Olivery Cowdery

[Uncle Dale]

I was just picking on you , I got what you meant. And I definitely don't have a problem with

the way you post.

Actually I love to beat folks over the head in my postings....

Uncle "now where are those two Dans? I mean Vogel and Peterson? I've got my club here somewhere" Dale

[USU78]

Why did he return to Utah, and rejoin the church?

Well isn't that where 30,000 plus religious fanatics lived.

I'm sure JB has evidence that he can submit to the learned panel to establish the bona fides of his claim that all "30,000 plus" Mormons in Deseret (including direct ancestors of many posters hereabouts) were "religious fanatics."

Or perhaps he'd prefer to withdraw the accusation of the safely dead as the d@mned lie that it is.

USU "Pulling on the 3 lb. gloves" 78

[jadams_4242]

Cowdery was pretty well educated and was with Smith through i'm guessing half his early visions, and spiritual visitations, plus was with Smith while translating the BoM subposedly only scribing what was dictated.

If anyone else was "in on it" it would have definitely been Cowdery. Being the "scribe" and being with Smith when the "keys were passed", makes him an invalueable figure to have had testifing against the church's truthfulness.

He, however, after being disinfranchized with the Church, didn't come forward with any deathnell information, or any crippling accusations; he quitely just left.

With his close hierarchy relationship with Joseph, Oliver could have split the church or even crushed most of it with a negative testimony, but chose not to. For better or worse, Cowdery's choice to not oppose the church after leaving it, stands as a strong testimony to me of the truthfulness found within it.

But if the Church wasn't true.....

Knowing this was all a faint by Joseph Smith, why is it that, Oliver Cowdery gave up so much time, effort, and work scribing and validating for Smith to play second fiddle to Smith's prophethood?

Obviously, Cowdery would have to be the brains behind the BoM, being an educated man that actual was the one "scribing" it, so why didn't he also claim the role of a prophet/leader?

When he left the church why didn't he try forming his own spinoff church (after all if it was all a fake why not do this)?

For that matter, why not just reveal that Smith was a fraud?

Why would he not denign his testimony till his dieing breath?

My question would be...Why did he leave the church, this would probably give all answers?

[Joseph Antley]

My question would be...Why did he leave the church, this would probably give all answers?

I'm not all that well aquainted with early LDS history, but here's a few theories:

If Cowdery did believe, he could've come to the conclusion that Joseph was a fallen prophet, based upon the Kirtland Bank fiasco, polygamy, and the new evolving doctrines.

If Cowdery didn't believe, he may've been upset that his power in the Church was dwindling and people like Rigdon were usurping his position.

[Uncle Dale]

My question would be...Why did he leave the church, this would probably give all answers?

Two new books on Oliver just out from BYU Press, plus three older sources for study here:

1. Joseph Hyrum Greenhalgh's "Oliver Cowdery, the Man Outstanding" (1965)

2. Phillip R. Legg's "Oliver Cowdery, the Elusive Second Elder" (1989)

3. Stanley R. Gunn's "Oliver Cowdery, Second Elder" (1962)

It appears that Oliver Cowdery left the Church because he was caught drinking a cup of tea

on a cold winter's night in Missouri.

Uncle "Or -- maybe there's a bit more to the story that just that" Dale

[Jaybear]

Yes, there are. Few of them, however, are credible.

How about that, you are conceding that there is in fact a credible explanation for Oliver's actions, presupposing fraud on his part. What a remarkable honest concession.

Tshirt:

And just who would have disbarred him or jailed him for exposing a fraud?

One can be disbarred for moral turpitude. Oliver's admission that he participated in a fraud, would be grounds for disbarment.

T-shirt:

This would have helped him more than hurt him. His reputation was already sullied, by his own admission, his practice suffered from his reputation of having, once, been associated with the Mormons.

You mean aside from the fact, that he could lose his license to practice law.

Uh... he didn't return to Utah. In fact he never, in his entire life, set foot in Utah.

Uhmm...As I noted earlier, ...."The question presented is whether his decision to return to Utah presents a conundrum when juxtaposed against an allegation of fraud."

Oliver died en route, after having made the decision to come to Utah.

USU: I'm sure JB has evidence that he can submit to the learned panel to establish the bona fides of his claim that all "30,000 plus" Mormons in Deseret (including direct ancestors of many posters hereabouts) were "religious fanatics."

Or perhaps he'd prefer to withdraw the accusation of the safely dead as the d@mned lie that it is.

USU "Pulling on the 3 lb. gloves" 78

My, my. We are touchy group.

Alright then, I will retract my claim of 30,0000 plus and replace it with "5,000 plus Mormon fanatics."

Happy now?

[T-Shirt]

Oliver died en route, after having made the decision to come to Utah.

No he didn't. He was rebaptized in Kanesville, Iowa and then was given the assignment to remain in Iowa to help Orson Hyde publish a newspaper. In 1849 he traveled to Richmond, Missouri to visit family. His health deteriorated and he died in 1850 at David Whitmer's home.

My, my, we have been Jaybeared again.

T-Shirt

[jadams_4242]

[quote name= the church why didn't he try forming his own spinoff church (after all if it was all a fake why not do this)?

For that matter, why not just reveal that Smith was a fraud?

Why would he not denign his testimony till his dieing breath?

[Pahoran]

How about that, you are conceding that there is in fact a credible explanation for Oliver's actions, presupposing fraud on his part. What a remarkable honest concession.

No he didn't, as a matter of fact. But are you honest enough to concede that there is any credible explanation for the actions of the founders that does not presuppose either fraud or some kind of derangement on their part?

Or are you too--fanatical--to even consider the possibility that they might actually be telling the truth?

Alright then, I will retract my claim of 30,0000 plus and replace it with "5,000 plus Mormon fanatics."

Happy now?

I'm not aware of any evidence (your prejudice is not evidence) that there have ever been that many "Mormon fanatics" in the Church in its entire history.

Regards,

Pahoran

[AeonJ]

I'm not all that well aquainted with early LDS history, but here's a few theories:

If Cowdery did believe, he could've come to the conclusion that Joseph was a fallen prophet, based upon the Kirtland Bank fiasco, polygamy, and the new evolving doctrines.

If Cowdery didn't believe, he may've been upset that his power in the Church was dwindling and people like Rigdon were usurping his position.

Couldn't he still not believed and still have been upset by the Kirtland Bank fiasco, polygamy, and the new evolving doctrines?

[Uncle Dale]

Couldn't he still not believed and still have been upset by the Kirtland Bank fiasco, polygamy,

and the new evolving doctrines?

Hint: Oliver Cowdery saw the 1835 Kirtland D&C as being the Law of the Church --

applicable to all members, with no exceptions for "secret revelations" to the contrary.

Now Oliver was correct in that viewpoint -- technically. All the members of the Church were

governed by the D&C, (and in individual cases by the decisions of high councils).

All but one member, that is........

UD

[AeonJ]

Well, I think there are pretty good explanations for Oliver Cowdery's actions whether he believed if it were true or false. First of all I don't think Oliver Cowdery had the charisma to start his own Church, so I imagine that would have been his reason for being 'second fiddle'.

Charisma or leadership presense is not just in the personality of the individual but in who the individual is. Oliver Cowdery whether it was natural or not would have had huge presense to take over after Joseph, or to offshoot the church with a spinoff after the 2nd half of Joseph's ministry where he got controversial.

In terms of exposing the fraud (if that's what it was) to do so would expose himself as a charlatan if he were 'in' on the whole thing-not a very good career move. No, the best thing for him to do would be to walk away from the whole thing quietly and try to start over. I'm not saying that the whole thing was a fraud but I hardly feel that Oliver Cowdery's actions can be entered in as proof that it wasn't.

If Cowdery didn't believe than he would really have nothing to lose if he believed Smith "took the ball and went the wrong way with it". In many views he was already a charlatan and coming out would put him in better standing with the Nicene-Christian community.

The only speculative option I could think of is that he feared physical retailiation by the Mormon community. (is this a plausible option or no)

[AeonJ]

Hint: Oliver Cowdery saw the 1835 Kirtland D&C as being the Law of the Church --

applicable to all members, with no exceptions for "secret revelations" to the contrary.

Now Oliver was correct in that viewpoint -- technically. All the members of the Church were

governed by the D&C, (and in individual cases by the decisions of high councils).

All but one member, that is........

UD

Uncle Dale were you that member? UD can only stand for so many people.

[Uncle Dale]

Uncle Dale were you that member? UD can only stand for so many people.

After all these years! The truth finally comes out!

Oh the shame! -- yes, Sister Emma caught me in the woodshed with that Alger girl!

Uncle "I gave Emma a darned good explanation, but she burned the paper at Nauvoo in 1843!" Dale

[AeonJ]

After all these years! The truth finally comes out!

Oh the shame! -- yes, Sister Emma caught me in the woodshed with that Alger girl!

Uncle "I gave Emma a darned good explanation, but she burned the paper at Nauvoo in 1843!" Dale

(chuckles)

[USU78]

My, my. We are touchy group.

Alright then, I will retract my claim of 30,0000 plus and replace it with "5,000 plus Mormon fanatics."

Happy now?

Not in the slightest, and, as Goetz of the Iron Fist said to the Archbishop . . ..

C

F

R

Or shut up.

[Sleeper Cell]

(Jaybear @ Aug 2 2007, 04:41 PM)

... Alright then, I will retract my claim of 30,0000 plus and replace it with "5,000 plus Mormon fanatics."

Happy now?

I'm not aware of any evidence (your prejudice is not evidence) that there have ever been that many "Mormon fanatics" in the Church in its entire history.

Regards,

Pahoran

Actually, there is some evidence. Apparently, there have been nearly 6000 individuals who have posted on this board at one time or another. Assuming the overwhelming majority of posters are, at least, nominal members of the Church, that would account for most of the alleged â??5000 plus Mormon fanatics.â?

Sleeper Cell (Mormon Fanatic No. 5837)

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Hey, you are perfectly welcome to draw that inference. I have absolutely no problem with that. Go figure?

What I have a problem with is the assertion by apologist that no other rational or reasonable explanation exists, and that anyone who does not draw the same inference is fool, under the influence of satan, or an antimormon with an axe to grind.

Not anti...just a double standard. Fool is such a harsh word...lets try "can't see the forrest for the trees". Why is it that the testimony of anyone in "mormonism" cannot be trusted...but all others can?

Pa pa

[cdowis]

I am quoting from a previous post on the subject.

===========================================

Several have written "Charles, most of them realized their mistake and

left Mormonism." Pretty simple and compelling argument -- they

realized the deception and left Mormonism.

The difficulty is that, having left Mormonism, and even

with the death of Joseph Smith, they continued their witness of the

Book of Mormon!!

Even on the deathbed, some of the witnesses gave an affirmation of

what

they had seen.

Let us look at just one witness, David Whitmer, the most interviewed

witness.

As the last surviving witness of the BOM, prior to his death in 1888,

he was interviewed more extensively than anyone else. Over fifty

conversations, among literally thousands, are reported in detail in

contemporary diaries, letters and newspapers, and supplmented by later

recollections. (These accounts will be published in a multi-volume

work of over 200 documents containing accounts of the testimonies of

the witnesses)

In these accounts David Whitmer gives a detailed account of his

experience:

1. We "went out into the woods nearby, and sat down on a log and

talked

awhile. We then kneeled down and prayed. Joseph prayed. We then got

up and sat on the log and were talking, when all at once a light came

down from above us and encircled us for quite a little distance

around,

and the angel stood before us."

2. The angel "was dressed in white, and spoke and called me by name

and

said, 'Blessed is he that keepeth His commandments.'"

3. The light "was not like the light of the sun, nor like that of a

fire, but more glorious and beautiful. It extended away round us, I

cannot tell how far, but in the midst of this light, immediately

before

us, about as far off as he sits (pointing to an individual sitting abt

2-3 feet away) there appeared, as it were, a table, with many records

on it -- besides the plates of the Book of Mormon, also the sword of

Laban, the Directors, and the Interpreters. I saw them as plain as I

see this bed (striking his hand on the bed beside him), and I heard

the

voice of the Lord as distinctly as I ever heard anything in my life

declaring that they were translated by the gift and power of God."

4. "The angel stood before us and he turned the leaves one by one...so

that they could be plainly visible...I did not handle the plates --

only saw them" (the elipsis indicates different recitations.

5. In 1833 a mob seized several Mormon leaders, including Darvid

Whitmer. Driving them at the point of bayonet, they stripped them and

tarred and feathered them. Cocking their guns and, threatening them

with instant death, demanded that they renounce Mormonism. "David

Whitmer, hereupon, lifted up his hands and bore witness that the Book

of Mormon was the word of God. The mob then let them go."

6. A reporter from the Missouri PLATSBURG DEMOCRAT interview him, and

was profoundly affected. "Skeptics may laugh and scoff if they will,

but no man can listen to Mr. Whitmer as he talks of his interview with

the angel of the Lord, without being most forcibly convinced that he

has heard an honest man tell what he honestly believes to be true."

This reporter was a seasoned political analyst.

7. In 1881 John Murphy, a local farmer and Protestant missionary,

interviewed Whitmer, and claimed that he had renounced his testimony

--

that the experience was simply an inner feeling. Whitmer gathered

statements from two dozen community leaders, attesting to his

integrity. He then published a proclamation in the local newspaper,

denying the statement by Murphy. "To the end, therefore, that he may

understand me now, if he did not then; and that the world may know the

truth, I wish now, standing as it were, in the very suset of life,

and

in the fear of God, once for all to make this public statement: That I

have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof,

which

has so long since been published with that book, as one of the three

witnesses....I do again affirm the truth of all my statements, as then

made and published, He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear; it was

no delusion!"

8. Finally, the following was recorded as he lay on his deathbed, as

published in the RICHMOND DEMOCRAT, and described by Angus Cannon ==>>

Raising his hand, he declared: "My friend, if God ever uttered a

truth,

the testimony I now bear is true. I did see the angel of God, and I

beheld the glory of the Lord, and he declared the record true."

[Uncle Dale]

published in the RICHMOND DEMOCRAT....

Not so far as I can determine.

I've looked through literally scores of thousands of old newspapers, searching for reports on

Oliver Cowdery. The Richmond, Missouri papers may indeed reprint a couple of Mormon allegations,

but without citations back to anything from Oliver's time period. What little original reporting I have so

far discovered, I've placed on the web for all to see.

I could get a letter published in my local newspaper today and in that letter I might cite some

words attributed to Oliver Cowdery. That would not be an original source. It would be "late hearsay."

Let's find some original sources on what Oliver said and did, so that we do not waste our time

repeating unverified hearsay.

UD

[Jaybear]

Not in the slightest, and, as Goetz of the Iron Fist said to the Archbishop . . ..

C

F

R

Or shut up.

Is your CFR made in reference to the number the number of mormons in Utah in 1848, or my use of the adjective "fanatic?"

[Uncle Dale]

Is your CFR made in reference to the number the number of mormons in Utah in 1848,

or my use of the adjective "fanatic?"

I would suggest taking your fanatics' census in 1856, rather than 1848.

Even Bro. Horatio might have to concede a fanatic or two in Deseret during The Reformation.

Uncle "don't you just love Jeddy Grant and Dan Wells!" Dale

[USU78]

Is your CFR made in reference to the number the number of mormons in Utah in 1848, or my use of the adjective "fanatic?"

"Fanatic," as used by JB, is hardly merely adjectival. It is, rather, a collective noun by which JB attempts to define a people, a collection of individuals, and a belief system. I ask JB, therefore, to produce references, to the extent JB hath such, or withdraw.

[cdowis]

Sorry, got David and Oliver confused in this thread.

[Uncle Dale]

Sorry, got David and Oliver confused in this thread.

No problem, Bro. Charlie -- I enjoyed your contributions nevertheless.

UD