Who Knows Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Sooooo true! You are hitting the nail on the head. I see it the way you do, from a human perspective with seeing the human angle to the story. No need for intellectual claptrap. Soooo not true! If he indeed felt that what he did brought people closer to God (which i suspect he did), then there is absolutely no reason for any type of confession - to either the public or to God.So thus far, the only reasons I've been given for SR 'confessing' are these: - He would have wanted to repent of his fraud before dying. - He didn't like JS chastising him.Any others?
why me Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 A death-bed confession affirming Brigham Young as the true living prophet, and Sidney's admission that he fabricated his own visions and revelations, trying to lead the Saints away from Brigham would have been a nice touch for a sincere, repentant, dying Christian.Rigdon was a tough nut to crack -- he had two possible opinions about things:Either he was "right" or he was "dead right."The 1863 "Appeal to the LDS" that he ghost-wrote makes for interesting reading:http://sidneyrigdon.com/books/Appl1863.htmUDAnd page 67 is the important page of that appeal. Written in red letters is the conclusion of the appeal.
Who Knows Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 A death-bed confession affirming Brigham Young as the true living prophet, and Sidney's admission that he fabricated his own visions and revelations, trying to lead the Saints away from Brigham would have been a nice touch for a sincere, repentant, dying Christian.touche.
why me Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Soooo not true! If he indeed felt that what he did brought people closer to God (which i suspect he did), then there is absolutely no reason for any type of confession - to either the public or to God.So thus far, the only reasons I've been given for SR 'confessing' are these: - He would have wanted to repent of his fraud before dying. - He didn't like JS chastising him.Any others?His dignity...His self-respect...His christian honesty...His human-ness...His heart felt desire to set things straight...His soul.....His morality.... His conscious... His human consciousness of right and wrong.... Sin.... Not doing the devil's work....
Uncle Dale Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 So thus far, the only reasons I've been given for SR 'confessing' are these: - He would have wanted to repent of his fraud before dying. - He didn't like JS chastising him.Any others?He had two distinct personalities -- one of which was faithful, eloquent, pious and sort of honest -- and one of which was heaven-daring, deceitful and weird.Of course that is just a theory -- but such things were published about him as early as 1831 -- months before he and JS were abused with tar and feathers.http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/VA/ha....htm#020731-100I think that the honest part of Rigdon's psyche died a slow death over the years, and that we should take seriously what was said about him at his excommunication.See also here:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/Hyd1845A.htmhttp://www.sidneyrigdon.com/Grnt1844.htmUD
emeliza Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 I agree with cinepro that sometimes you need to have the It's called the "I don't know" theory. But see the genius of a theory is it is just that. A theory. It is subject to change it isn't necessarily fact. I have theories on many things I do in life. Most of science is just a theory. I don't think it is so wrong to have theories.
Who Knows Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 His dignity...His self-respect...His christian honesty...His human-ness...His heart felt desire to set things straight...His soul.....His morality.... His conscious... His human consciousness of right and wrong.... Sin.... Not doing the devil's work.... Again, you're assuming that if he did fabricate the BOM to bring people closer to God, that he felt guilty about it. Or thought it was wrong. Or thought he was doing the 'devil's work'.UD, I don't know why, but I have a hard time deciphering your 'code' sometimes. Could you explain a little more?
cdowis Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 >Spilling the beans would have made him look just as bad as JS. What would he have to gain?Again I ask: the eleven witnesses? Were they dupes, or co-conspirators.
Who Knows Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 >Spilling the beans would have made him look just as bad as JS. What would he have to gain?Again I ask: the eleven witnesses? Were they dupes, or co-conspirators.I have no idea. I'm just trying to find out why some automatically assume that if SR had a hand in writing the BOM, he would have eventually 'confessed' it.
emeliza Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Good question Cdowis. I believe that the BoM was translated by JS thru the power the the Holy Ghost so it is a bit hard for me to try and answer this one.I would have to say that if they were duped, they were duped very well in that none of them would later state they might have been duped. However if they were all in on it, I would not consider them men of God. However the more people involved the more likely someone is going to open their mouth....so if it had to be one of those two choices, I would say they had to be duped, but I prefer neither choice.
journeyman Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 I think Uncle Dale has stated in prior threads that Sidney Rigdon didn't keep him mouth shut and did claim (once?) to have authored the book or helped on it. However, from what I read it was only a snippet where he said he could bring down the Church. I am sure Uncle Dale can provide it again though.I don't agree that Rigdon wrote the book or that it was a compulation of Rigdon and Spaulding and Smith, otherwise I think we would have more evidence (such as Spauldings draft in KJ English). However evidence seems to be such a hard word these days because it can be turned around to say where is the evidence of the literal side of the BoM. I think if Rigdon did write the BoM he would have gone to the papers about it or announced it more during all his difficulties with Smith.I don't see a fraud coming out and saying, "He guys, I wrote this the Book of Mormon to deceive everybody but I hope we can still be friends and you will follow me into my next adventure." I wonder how many liars went to their graves having the facts laid before them and the world but they still would deny the truth... Our Ego and Pride is a dangerous thing.
Uncle Dale Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 UD, I don't know why, but I have a hard time deciphering your 'code' sometimes. Could you explain a little more?See the on-line FARMS review of Richard S. Van Wagoner's Rigdon biography for some discussion regarding Rigdon's mental problems.Like many emotionally disturbed people, Rigdon could function "normally" for lengthy periods of time, but when his "bad side" took over, he was out on the podium urging the Saints to exterminate the Missourians, and a dozen other bad things.Like I said, read the LDS reporting of his excommunication trial -- and then compare THAT to what Alexander Campbell wrote about him 13 years before.UDOur Ego and Pride is a dangerous thing.Rigdon's concerns over his family's reputation and welfare may have been a factor as well.See what his grandson had to say:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/UT/tribune2.htm#041588UD
emeliza Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 See I don't get where you would think he thought it was bringing people closer to God. Every time he left a church in the past it was basically because he didn't agree with the way scriptures and doctrine were intrepreted and didn't think it was bringing people closer to God. Why wouldn't this be the same?
journeyman Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Good question Cdowis. I believe that the BoM was translated by JS thru the power the the Holy Ghost so it is a bit hard for me to try and answer this one.I would have to say that if they were duped, they were duped very well in that none of them would later state they might have been duped. However if they were all in on it, I would not consider them men of God. However the more people involved the more likely someone is going to open their mouth....so if it had to be one of those two choices, I would say they had to be duped, but I prefer neither choice.A good example of witnesses that were duped or perhaps dupers were the eight witnesses for the James Strang brass plates, as delivered by an angel. Set this witness stuff aside and consider that the Devil is quite the illusionists and liar. He has power to do about anything he wants in this world for those who are willing to give into his trickery. I tell you that there are many more books out in the world that have a far more convincing story than the Book of Mormon but are completely from darkness.Consider Acts 17:11 or Galatians 1:8 before you believe in any new books or teachings that sound of a "familiar spirit" or any other supernatural story. Although, I do not see the Book of Mormon story being real or convincing.
David Waltz Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Hi Uncle,You wrote:>>Dan and I agree on so much, that about all there would be left to debate is whether or not David Whitmer's mother was a competant witness in her reported testimony of having been shown the golden plates.>>Does this mean that you believe Joseph Smith Jr. was the sole author of the BoM and that Rigdon had nothing to do with itâ??s production?Thanks in advance,David
Uncle Dale Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 A good example of witnesses that were duped or perhaps dupers were the eight witnesses for the James Strang brass plates, as delivered by an angel...Actually Strang did not have quite that many witnesses -- nor were any of them as intimately involved with his church in its early days as were the Smith family, the Whitmers (and Whitmer relatives Cowdery & Page) and Martin Harris were with incipient Mormonism.I once heard an RLDS elder deliver a talk before a large audience, in which he claimed that "any jury in the world would find the 11 witnesses fully reliable."Do Mormons really believe such things? I guess a few converts are brought in now and then, upon the effects of the 11 witnesses' testimony, but it is mostly only convincing to "believers."I get a little tired of the "Well, then, Mr. anti-Mormon, how do you explain the witnesses??" sort of confrontational talk. Its main purpose is simply to reinforce the testimony of the believer. It does little or nothing to gain the sympathy of the non-believer.If the 11 witnesses' testimony were fully believable and actionable, converts would be pouring in by the millions. Other witnesses are avilable for all sorts of other claims, all though history -- and they did not bring in many converts either, unless their message was "Gold discovered in California!!!!!" or some such thing.Uncle Dale
why me Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 See the on-line FARMS review of Richard S. Van Wagoner's Rigdon biography for some discussion regarding Rigdon's mental problems.Like many emotionally disturbed people, Rigdon could function "normally" for lengthy periods of time, but when his "bad side" took over, he was out on the podium urging the Saints to exterminate the Missourians, and a dozen other bad things.Like I said, read the LDS reporting of his excommunication trial -- and then compare THAT to what Alexander Campbell wrote about him 13 years before.UDRigdon's concerns over his family's reputation and welfare may have been a factor as well.See what his grandson had to say:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/UT/tribune2.htm#041588UDAnd reading sidney's grandson's account and the low respect that he had for his grandfather, I can honestly say that sidney made a mistake by not coming clean himself to the public. But in truth uncle dale I give no credence to his grandson's story. He sounds like an angry man with an agenda. I do believe that sidney did claim that he did not author the book of mormon on his deathbed to his son. And so we have a conflict here. Poor sidney is certainly not resting peacefully these days...too much controversy surrounding him. I still feel sorry for the man...
Luigi Posted October 6, 2006 Author Posted October 6, 2006 Again, you're assuming that if he did fabricate the BOM to bring people closer to God, that he felt guilty about it. Or thought it was wrong. Or thought he was doing the 'devil's work'.I think even if you look at Sidney Rigdon from a total humanistic approach it seems he would 'confess' if he had written parts of the BoM. Imagine you author large portions of a book that spurs a relatively large religious movement and that you aren't credited for participating in at all-wouldn't that bother you enough that you would want to let someone know how ingenous you were? I just don't think I could hold it in personally.
Uncle Dale Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 I just don't think I could hold it in personallyEver know a person who "channels" the output of "automatic writing" to confess that their literary productions are merely a hoax" Some of these "automatic writers" are fully convinced they are being guided by spirits or other supernatural beings -- when the best explanation is that the strange writing comes from their own subconscious mind:See here also:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NW/miscnw04.htm#090980UD
why me Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 I think even if you look at Sidney Rigdon from a total humanistic approach it seems he would confess. Imagine you author large portions of a book that spurs a relatively large religious movement and that you aren't credited for participating in at all-wouldn't that bother you enough that you would want to let someone know how ingenous you were? I just don't think I could hold it in personallyAnd if you were JS you would think twice before booting him out. Here is a man who could upset your apple cart. Plus, any fraudster would keep a record of the fraud to blackmail their partners in crime, if needs be. Too many loose ends with good ol' sidney. Ever know a person who "channels" the output of "automatic writing" to confess that their literary productions are merely a hoax" Some of these "automatic writers" are fully convinced they are being guided by spirits or other supernatural beings -- when the best explanation is that the strange writing comes from their own subconscious mind:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/features/mental0.jpgSee here also:http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NW/miscnw04.htm#090980UDI think I need a drink... I wonder what whiskey tastes like?? These stories are getting stranger and stranger uncle dale.
SolarPowered Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 OK, I seem to have missed something here. Just exactly what evidence is there that Sidney Rigdon wrote the Book of Mormon, discovered chiasmas, NHM, the "more fertile parts" of Arabia, the land Bountiful, knew there was iron ore in Bountiful, knew enough Hebrew to drop tons of Hebraisms in the BoM original manuscript, etc., etc., etc.?
cdowis Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 >A good example of witnesses that were duped or perhaps dupers were the eight witnesses for the James Strang brass plates, as delivered by an angel...Please give us the citation where they saw and heard an angel.
emeliza Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 Solar Power---There are a few different threads by Uncle Dale all about Rigdon being the author of the BoM. They are pretty recent too so you shouldn't have a hard time finding them.
why me Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 >A good example of witnesses that were duped or perhaps dupers were the eight witnesses for the James Strang brass plates, as delivered by an angel...Please give us the citation where they saw and heard an angel.And please tell us why they were not copying the bofm witness story...to make their own story legit. And as we can see...the 'lord' abandoned those sheep rather early, for some strange reason.
Who Knows Posted October 6, 2006 Posted October 6, 2006 ...NHM...What about NHM? What do you find so convincing about NHM?Sorry for derailing...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.