his own seer stones. Later, at the 3rd conference of the Church on Jan 2, 1830, Rigdon empowered Smith in front of a New York audience. He did this in order to get them to sell their homes and move to Ohio, the area where Rigdon lived. This was where Rigdon had already brought about 100 former Campbellites into Mormonism. Later, Rigdon bragged that the Book of Mormon had "puked Cambellism".

The tables turned on Feb 7,1832, when Rigdon and Smith jointly revealed D&C 76 in a live performance. It was clear then that Smith was the better performer and that Rigdon would be playing second fiddle. Any ratting out of Smith at this point would have been "mutually assured destruction" for both Rigdon and Smith.

Thank you so much for the explanation. Poor Sidney! It just got away from him. I love your presentation. I might get the courage to show it to my extremely TBM husband. It could backfire, so I'm not sure yet. At least he would better understand where I'm coming from.

This isn't an area that "commands a lot of my attention" because basically, for me, a fraud is a fraud is a fraud.

And years ago I made a statement here, "Sane people don't react well to insanity," and Rigdon was clearly insane in terms of his zealotry. Joseph Smith? Clearly a narcissist, capable of exploiting Rigdon (while eyeing the comely Nancy); if folks want to see NPD personified, have a good look at one of the current presumptive presidential nominees (the other "has tendencies," but is "more sub-clinical"). There's a delusional component to narcissism as well, but some are skilled at "keeping it concealed." I think it's important to remember tha this was the American frontier; people were as intelligent as they are these days, but communication was slower and more spotty, and I think JS, Rigdon, and Mormonism benefitted from this historical reality. Enlightened sorts, like most of the Founding Fathers, may have rejected much of "The Bible's Divinity," but the masses were ripe for exploitation, and Mormonism's founders sought to fill that void in order to enrich themselves.

Many, however, do genuinely need to explore the deeper historical nuances, and alternative views still merit discussion among reasonable sorts. These include Brodie's "I don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, but I believe he thought he was." Bernard DeVoto, on the other hand dismisses Smith as a garden variety sociopath. There's probably merit in both of those views as well; there's considerable overlap in the "dynamics" when seen from a clinical point of view.

That reminds me, I've got a piece on Parley P. Pratt "in the oven"--mostly his later years, and I know Craig has information on the likely role PPP played.

I believe that Rigdon helped write the BoM and that he was at least familiar with Spaulding's writing. I don't know how much of his writing made it's way into the BoM, but it was likely one of the influences. It seems to me that Rigdon was the pious fraud behind the church and Joe was the experienced conman that helped pull it off.

I always thought the evidence around Sidney Rigdon being heavily involved was particularly compelling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work

A lot of work has been done on it and I believe it would be foolish to dismiss it. However, it is just as possible that the influence is a little less direct. My hypothesis is that Joe, Oliver, and Sydney were pulling ideas from their ass, and those ideas were just digested bits of information from their collective experiences.

I feel that Spaulding's Original Manuscript (the one Rigdon stole from the printer's office) was used along with other sources including the "View of the Hebrews" and the KJV to produce the BoM.

The so-called "Manuscript Found" is not, and never has been, that document, but is merely something else Spaulding wrote.

There is is compelling evidence, for me, with "The Late War between the United States and Great Britain", as one of the sources of the BoM.

While not specific to a Spalding origin, I think this very compelling piece of evidence is consistent with one, and not at all consistent with most other origin hypotheses:

The Book of Ether itself contains a similar story to the rest of the Book of Mormon: a group of people flee the old world, cross the sea to the Americas and eventually destroy themselves in a massive war. There is evidence that the Book of Ether was a separate manuscript that was grafted onto the rest of the Book of Mormon. Two of the major textual changes in the Book of Mormon are in Mosiah 21:28 and Ether 4:1 where the name "Benjamin" was changed to the name "Mosiah" to maintain consistency with the rest of the narrative. It's as if someone unfamiliar with the story line did the grafting.

Witness testimony provides that Spalding wrote a number of stories. Perhaps two of those that made their way into the Book of Mormon were "Manuscript Found" and "Ether". The compilers and writers of the Book of Mormon inserted Ether as filler, leaving the above inconsistencies between the Benjamin and Mosiah characters.

Perhaps the stories were taken from some author other than Spalding, but the implication is that whoever put together the Book of Mormon used more than one document and that they were sufficiently unfamiliar with the text to make errors in splicing.

Perhaps the stories did come from Spalding, which could explain the similar story lines of "Manuscript Story -- Conneaut Creek", "Ether" and the main Book of Mormon née "Manuscript Found".

I think it's the most plausible and my opinion is largely formed from the book "Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon" http://www.amazon.com/Who-Really-Wrote-Book-Mormon/dp/0758605277

The authors compile quite a list of circumstantial evidence to suggest that it's so. E.g., if the BoM isn't based largely on Spaulding's work, what are the odds that SS developed the nickname "Old Come to Pass" from his neighbors from his readings of his book in progress independently of the BoM? Is it mere coincidence?

This theory also addresses the question of how a young boy could have written such a book. Well, he didn't, says this theory. So it gets past that big question.

I have the book and have read it. They offer a good deal of evidence in support of the Spaulding theory which cannot be easily dismissed.

It would appear that the rock in the hat bit was done for show to the curious and the BoM was actually an amalgamation from several sources including Spaulding's stolen manuscript.

I am open-minded on this. I do think that Joseph did have the ability to write the BOM which is what B.H. Roberts thought as well.

However, I am compelled by the Spaulding theory and by Craig's research on it. Another thing in support of Sidney being 'in on it' is that he and Joseph reportedly shared a vision according to Philo Dibble. So either Sidney was lying about it to increase his stature, lied about it in concert with Joseph or was gullible enough to be persuaded by Joseph that he was seeing some sort of vision.

From Craig Criddle's research:

Rigdon and Smith collaborated on shared revelations, beyond The Book of Moses and The Inspired Translation of the Bible. Examples of "revelations" or "visions" given to both Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon include Doctrine and Covenants sections 35, 37, 40, 44, 71, 73, 76 and 100. In 1892, Philo Dibble, an eyewitness to the revelation of Section 76, gave the following description of the event:

The vision which is recorded in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants was given at the house of 'Father Johnson,' in Hyrum [sic], Ohio, and during the time that Joseph and Sidney were in the spirit and saw the heavens open, there were other men in the room, perhaps twelve, among whom I was one during a part of the time-probably two-thirds of the time,-I saw the glory and felt the power, but did not see the vision.

The events and conversation, while they were seeing what is written (and many things were seen and related that are not written), I will relate as minutely as is necessary.

Joseph would, at intervals, say: "What do I see?" as one might say while looking out the window and beholding what all in the room could not see. Then he would relate what he had seen or what he was looking at. Then Sidney replied, "I see the same." Presently Sidney would say "what do I see?" and would repeat what he had seen or was seeing, and Joseph would reply, "I see the same."

This manner of conversation was repeated at short intervals to the end of the vision, and during the whole time not a word was spoken by any other person. Not a sound nor motion made by anyone but Joseph and Sidney, and it seemed to me that they never moved a joint or limb during the time I was there, which I think was over an hour, and to the end of the vision.

Joseph sat firmly and calmly all the time in the midst of a magnificent glory, but Sidney sat limp and pale, apparently as limber as a rag, observing which, Joseph remarked, smilingly, "Sidney is not used to it as I am."
(Cited on page 112 in Van Wagoner (1994).

http://www.mormonthink.com/mormonstudiesrigdon.htm

It is my belief that S. Spaulding did write this book and that Joe Jr. used part of it in the creation of the BoM. but there was also Emanuel Swedenburg and several others whose works were also used in the fabrication.

But both names refer to the same Solomon Spalding.

I don't know but they make solid basketballs.

What reasons do we have to believe that the Spaulding witnesses are credible?

From the footnotes to Episode 2 at mormonleaks:

There are many reasons to accept the Conneaut witness statements:

1. After collecting witness testimony in Conneaut, Hurlbut travelled hundreds of miles searching for Spalding’s Manuscript Found. This indicates that he thought there really was such a manuscript.

2. The 8 Conneaut witnesses' statements were individually produced, dated and witnessed by Hurlbut and Howe. Howe traveled to Conneaut to interview the witnesses and confirm the facts before he printed their statements.

3. While there are some common elements, there are important differences in the Conneaut witnesses' statements, contrary to Fawn Brodie's incorrect analysis.

4. In an article published in the Hudson Ohio "Observer", (Masthead of Vlll:15 - June 12, 1834), the editor interviewed some of the Conneaut witnesses, who then told the editor the same thing that they told to Hurlbut, even though they had every opportunity to say anything they wished. This article appeared shortly after Hurlbut's trial in April 1834 and around six months before "Mormonism Unvailed", was published, thus refuting the claims that the witnesses had been coached by Hurlbut or that he had inaccurately reported their testimony.

5. Statements opposing the Conneaut witness statements were made at least a decade after the Conneaut witnesses gave their statements. This is important because the Conneaut witness statements were not refuted by the Church at the time their evidence was published. These people lived only 40 miles from Kirtland, headquarters of the Church. Spalding read his manuscript to them for entertainment, in a time before television, radio, or newspapers.

6. The Conneaut witnesses were reporting on actual events from memory. They lived in the vicinity of Spalding from 1809 to 1812, and personally knew him. One way to crosscheck the reliability of the memory of a witness is to seek corroborating evidence regarding the witness – his/her reputation, attention to detail, memory skills, biases, and trustworthiness. Many of the Conneaut witnesses were leading citizens of the community. One was John Spalding, Solomon’s brother, who reportedly heard Manuscript Found repeatedly and in its entirety. Artemus Cunningham was owed money by Spalding. Another was Henry Lake, Solomon's business partner. Yet another, Aaron Wright, was a Justice of the Peace who investigated the mounds of Conneaut and described finding bones in the mounds that disintegrated when he dug them up. These were credible people, with no known conflicts of interest. They had no connection to Mormonism either before or after their statements were published. They didn't retract or modify what was quoted in “Mormonism Unvailed”.

7. Howe was friendly with Joseph Smith, married to a Mormon, and had dinner at Joseph Smith's house after “Mormonism Unvailed” was published. His "Mormonism Unvailed" is widely respected and widely quoted by both Mormon scholars and non-Mormon scholars. In it, Howe acknowledged that the Spalding manuscript he received from Hurlbut (the Oberlin Manuscript also called Manuscript Story) was not Manuscript Found, and he connected Rigdon to Spalding. Howe said he didn't know what happened to the Spalding manuscript he received from Howe but assumed it was lost in a fire after he sold the print shop. Later, the new print shop owner, L.L. Rice, found the manuscript in among the texts shipped to Hawaii. These data do not indicate lying or bias on Howe’s part.

8. The 8 Conneaut statements are the tip of the witness iceberg. At least 19 different witnesses linked Spalding to the Book of Mormon. Besides the eight published Conneaut witnesses, additional credible witnesses in Conneaut and in Amity, stated that they saw the Spalding manuscript that identified Lehi and Nephi. The biggest problem with much of this evidence was the time period that elapsed between their encounters with Spalding’s work and their statements. The earliest statements came 18-22 years after Spalding allegedly exposed them to his work; the latest came 74 years after the alleged encounter with Spalding.

9. Old evidence is admittedly susceptible to memory fallibility, and the possibility of witness tampering. The 8 Conneaut witnesses were remembering events that transpired about 18-22 years before their statements were taken. But it is speculation to claim that they could not recall the names or events after 18-22 years. Most people remember many people's names and details after 18-22 years. Another way to crosscheck the Conneaut witness testimony is to test its predictive power. Based on their statements and Howe’s analysis, we can expect to find a link between Spalding and Sidney Rigdon. A strong connection to the Pittsburgh post office comes through the testimony of Rebecca Eichbaum. Eichbaum’s testimony was not collected until September 18, 1872 - over 56 years after the alleged incidents! The reliability of her memory could be a problem, but in her case, the details have checked out. Eichbaum was the clerk in the post office where Spalding and Rigdon collected their mail. Several witnesses testified that Eichbaum had a superior memory and was superbly attentive to detail. Her testimony connects Rigdon to printer Silas Engles and to J. Harrison Lambdin, the ward of Robert Patterson and eventual junior partner in the Patterson printing and book selling operation. When researchers crosschecked her testimony by investigating post office records, they found the names of both Spalding and Rigdon on the same June 30, 1816, list of unclaimed letters.

10. One of the later witnesses for Manuscript Found was Hurlbut's lawyer,Jason Briggs, who wrote five letters to newspapers later in his life claiming that he had seen and handled Manuscript Found in December of 1833. This lawyer had a distinguished career unrelated to Mormonism. Another person was J.D. Dowan, the Justice of the Peace who signed the warrant against Hurlbut. Dowan also had no alleged interest against Mormonism. His statement says that Spalding's manuscript conformed specifically to the Book of Mormon. The statement is attested by his grandchild, and is kept in the Chicago Historical Society.