A Challenge to Critics

[Joseph Antley]

Here's a challenge for critics, or for the believer who likes to play devil's advocate. This is a list of questions that I came up with rather quickly, so it's not nearly comprehensive. The goal for the critic is to answer each one in order to provide a realistic scenario for how the events surrounding the Book of Mormon translation took place. All of the questions presuppose that nothing supernatural occurred. Some of the questions may not be worded as well as they should be, but try to answer them as best you can. And of course there are probably many other questions that could be added that would help define the scenario, but these are just the ones that occurred to me at the time.

Your answers don't necessarily have to have historical support (although they shouldn't blatantly contradict the historical evidence). And obviously much of it is a guessing game.

1. Did Joseph Smith believe that he had visions and revelations or was he lying?

2. Did the Smith family believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions or were they lying?

3. Did Emma Smith believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions or was she lying?

4. Did Oliver Cowdery believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

5. Did Martin Harris believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

6. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled gold plates?

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

b. Did the Three Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

c. Did the Eight Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

i. If not, why do you think they claimed to?

ii. If not, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

7. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled what he described as a Urim and Thummim and breastplate?

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

b. If so, why did he only show them briefly to a few and then dispose of them?

c. If not, was Lucy Smith lying or deluded when she claimed to have seen and handled them? If deluded, how was this accomplished, considering the detail in which she described them?

8. Were the Three Witnesses lying or deluded when they claimed to have seen the vision of the angel who showed them the plates and Nephite artifacts?

a. If deluded, how was this accomplished?

b. If lying, why do you think they did this?

c. If lying, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

d. What do you credit the conviction that they spoke of the experience with throughout their lives?

9. Who (if anyone), besides Joseph Smith, contributed to the Book of Mormon?

a. If others contributed, how was this accomplished?

b. Did the traditional accounts of translation with Joseph using a seer-stone and dictating a scribe take place?

10. Did Joseph Smith have written sources present during the Book of Mormon dictation?

a. If so, were the scribes aware of this?

i. If so, why do you think they lied about it?

b. If so, what sources might he have used?

11. If others beside Joseph Smith contributed to the Book of Mormon and/or if written sources were used, how do you think this was accomplished?

a. If Joseph Smith used a seer-stone as the accounts claim, how do you reconcile this translation ritual with blatant fabrication?

[Mortal Man]

1. Did Joseph Smith believe that he had visions and revelations or was he lying?

Joseph Smith believed he had revelations. He viewed his imagination as inspiration.

2. Did the Smith family believe in the authenticity of Joseph's visions or were they lying?

They believed it.

3. Did Emma Smith believe in the authenticity of Joseph's visions or was she lying?

She believed it.

4. Did Oliver Cowdery believe in the authenticity of Joseph's visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

He believed it, although he wondered at times during the translation process if they were "men in their sober minds."

5. Did Martin Harris believe in the authenticity of Joseph's visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

He believed it, but sometimes needed specific revelations from Joseph to help him along.

6. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled gold plates?

Yes

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

He probably used "common tin."

b. Did the Three Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

Yes

c. Did the Eight Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

Yes

i. If not, why do you think they claimed to?

The only alternative is the "spiritual eyes" explanation, but that's rather weak.

ii. If not, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

They believed it and they had based their reputations on it.

7. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled what he described as a Urim and Thummim and breastplate?

Yes

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

He found the stones for the U & T and made the rims and breastplate.

b. If so, why did he only show them briefly to a few and then dispose of them?

He didn't want them examined too closely. The breastplate might have had "Hyrum Smith's shirt" written on the inside.

c.

If not, was Lucy Smith lying or deluded when she claimed to have seen and handled them? If deluded, how was this accomplished, considering the detail in which she described them?

She saw them. But stones are stones.

8. Were the Three Witnesses lying or deluded when they claimed to have seen the vision of the angel who showed them the plates and Nephite artifacts?

They weren't lying. But neither was Brigham Young when he described Cumorah's cave.

a. If deluded, how was this accomplished?

Via delusion I suppose.

b. If lying, why do you think they did this?

I think they believed their stories.

c. If lying, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

See above

d. What do you credit the conviction that they spoke of the experience with throughout their lives?

That's how people talked back then. You gained notoriety by making bold claims or telling "tall tales."

9. Who (if anyone), besides Joseph Smith, contributed to the Book of Mormon?

Ethan Smith, Josiah Priest and numerous biblical authors.

a. If others contributed, how was this accomplished?

By writing and publishing.

b. Did the traditional accounts of translation with Joseph using a seer-stone and dictating a scribe take place?

Yes. He used the breastplate and spectacles for a little while with Martin Harris but then switched to the hat for the bulk of it.

10. Did Joseph Smith have written sources present during the Book of Mormon dictation?

Yes, but he didn't use them during dictation.

a. If so, were the scribes aware of this?

Scribes were too busy writing to notice much.

i. If so, why do you think they lied about it?

They didn't lie but they were eager to make it sound miraculous.

b. If so, what sources might he have used?

The Bible, but he probably had most of the passages memorized, like consiglieri.11. If others beside Joseph Smith contributed to the Book of Mormon and/or if written sources were used, how do you think this was accomplished?

Other than some general ideas from VotH and WoNaPD, and some wholesale copying from the Bible, Joseph thought it all up during his long walks between towns.

a. If Joseph Smith used a seer-stone as the accounts claim, how do you reconcile this translation ritual with blatant fabrication?

I used to play blindfold chess quite a bit. In order to keep track of the pieces in my mind I would have to sit with my head down and eyes closed and really concentrate. I never used a hat but I think thay may have helped.

[Bernard Gui]

Common tin is too thick, it is not heavy enough,

it does not rustle like heavy paper when

brushed, and it is very difficult to engrave.

It is steel plate covered with tin.

Bernard

[Uncle Dale]

...

1. Did Joseph Smith believe that he had visions and revelations or was he lying?

2. Did the Smith family believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions or were they lying?

3. Did Emma Smith believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions or was she lying?

4. Did Oliver Cowdery believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

5. Did Martin Harris believe in the authenticity of Joseph’s visions and the Book of Mormon translation or was he lying?

They all believed -- but Cowdery knew more of what was going on "behind the scenes"

than he ever told. He attempted to add "translation" to the BoM and probably did contribute

a little to the text, using his divining rod rather than a seerstone.

6. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled gold plates?

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

b. Did the Three Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

c. Did the Eight Witnesses actually handle something that they believed were the plates?

i. If not, why do you think they claimed to?

ii. If not, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

I think some plates were constructed -- probably using materials available

in the Smiths' cooper shop -- possibly incorporating a few copper engraving

plates, polished up to resemble gold. If this actually happened, I suppose that

only Smith and Cowdery knew the secret. And even the two of them may have

thought it a necessary "prop," and that their intended "ends" justified the "means."

7. Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled what he described as a Urim and Thummim and breastplate?

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

I'm not sure about the breastplate -- but two magnifying glasses, joined together

with metal from the cooper's shop, and with one of the handles removed would

come close to resembling over-sized magical spectacles.

b. If so, why did he only show them briefly to a few and then dispose of them?

Perhaps it became evident that such "props" only fooled people who had been drugged,

or who observed them in unusual lighting, etc. Carrying around such props and

repeatedly displaying them may have been perceived as a dangerous gamble.

c. If not, was Lucy Smith lying or deluded when she claimed to have seen and handled them?

If deluded, how was this accomplished, considering the detail in which she described them?

c. If lying, why do you think they never repudiated their claim?

d. What do you credit the conviction that they spoke of the experience with throughout their lives?

My guess is that Cowdery truly believed in the Mormon religion, and that the "ends justified the means"

if a little deception was necessary at certain times. Christianity has a long history of pious frauds,

conducted by true believers who were trying to promote faith in others.

9. Who (if anyone), besides Joseph Smith, contributed to the Book of Mormon?

a. If others contributed, how was this accomplished?

Smith, Rigdon and Cowdery -- partly in Ohio and partly in NY/PA -- partly by use

of pre-existing materials -- partly by visions -- partly by diving rod & peepstone.

b. Did the traditional accounts of translation with Joseph using a seer-stone and dictating a scribe take place?

10. Did Joseph Smith have written sources present during the Book of Mormon dictation?

a. If so, were the scribes aware of this?

i. If so, why do you think they lied about it?

Emma and Oliver may have told an occasional lie, to help along the "latter day work."

I think Joseph had a "wonderful memory," just as William Law said -- that he could

memorize large sections of text and repeat it back by dictation.

b. If so, what sources might he have used?

11. If others beside Joseph Smith contributed to the Book of Mormon and/or if written sources were used, how do you think this was accomplished?

a. If Joseph Smith used a seer-stone as the accounts claim, how do you reconcile this translation ritual with blatant fabrication?

I think that Smith, Rigdon and Cowdery all believed what they were doing was good --

even if some deception was involved -- just as deception was later used a Nauvoo to

hide polygamy and to keep the Council of Fifty a secret.

I think Smith, Rigdon and Cowdery truly believed that 1820s Christianity was totally

apostate -- depraved -- abominable in God's sight; and that their own secret activities,

even if sometimes deceptive, were 1000% better than those of "hireling priests" and

"tools of the devil" who promoted "empty" religion, instead of the fulness of the gospel.

I think that Smith, Rigdon and Cowdery truly believed that what they were doing

would bring on the imminent Christian Millennium and the gathering of Israel to

an American Zion. They may have even believed in Nephites, and that the account

they put forth as the "Nephite Record" was essentially true history -- though not

derived from any physically-real "golden plates."

UD

[Joseph Antley]

a. If deluded, how was this accomplished?

Via delusion I suppose.

How do you delude multiple people into believing that they simultaneously witnessed something like an angel showing them gold plates and Nephite artifacts?

[Uncle Dale]

How do you delude multiple people into believing that they simultaneously witnessed something like an angel showing them gold plates and Nephite artifacts?

You begin by dividing them into smaller groups, if possible.

If Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith tricked David Whitmer into

seeing what he witnessed seeing, then their next task would

have been to trick Martin Harris separately.

As for the eight witnesses, I've heard that they did their

witnessing in two groups of four. If so, then one member

of the Whitmer-Page family group must have been present

with the three Smith family members.

It might be helpful if we could sort out that chronology and

interaction/association of the witnesses.

UD

[Joseph Antley]

You begin by dividing them into smaller groups, if possible.

If Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith tricked David Whitmer into

seeing what he witnessed seeing, then their next task would

have been to trick Martin Harris separately.

As for the eight witnesses, I've heard that they did their

witnessing in two groups of four. If so, then one member

of the Whitmer-Page family group must have been present

with the three Smith family members.

How do you think they were fooled? Do you think they were drugged?

[Gordon]

If Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith tricked David Whitmer into

seeing what he witnessed seeing, then their next task would

have been to trick Martin Harris separately.

Yeah, they hung a white sheet, with a painted face, from a tree, that had branches for arms with some tin plates, painted gold, glued to them, while JS's younger brother hid in the bushes speaking as an angel...to which DW and MH (on separate occassions - one stood facing a big tree with his fingers in his ears counting to a thousand while the other was tricked, and vice versa) ignored the string and bought the story hook, line, and sinker!

[Abulafia]

How do you think they were fooled? Do you think they were drugged?

I don't know anything about being drugged Joseph, but have just been reading up on hypnotism. If Joseph had learned from Luman Walters and others like him (and there is no doubt surely that his family were involved and believed deeply in magic and the occult), then it may be plausible that he was able to use hypnotic techniques and mesmerisation. That's not as daft as it seems, and the BMA for instance has recognised that altering a state of consciousness can help in pain management and control.

Hypnosis is a metal state associated with increased suggestibility, altered sensory perception, and a measurable shift in use of functional centers of the brain. As discussed in the neuroscience section, peer reviewed research studies have shown that hypnotized subjects exhibit both altered fMRI scans, and measurable perceptional abilities that cannot be reproduced in subjects not under hypnotic trance.

Many studies have shown that hypnosis is effective for the treatment of pain and anxiety, promoting weight loss, and helping people quit smoking.

We can all agree that Joseph was indeed a charismatic man, I don't find it impossible that he was able to use his charisma, combined with occult and religious thinking to persuade and convince (others and himself), whether that was using ' physical props' or not, I don't know. But Ingersoll's account in the affidavits suggests that Joseph Sr wasn't above using them which would indicate that Joseph had good training from his father amongst others.

Just some thoughts.

[Joseph Antley]

I don't know anything about being drugged Joseph, but have just been reading up on hypnotism. If Joseph had learned from Luman Walters and others like him (and there is no doubt surely that his family were involved and believed deeply in magic and the occult), then it may be plausible that he was able to use hypnotic techniques and mesmerisation. That's not as daft as it seems, and the BMA for instance has recognised that altering a state of consciousness can help in pain management and control.

Having participated in hypnotherapy, I know a little bit about hypnotism and its effects. While hypnotism certainly has powerful psychological affects, I found it difficult to believe that Joseph Smith was able to use hypnotic techniques -- especially without any formal training -- to convince multiple people that they experienced the same event.

But Ingersoll's account in the affidavits suggests that Joseph Sr wasn't above using them which would indicate that Joseph had good training from his father amongst others.

Maybe I'm being a little incredulous, but I consider Ingersoll's account (assuming he actually authored the affidavit) to be one of the least trustworthy of a collection of all hostile affidavits.

[Uncle Dale]

How do you think they were fooled? Do you think they were drugged?

I do not know.

Can you supply me the official LDS Church chronology, listing which witnesses

had their respective experiences on what days?

Without my knowing what the General Authorities of the LDS Church say happened,

it is very difficult for me to try and refute their claims.

Also, who wrote each of the two witness statements, and when were they signed

by each witness? -- or, were the names simply written down without actual signatures?

UD

[Abulafia]

Having participated in hypnotherapy, I know a little bit about hypnotism and its effects. While hypnotism certainly has powerful psychological affects, I found it difficult to believe that Joseph Smith was able to use hypnotic techniques -- especially without any formal training -- to convince multiple people that they experienced the same event.

I'm not sure 'formal' training existed in the 19th Century, from what I have been reading Joseph, certainly in Joseph's area. If Luman Walters went over to Europe, and Paris in particular, then he was there at the right time to pick up on Mesmer's ideas or at least the residual effects of them and take them back to the States. (Mesmer was also apparantly a Mason and his 'doctrines' were regarded by some to have linked in closely with those of Swedenborg - see Book below)

From A history of hypnotism

by Alan Gauld

According to the Baronne d'Oberkirch, a very sharp observer of French society

The end of this very sceptical century is conspicuous for this incredible characteristic - the love of the marvellous...It is certain that Rosicrucians, adepts, prophets and all that goes with them, were never so numerous or so much listened to. Conversation turns almost entirely on these matters: they fill all heads: they strike all imaginations, even the most serious...Our successors will hesitate to believe it: they will not understand how people who doubt everything, even God, can add a complete faith in omens.

On Mesmer's personality

From p 17 of above book

'I have met, talked to, and watched, several well-known 'fringe' healers, of quite different persuasions, who share, I should suppose, some of Mesmer's characteristics:'

The list is incredibly interesting from my point of view, as he might just as well be describing Joseph in my opinion

' an imposing presence, immense, but not oppressive, vitality; a benevolent appearance, reflecting a real goodness of heart; unshakeable belief in some cherished set of doctrines; great obstinacy and pertinacity in propounding them; a rather paranoid reaction to criticism or incredulity; and a way of overcoming doubts and of sweeping patients along on a tide of enthusiasm and hope'

Interestingly Mesmer also insisted that those that followed him, sign a note of secrecy not to divulge his methods, though this was gradually broken down, and his methods (seemingly) were adapted and changed and connected to hypnotism and other occult practices such as divination .

Just found this BYU article by Bitton and Bunker, but no mention of a possible influence of Luman Walters..

http://byustudies.byu.edu/shop/pdfSRC/15.2BunkerBitton.pdf

Maybe I'm being a little incredulous, but I consider Ingersoll's account (assuming he actually authored the affidavit) to be one of the least trustworthy of a collection of all hostile affidavits.

Here we agree to differ, I like Ingersoll's account, particularly for showing a very human side to Joseph with regard to the difficulties he experienced with his father in law.

[Brenda]

Did Joseph Smith construct or acquire something that resembled what he described as a Urim and Thummim and breastplate?

Yes

a. If so, how was this accomplished?

He found the stones for the U & T and made the rims and breastplate.

b. If so, why did he only show them briefly to a few and then dispose of them?

He didn't want them examined too closely. The breastplate might have had "Hyrum Smith's shirt" written on the inside.

No logic here. Why would Joseph make them in the first place? It wasn't needed for his "plan". If overexposure was risky, then even including them in his story at all, was risky.

If Joseph was smart enough to have made it all up, one would think he'd cut out a lot of the pecular parts, such as the U & T, hats, or what have you. He would have made it more believable.

[Brenda]

10. Did Joseph Smith have written sources present during the Book of Mormon dictation?

Yes, but he didn't use them during dictation.

a. If so, were the scribes aware of this?

Scribes were too busy writing to notice much.

I'm sorry but, are you kidding me?

[Uncle Dale]

No logic here. Why would Joseph make them in the first place?

...

Good point.

Could a simple farmboy living in Manchester, New York in the late 1820s

have fabricated a heavy, intricate piece of warrior's armor -- the metal of

which, his mother published, was "worth at least $500." (1853 ed, p. 107).

Five hundred dollars in the 1827-1853 period would probably be something

like $5,000 worth of materials in today's prices -- bronze, gold, silver,

leather, etc. Could a young boy have really created such a breastplate in his

father's cooper's shop in 1827?

The "giant spectacles" I agree could have been easily constructed -- from

a joined pair of magnifying glasses, with one of the handles removed. Or,

at least Martin Harris' description of the spectacles could be easily matched.

But Lucy Mack Smith reports three-cornered diamonds set in glass lenses.

Where on earth could her son have obtained diamonds that large?

UD

[Mortal Man]

No logic here. Why would Joseph make them in the first place? It wasn't needed for his "plan". If overexposure was risky, then even including them in his story at all, was risky.

If Joseph was smart enough to have made it all up, one would think he'd cut out a lot of the pecular parts, such as the U & T, hats, or what have you. He would have made it more believable.

The U & T was probably a topic of conversation in the 1820's New York/Vermont area.

View of the Hebrews, page 175:

"In resemblance of the Urim and Thummim, the American Archimagus wears a breast plate made of a white conch-shell with two holes bored in the middle of it, through which he puts the ends of an otter skin strap, and fastens a buck horn white button to the outside of each, as if in imitation of the precious stones of the Urim."

Note that Ethan Smith doesn't bother to explain what U & T is, he just assumes the reader is familiar with it.

See link: Ethan Smith connection

[Mortal Man]

10. Did Joseph Smith have written sources present during the Book of Mormon dictation?

Yes, but he didn't use them during dictation.

a. If so, were the scribes aware of this?

Scribes were too busy writing to notice much.

I'm sorry but, are you kidding me?

Now Brenda, how could I ever kid you?

Have you ever watched a court stenographer? They don't have time to look around much. And they are writing shorthand, whereas O.C. et al. were writing long-hand.

[Brenda]

Good point.

Could a simple farmboy living in Manchester, New York in the late 1820s

have fabricated a heavy, intricate piece of warrior's armor -- the metal of

which, his mother published, was "worth at least $500." (1853 ed, p. 107).

Five hundred dollars in the 1827-1853 period would probably be something

like $5,000 worth of materials in today's prices -- bronze, gold, silver,

leather, etc. Could a young boy have really created such a breastplate in his

father's cooper's shop in 1827?

The "giant spectacles" I agree could have been easily constructed -- from

a joined pair of magnifying glasses, with one of the handles removed. Or,

at least Martin Harris' description of the spectacles could be easily matched.

But Lucy Mack Smith reports three-cornered diamonds set in glass lenses.

Where on earth could her son have obtained diamonds that large?

UD

And how would Joseph make them undetected? This church has been under scrutiny for nearly 200 years. It would have been debunked on "flaws" like this long ago. Someone would have spoken up. Facts would have come out. Instead we STILL have only theories.

Joseph added too many unnecessary elements to his "fabricated story" making it vulnerable to exposure. If he was smart enough to make it all up, he was smart enough to make it more believable.

[ttribe]

Those of us who actually believe JS was a prophet get accused of engaging in "mental gymnastics" to justify our belief...some of the explanations in this thread by the critics are downright gold medal worthy. Interesting dynamic in play here.

[Brenda]

Now Brenda, how could I ever kid you?

Have you ever watched a court stenographer? They don't have time to look around much. And they are writing shorthand, whereas O.C. et al. were writing long-hand.

This wasn't a courtroom. The scribe had every opportunity to interject, ask for a break, ask to slow down for a moment, etc. Sure he had a moment to look up once in a while.

[Mortal Man]

Smith, Rigdon and Cowdery -- partly in Ohio and partly in NY/PA -- partly by use

of pre-existing materials -- partly by visions -- partly by diving rod & peepstone.

I don't think Rigdon had anything to do with the production of the BoM. Do you have any hard evidence for this beyond opportunities and motives?

[Uncle Dale]

The U & T was probably a topic of conversation in the 1820's New York/Vermont area.

View of the Hebrews, page 175:

"In resemblance of the Urim and Thummim, the American Archimagus wears a breast plate made of a white conch-shell with two holes bored in the middle of it, through which he puts the ends of an otter skin strap, and fastens a buck horn white button to the outside of each, as if in imitation of the precious stones of the Urim."

Note that Ethan Smith doesn't bother to explain what U & T is, he just assumes the reader is familiar with it.

See link: Ethan Smith connection

The only problem being, is that there is no mention of a "urim and thummim" in any

of the early Mormon documents, correspondence, news reports, etc.

No mention in the Book of Commandments. No mention in the Book of Mormon.

What are mentioned in the pre-1835 sources are: "interpreters, directors," and "spectacles."

So, while Ethan Smith spoke of American Indian magic men having breastplates and some

accouterments resembling Israelite oracular devices, Ethan's descriptions seem to have

had no direct effect upon Mormonism -- or, at least no documented effect prior to 1835.

If there is any connection, it must have been something more subtle than an outright

copying, straight out of the pages of Ethan Smith.

I am inclined, however, to think that the earliest Mormons confused the breastplate of

the Israelite high-priest with a classical period warrior's bronze cuirass. Ethan Smith

provides a possible intermediate type of artifact --- an Indian article "resembling" the

Israelite original ----- which was absolutely nothing like the cuirass described by

Lucy Mack Smith, William Smith and others.

There's a puzzle piece missing here -- but what is it?

UD

[Mortal Man]

Those of us who actually believe JS was a prophet get accused of engaging in "mental gymnastics" to justify our belief...some of the explanations in this thread by the critics are downright gold medal worthy. Interesting dynamic in play here.

I agree with you here. Except for the visit of Peter, James and John, the simplest and most straightforward explanation for the witnesses is that they saw what they said they saw. The visit of John the Baptist is especially compelling. It does indeed take "mental gymnastics" to rationalize away the many witnesses. But that is what the OP asked for.

How about this? I'll give up the mental gymnastics on the witnesses if you'll give up the mental gymnastics on the BoA. Deal?

[ttribe]

I agree with you here. Except for the visit of Peter, James and John, the simplest and most straightforward explanation for the witnesses is that they saw what they said they saw. The visit of John the Baptist is especially compelling. It does indeed take "mental gymnastics" to rationalize away the many witnesses. But that is what you asked for in your OP.

I didn't make the OP.

How about this? I'll give up the mental gymnastics on the witnesses if you'll give up the mental gymnastics on the BoA. Deal?

What mental gymnastics have I been engaging in regarding the BoA?

[Uncle Dale]

I don't think Rigdon had anything to do with the production of the BoM. Do you have any hard evidence for this beyond opportunities and motives?

Look for the follow-up report of the Stanford "word-print" analysts,

in which they extend their comparisons of Rigdon's language from

just the BoM text to that of the "Lectures on Faith" and the 1824

"Third Epistle of Peter."

I think that the Stanford researchers will effectively demonstrate a

process by which Rigdon's language can be identified in texts already

conceded by the Mormons to be his creations -- or texts which they

agree are probably Rigdon's creations.

Once that computerized process has been verified, by other scientists,

then it will be time to turn attention back to the portions of the Book of Mormon

previously singled out as probable Rigdon contributions.

Mormons will probably never agree that any of Rigdon's language could

have made it into that book. But their opinions will not matter, when disinterested

scholars from various disciplines begin to accept modern computerized word-print

analysis demonstrating a Rigdon contribution to various 1820s-1840s texts,

including part of the Book of Mormon.

We will try to outline the original method of BoM compilation, here:

But please give me plenty of time -- I'm in the middle of a series of eye-operations

and can only do a little web-work in a day.

UD