DiscussMormonism.com

Thank you for your comments, Mr. Vogel. I just have a few comments andquestions.

1. Although Harris did state that Joseph used the stone in the hat as well as the magic spectacles during the translation of the 116 pages, he couldn't see what Joseph was doing because of the curtain so Harris was just relying on what Joseph told him--not a very reliable source. Joseph could have very well have been looking at and even reading from other sources without Harris knowing. Harris wasn't very hard to fool.

2. Although Emma said that Joseph used the stone in the hat and strongly implied he always used it, she also made the fantastical claim Joseph knew when something she wrote was incorrect and made her correct it even though he could not see what she was writing and even though there were many hundreds of spelling and grammatical mistakes. She claimed that Joseph never referred to any other materials in translating. This, of course, was in her interest and the interest of her son and the RLDS and Emma was want to lie when it served her purposes. If Joseph wasn't looking at other materials during the translation, how do you explain all the quoting from and paraphrasing the King James Bible, especially Isiah?

3. Do you think that Cowdery really believed that during the translation (probably the Three Nephites portion) Joseph was getting a revelation from God that the Apostle John had buried a parchment somewhere in the Middle East showing that John was still alive or was Oliver just going along to protect his position? Joseph did not look kindly upon being contradicted.

4. I agree that Cowdery could be a true believer that what he and Joseph were doing with the Book of Mormon and Mormonism was a good thing and in that sense he was a true believer, but that doesn't mean he wasn't willing to deceive for the cause. He obviously was willing to deceive with respect to the divine origins of the priesthood stories (shortly after which Cowdery was made Assistant President as you note in your videos), Joseph's use of the magic spectacles during translation and other matters. Also Cowdery had to know that Joseph changed revelations to agree with his evolving claims and theology. Yet, Cowdery never said anything about these things. But after he lost power, he was willing to criticize Smith on matters that didn't implicate Cowdery such as the Fanny Alger affair. Cowdery's conduct is consistent with his being in on the con from the outset in the sense that he knew Joseph was using outside materials for the Book of Mormon and was making up stories to support his position and prestige. I disagree that it is pure speculation that Cowdery was a co-conspirator with Smith from the beginning. I think it is a reasonable inference based on some pretty solid evidence. It is no more speculative than your conclusion that the testimony of the eight witnesses is of an experience that was more spiritual than physical.

5. What Cowdery's involvement in the con helps explain is how Joseph could have been looking at the Bible and other materials during the translation without Cowdery knowing. Cowdery did know but kept silent. I believe it also explains why the Book of Mormon has so many parallels with View of the Hebrews, as even B.H. Robers recognized. I agree that Joseph didn't have to read that book to write the Book of Mormon, but I think it is highly unlikely that he was not familiar with the book and that Cowdery had not read and was not familiar with a book that his Pastor wrote during the time Cowdery was a member of the congregation. I also think it is highly unlikely that Cowdery and Smith didn't have substantial discussions about the book.

6. I don't think any of the above requires one to believe the Spalding theory and I'm not an adherent, although the proponents have raised a number of interesting questions.

I would be interested in your comments. By the way, I have really enjoyed and learned a great deal from you videos and books, for which I thank you.

Tonto

Tonto Schwartz wrote:Thank you for your comments, Mr. Vogel. I just have a few comments andquestions.

1. Although Harris did state that Joseph used the stone in the hat as well as the magic spectacles during the translation of the 116 pages, he couldn't see what Joseph was doing because of the curtain so Harris was just relying on what Joseph told him--not a very reliable source. Joseph could have very well have been looking at and even reading from other sources without Harris knowing. Harris wasn't very hard to fool.

2. Although Emma said that Joseph used the stone in the hat and strongly implied he always used it, she also made the fantastical claim Joseph knew when something she wrote was incorrect and made her correct it even though he could not see what she was writing and even though there were many hundreds of spelling and grammatical mistakes. She claimed that Joseph never referred to any other materials in translating. This, of course, was in her interest and the interest of her son and the RLDS and Emma was want to lie when it served her purposes. If Joseph wasn't looking at other materials during the translation, how do you explain all the quoting from and paraphrasing the King James Bible, especially Isiah?

3. Do you think that Cowdery really believed that during the translation (probably the Three Nephites portion) Joseph was getting a revelation from God that the Apostle John had buried a parchment somewhere in the Middle East showing that John was still alive or was Oliver just going along to protect his position? Joseph did not look kindly upon being contradicted.

4. I agree that Cowdery could be a true believer that what he and Joseph were doing with the Book of Mormon and Mormonism was a good thing and in that sense he was a true believer, but that doesn't mean he wasn't willing to deceive for the cause. He obviously was willing to deceive with respect to the divine origins of the priesthood stories (shortly after which Cowdery was made Assistant President as you note in your videos), Joseph's use of the magic spectacles during translation and other matters. Also Cowdery had to know that Joseph changed revelations to agree with his evolving claims and theology. Yet, Cowdery never said anything about these things. But after he lost power, he was willing to criticize Smith on matters that didn't implicate Cowdery such as the Fanny Alger affair. Cowdery's conduct is consistent with his being in on the con from the outset in the sense that he knew Joseph was using outside materials for the Book of Mormon and was making up stories to support his position and prestige. I disagree that it is pure speculation that Cowdery was a co-conspirator with Smith from the beginning. I think it is a reasonable inference based on some pretty solid evidence. It is no more speculative than your conclusion that the testimony of the eight witnesses is of an experience that was more spiritual than physical.

5. What Cowdery's involvement in the con helps explain is how Joseph could have been looking at the Bible and other materials during the translation without Cowdery knowing. Cowdery did know but kept silent. I believe it also explains why the Book of Mormon has so many parallels with View of the Hebrews, as even B.H. Robers recognized. I agree that Joseph didn't have to read that book to write the Book of Mormon, but I think it is highly unlikely that he was not familiar with the book and that Cowdery had not read and was not familiar with a book that his Pastor wrote during the time Cowdery was a member of the congregation. I also think it is highly unlikely that Cowdery and Smith didn't have substantial discussions about the book.

6. I don't think any of the above requires one to believe the Spalding theory and I'm not an adherent, although the proponents have raised a number of interesting questions.

I would be interested in your comments. By the way, I have really enjoyed and learned a great deal from you videos and books, for which I thank you.

Tonto

1. There was no curtain during the translation. Harris only mentioned the curtain and spectacles to Anthon (and Rev. Clark shortly after), because that was when Joseph Smith supposedly copied the characters from the plates and neither the plates nor spectacles could be seen. When Joseph Smith translated with the hat, there was no need for a curtain.

2. Emma lied to her son about his father’s womanizing, but that doesn’t mean she lied about everything. We know Emma lied about polygamy from the testimony of others. However, her statements about the translation are corroborated by others. I don’t question their sincerity. Somehow Joseph Smith gave the impression that he could correct their mistakes, perhaps correcting the spelling of proper names. Over the years this got exaggerated in their memories. This is common with anyone fooled by a psychic today.

Emma was scribe for the lost 116 pages and perhaps the first part of Mosiah. Most of the Isaiah material was written in Fayette at the Whitmer residence. It should be remembered that when the witnesses said Joseph Smith didn’t use any books or manuscripts, it was in the context of answering the Spalding theory—there was no curtain and no manuscript.

3. Cowdery could have been completely taken in and believed Joseph Smith saw the parchment in his stone just as he did the gold plates. Cowdery lost the debate by revelation.

4. It’s not impossible that OC was in on it from the start, but you have to prove that. So far, I see no evidence of it. He could have been a sincere believer in the Book of Mormon and then went along with Joseph Smith on the priesthood visions to protect something he believed in. He believed they had unique authority through the Book of Mormon and revelations, but also believed Joseph Smith’s plan to keep the church together with the story of angelic ordinations.

5. Cowdery didn’t keep silent as I already explained. There was no one on the scene asking the questions that interest us today. The Book of Mormon doesn’t have many parallels to the View of the Hebrews other than what was generally available. Most of B. H. Roberts’s parallels are forced. It can’t be proven that Joseph Smith knew about VofH. Cowdery could have known about it and regarded it as evidence for the Book of Mormon. The Mound Builder Myth and Lost Ten Tribe Theory were widely known and the Book of Mormon tapped into that belief.

Thanks for the kind comments.

Tonto,
I should add that when Joseph Smith used the Bible, it would have been seen as an aid in translating, not a source. It is likely that he used the Bible in the same way that he later used it in the Inspired Revision. I imagine that he took a Bible and “corrected” it by aid of his seer stone, and then either read it or had someone else read it. As I said, the Isaiah chapters occurred at the Whitmer residence in June 1829 about the time he went to Palmyra and made arrangements with Grandin to publish the Book of Mormon and then to Utica to file the copyright. This would have been a good time to have Cowdery copy the Isaiah text either by sight or from someone reading.

Hi Dan:

Dan Vogel wrote:I imagine that he took a Bible and “corrected” it by aid of his seer stone, and then either read it or had someone else read it.

When you say, "'corrected' it by aid of his seer stone" what do you envision actually occurring?

Hi Dan,

I think the horse is almost dead and I don't want to be accused of animal cruelty, but I am really curious about your comment that the curtain was not used when Harris was the scribe for the lost 116 pages. I always understood that the curtain was used. It seems to me that the curtain certainly had to have been used during the time Harris said that Joseph was using the spectacles. But, even when Joseph was supposedly using the stone and hat there would have been good reason to use the curtain so that poor gullible money man Harris would not know Joseph was reading from or referring to the Bible and possibly other sources. I would be interested to know if you are aware of any sources that say the curtain was not used during Harris's transcription. Thanks.

Tonto

Hi Roger,

Thanks for the links you provided. Very interesting. As for your request for a reference with respect to whether Dan Vogel referred to Cowdery as a co-conspirator, in his You Tube video "Evolution of Mormon Authority Claims Part 1," at the 51:34 or so mark, Dan says that it is unclear when Cowdery became a "co-conspirator or pious fraud" with Joseph but that it was before 1834 and that Cowdery was clearly willing to deceive for Joseph. I would only add that by mid 1829 Cowdery was clearly battling for a position of power when Joseph had a revelation that Cowdery and I believe Whitmer were to select 12 Apostles which according to Vogel would leave Cowdery out of the power structure and Cowdery had his own counter revelation about the same as Joseph but deleting any reference to the 12. Cowdery was temporarily successful in derailing the idea of the 12 being part of the power structure until 1834 or 35. I think this is more evidence that in 1829 Cowdery was vying for power and was willing to deceive when it suited his purposes.

Tonto