Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Uncle Ed
_Emeritus
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Uncle Ed »

Nevo wrote:
Blixa wrote:I can't make out that signature, Nevo. Little help?

It's "Hinkle" (George M. Hinkle).

The name is clearer here: http://eadview.LDS.org/digitalAsset/image/full/FL2185655

Blixa wrote:Thanks! I'd pretty much forgotten about this (in fact I'm not certain where I ran across it) and its always amazing to see an actual document. I love all the new digitized historical documents the church is releasing. I can't keep up.

Another Mark Hoffman forgery discovery, cool!...
A man should never step a foot into the field,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need arms,
Or what menace meet on the road. - Hávamál 38

Man's joy is in Man. - Hávamál 47
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

The Kirtland Bank was an epic scam, and Joseph's handprints are all over it. The Church was massively in debt because of its temple-building and expenditures connected with the expulsion from Jackson County. The leaders had taken much of this debt upon themselves personally. They needed to make themselves liquid, and fast. So they started the Kirtland Bank and began printing large quantities of bank notes, which they used to make purchases and pay off debts. The scheme was probably Sidney Rigdon's idea, since he was the first stockholder listed in the ledger, but Joseph was soon running the show and prophesied that it would swallow up all other banks. The newspapers noted at the time that these notes didn't seem to be backed by anything, and they were almost certainly correct. The number of shares issued to stockholders implied a massive initial capital investment, but like the notes themselves, these shares seem mostly to have been invented out of whole cloth.

Sidney Rigdon, for instance, was issued 3,000 shares supposedly valued at $50 per share, for a total value of $150,000. Obviously this is completely unrealistic and doesn't represent actual investment. The bank's ledger shows that Rigdon received $751.64 in cash from the bank without ever paying anything into it. Smith owned the same ridiculous number of shares as Rigdon. The ledger shows that he was by far the bank's most active patron. His payments to the bank totaled $4887.60 in cash and a nearly $1500 note, but his withdrawals totaled $7647.46 in cash, for a total personal liability of over $1300. This was a larger profit for Smith than any of the bank's other patrons pocketed (though almost no one paid in more than they withdrew). Some of the lesser stockholders may have actually purchased their shares, but for the Church's top leaders the bank was a cash cow.

Obviously this scheme couldn't last long. By March 1837 it was on the verge of falling apart. In an effort to save it, Joseph Smith sent Brigham Young and Willard Richards off the the northeast to buy land with Kirtland bills. This land was to be used as specie to back other Kirtland bills. This essentially turned the bank into a Ponzi scheme, with new investment being used to satisfy old investors and conceal old losses.

Young and Richards did make some successful purchases, but meanwhile the situation in Kirtland became critical. David Whitmer got out of the enterprise earlier than most, transferring his stock to Joseph Smith on May 8, 1837. On June 8, Joseph Smith disassociated himself from the bank by transferring his stock to Jared Carter and Oliver Granger. Other leaders and their families followed suit a week later, transferring their stock to Carter and Granger on June 15. These two men had apparently volunteered as fall guys and caretakers of a last-ditch effort to save the bank. They would take the heat while Joseph publicly disclaimed any involvement with the bank and chided the "speculators" who were supposedly responsible for its sorry state. Notations in the ledger show that a few shareholders refused to transfer their stock or chose to withdraw it instead, probably not wanting to be part of such a ploy.

It should be noted that in Missouri a short time thereafter, Jared Carter became the first commander of the Danite order. He seems, in other words, to have been Joseph's go-to guy at the time for clandestine activities of questionable morality. He fell out of favor in 1838 when he questioned Sidney Rigdon in Joseph's presence, eliciting from the prophet quick demotion and an outraged threat to cut Carter's throat. (Absolute obedience to the First Presidency on pain of death was the main principle of the Danite order.)
Last edited by Guest on Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Runtu »

Chris,

Joseph's take from the bank was the equivalent of $26,000 today. Not a small amount, especially considering that the bank was only in existence for 6 months.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

Runtu wrote:Joseph's take from the bank was the equivalent of $26,000 today. Not a small amount, especially considering that the bank was only in existence for 6 months.

Yep. A nice chunk of change, for sure!
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Runtu »

CaliforniaKid wrote:Yep. A nice chunk of change, for sure!


Remember when Hillary Clinton's $1000 turned into $100,000 in 10 months? Joseph beat that by not having to invest any money at all.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Spanner
_Emeritus
Posts: 810
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 5:59 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _Spanner »

Uncle Ed wrote:He repented. Are you saying he didn't? There is no evidence of recidivism back to money digging....


What about this?

D&C 111 wrote:7 Tarry in this place, and in the regions round about;

8 And the place where it is my will that you should tarry, for the main, shall be signalized unto you by the peace and power of my Spirit, that shall flow unto you.

9 This place you may obtain by hire. And inquire diligently concerning the more ancient inhabitants and founders of this city;

10 For there are more treasures than one for you in this city.

11 Therefore, be ye as wise as serpents and yet without sin; and I will order all things for your good, as fast as ye are able to receive them. Amen.
_The Erotic Apologist
_Emeritus
Posts: 3050
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:07 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _The Erotic Apologist »

CaliforniaKid wrote:The Kirtland Bank...

Very interesting. Thank you for posting that.

Do you believe there's any truth to the accusations of counterfeiting that seemed to follow the Mormons to Nauvoo, and later to Utah?
Surprise, surprise, there is no divine mandate for the Church to discuss and portray its history accurately.
--Yahoo Bot

I pray thee, sir, forgive me for the mess. And whether I shot first, I'll not confess.
--Han Solo, from William Shakespeare's Star Wars
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

The Erotic Apologist wrote:Do you believe there's any truth to the accusations of counterfeiting that seemed to follow the Mormons to Nauvoo, and later to Utah?

Yes, probably. Printing money was too good to give up. Check out Joseph Jackson's Narrative of his adventures among the Mormons. I was initially skeptical of Jackson's tales, but then I found startling corroboration for certain details in a couple of the more violent and lurid stories he tells. I still think he exaggerates some things, but his claims—including that Smith enlisted him in a counterfeiting operation—have to be taken quite seriously. He gives a lot details about the operation which I suspect could corroborated by a sufficiently determined researcher (though I haven't looked into them myself).
_The Erotic Apologist
_Emeritus
Posts: 3050
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:07 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _The Erotic Apologist »

CaliforniaKid wrote:Check out Joseph Jackson's Narrative of his adventures among the Mormons.

Great link! Thanks!
Surprise, surprise, there is no divine mandate for the Church to discuss and portray its history accurately.
--Yahoo Bot

I pray thee, sir, forgive me for the mess. And whether I shot first, I'll not confess.
--Han Solo, from William Shakespeare's Star Wars
_robuchan
_Emeritus
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:17 pm

Re: Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

Post by _robuchan »

Bazooka wrote:
But the apologists can see the problems inherent in accepting this type of influence:
1. The book was written by ancient Prophets and Joseph was specifically given things to effect an accurate translation. He was to read the plates looking through the Urim & Thummin which would show him the words to use. If 19th century influence crept in then the U&T were a bit leaky.
2. The witnesses to the translation method (mostly) stated that God gave Joseph the exact words to use via a rock in a hat and he wasn't allowed to move on till it had been scribed accurately. If 19th century influence crept in then the witness statements, and therefore the witnesses themselves, cannot be trusted. Which in turns invalidates the signed testimony statements in the front of the Book of Mormon.
3. If Joseph, despite all the other documentary statements, was allowed to loosely translate using themes, words, phrases etc from his 19th century environment, then it can hardly be considered a translation of a book written by ancient Prophets who lived in the America's two thousand years earlier.
4. Credible proof of 19th century influence adds credence to the argument that there are things in the Book of Mormon that weren't in the America's during the relevant time frame, such as horses etc. If 19th century influence has interjected spurious items into the narrative, the book really cannot claimed to be what it is claimed to be. Instead it drifts into the section marked 'fiction'.

They are a bit panic stricken and I think they have just cause.


Catching up on this thread now. Good post. I think these area all strong points.
Post Reply