Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

[_Spanner]

There's the rub: this is like the "missing scroll" theory for the Book of Abraham. You can't insist on textual dependence on a text you don't have. It can't be done.

True. But the team have shown common authorship between sections of the Book of Mormon and the Spalding text that they do have. There are also common phrases and themes as shown by Uncle Dale, the pattern of distribution of Spalding material throughout the Book of Mormon independently correlates with the authorship analysis pattern; both of these analyses independently correlate with the Book of Mormon distribution of material identified by Donofrio to include plagiarism from early American patriotic authors which mimics Spalding's plagiarism of the same authors in his extant manuscript.

The modern iteration of the "Spalding theory" posits the existance of Spalding material in the Book of Mormon. It doesn't claim that Spalding wrote the whole thing, or even most of it. Numerous other contributions have been noted by Criddle's contributors including View of the Hebrews and Campbellite theology. Joseph remains a significant contributor to the Book of Mormon.

The theory has a lot of explanatory power beyond the Book of Mormon authorship - both Oliver and Sydney colluded with Joseph on matters such as angelic visits over subsequent years. The Gold Bible Company hypothesis extends that collusion to the the creation of the Book of Mormon in the first place. As an example of what I mean by explanatory power, Joseph "prophezied" the arrival of Oliver before he turned up to work as scribe - did he actually have the power of prophecy? or had they colluded earlier.

[_Sammy Jankins]

As someone who was not previously familiar with contemporary pseudo biblical texts I do think this is significant, because now to me the Book of Mormon appears to be a purely a product of it's time. Now also apologists must argue that the similarities are not significant because they are common, but by doing so they reinforce the idea that there is nothing particularly special about the Book of Mormon. The questionable methodology behind the alleged hebrewisms is now forfeit and shown to be unreliable.

[Guest]

I mean, this is unreal. No wonder Skousen gained such a following. The Book of Mormon is the story of the revolution told with exaggerated piety.

I didn't fully appreciate this perceptive insight the first time through the discussion. I think you really have something there, Dean Robbers. The Book of Mormon takes the biblical mythologization of American history one step further.

In Roman literature, the contrast would be something like comparing Lucan's Civil War to Vergil's Aeneid. Lucan writes in epic style about the more recent history of the fight between Caesar and Pompey from the vantage point of a poet living in the time of Nero. Vergil tells a similar kind of story, and one that is potentially more explosive, but he hides it in the trappings of ancient Homeric myth. Joseph Smith is a poor man's Vergil for the American story as rendered not only in Biblical vernacular as Hunt does (Lucan with more recent civil war history in ancient epic form) but also in terms of Israelite and New Testament myths and themes (Vergil with the deep past in ancient epic form).

Vergil's work has greater historical impact than Lucan. He is a huge influence on the Renaissance. Indeed, I could opine that the Book of Mormon, as epic, would not exist without Vergil. The mythical message of Vergil is all about Roman imperialism, the superiority of Rome as a divinely blessed nation, and the divinely chosen sons of Aeneas who are the ancestors of Julius Caesar and Augustus. The Book of Mormon has a similar ideological message regarding freedom-loving Christian Hebrews who are destined to rule America because of their faithfulness to their New World covenant. We can view some of the more disturbing events of Utah history through that lens.

So, yes, I think one could make a case that the religious ideology of the Book of Mormon contributed to the success of figures like Skousen.

[_Runtu]

True. But the team have shown common authorship between sections of the Book of Mormon and the Spalding text that they do have. There are also common phrases and themes as shown by Uncle Dale, the pattern of distribution of Spalding material throughout the Book of Mormon independently correlates with the authorship analysis pattern; both of these analyses independently correlate with the Book of Mormon distribution of material identified by Donofrio to include plagiarism from early American patriotic authors which mimics Spalding's plagiarism of the same authors in his extant manuscript.

The modern iteration of the "Spalding theory" posits the existance of Spalding material in the Book of Mormon. It doesn't claim that Spalding wrote the whole thing, or even most of it. Numerous other contributions have been noted by Criddle's contributors including View of the Hebrews and Campbellite theology. Joseph remains a significant contributor to the Book of Mormon.

The theory has a lot of explanatory power beyond the Book of Mormon authorship - both Oliver and Sydney colluded with Joseph on matters such as angelic visits over subsequent years. The Gold Bible Company hypothesis extends that collusion to the the creation of the Book of Mormon in the first place. As an example of what I mean by explanatory power, Joseph "prophezied" the arrival of Oliver before he turned up to work as scribe - did he actually have the power of prophecy? or had they colluded earlier.

I understand that. I'm just saying I'm nonplussed by the argument that there's another text out there that we haven't found that is solid evidence.

[_Nevo]

It's nice to see that all of the old Spalding-Rigdon-Cowdery-Pratt conspiracy theorists haven't lost the faith. Gilbert Hunt contributed to the Book of Mormon too? Why, the more the merrier! And what would a thread on Book of Mormon origins be if didn't mention Sidney Rigdon's unclaimed mail and the venerable Mrs. Eichbaum.

[_canadaduane]

I don't think this parallel has been found here, but my brother, Chris, mentioned this one in his presentation:

TLWB 28:12 “they cut down the tall trees of the forest, and hewed them, and built many more strong vessels… and they put windows in them, and they pitched them within and without with pitch; after the fashion of the ark”

Ether 2:17 “And they were built... tight like unto a dish; and the length thereof was the length of a tree;”
Ether 2:23 “your vessels ... cannot have windows”
Ether 6:7 “their vessels being tight like unto a dish, and also they were tight like unto the ark of Noah”

I think it sheds interesting light on the anachronism of the Lord mentioning windows that can be dashed to pieces.

[_Kishkumen]

I'm sorry but for you to write the above shows you have a very poor understanding of the Spalding theory. The Spalding witness talk about another book Spalding was reading to them as he was writing it..and that story was written in biblical style.

There's the rub: this is like the "missing scroll" theory for the Book of Abraham. You can't insist on textual dependence on a text you don't have. It can't be done.

Indeed. It is understandable to me why Spalding theorists are not greeting this news in the same way as Smith-only theorists. My comments were not meant to contribute to the latter's denigration of the former. My point was methodological. So much groundwork remains to be done on making any kind of credible case for Spalding that it seems to me to be a terrible strategic blunder to begin the task of exploring Hunt's influence by throwing it into the murky waters of Spalding.

Respectfully, it is, at this point, a distraction. But then so too is any other approach that primarily addresses the notion of who met whom carrying which text on which day and what he knew, etc. As has always been the challenge in past discussions of Mormon scripture, one cannot prove that Joseph Smith had a particular book open and consciously in mind when he translated his scriptures. Only in the case of the Book of Mormon and the KJV, where a clear pattern of eliding italicized words has been established, do we have a secure method for showing any kind of dependence that does persuasively put a book in Smith's hand.

This is nowhere nearly that. Is it exciting? Yes, and I am obviously bubbling at the prospects of learning much from this relatively recent revelation. But I am struck with buck fever, as many of us are. We are on the hunt, we see a nice seven-point buck, and we start tripping over ourselves in jubilation at the thought of bagging a big prize this season. As we do so, we run the risk of creating havoc.

I apologize to all that this is where I bubble over and fumble for my twelve gauge. In my view this isn't a scholarly forum, but, at the same time, it is a collection of very bright people, many of whom have advanced degrees in the sciences and humanities. We are going to have a great time batting around these ideas and discovering this text together. Some of our initial thoughts may go somewhere, though we may not be the ones to take them there. Some may not. Am I going to drop the topic because Nevo thinks there is nothing worth getting excited about?

Hell no.

[_Kishkumen]

It's nice to see that all of the old Spalding-Rigdon-Cowdery-Pratt conspiracy theorists haven't lost the faith. Gilbert Hunt contributed to the Book of Mormon too? Why, the more the merrier! And what would a thread on Book of Mormon origins be if didn't mention Sidney Rigdon's unclaimed mail and the venerable Mrs. Eichbaum.

LOL! The bus of Mormon-origins theories has many seats, evidently.

[_Kishkumen]

I don't think this parallel has been found here, but my brother, Chris, mentioned this one in his presentation:

TLWB 28:12 “they cut down the tall trees of the forest, and hewed them, and built many more strong vessels… and they put windows in them, and they pitched them within and without with pitch; after the fashion of the ark”

Ether 2:17 “And they were built... tight like unto a dish; and the length thereof was the length of a tree;”
Ether 2:23 “your vessels ... cannot have windows”
Ether 6:7 “their vessels being tight like unto a dish, and also they were tight like unto the ark of Noah”

I think it sheds interesting light on the anachronism of the Lord mentioning windows that can be dashed to pieces.

Greetings and welcome!

My impression is that this is by no means the strongest set of parallels I have seen. I will have to examine the passages in greater detail without the elipses. It may be that there are other things that come out of a more thorough examination than do in this version you have posted.

In any case, thank you very much for joining the conversation. There is a good deal of enthusiasm about the work that Chris has already done. I look forward to listening/watching the presentation and hopefully reading an expanded version.

[_Runtu]

It's nice to see that all of the old Spalding-Rigdon-Cowdery-Pratt conspiracy theorists haven't lost the faith. Gilbert Hunt contributed to the Book of Mormon too? Why, the more the merrier! And what would a thread on Book of Mormon origins be if didn't mention Sidney Rigdon's unclaimed mail and the venerable Mrs. Eichbaum.

Is there any particular reason for this sneering? You know, I have always valued your input here and elsewhere, but you seem to be having a bad day. If so, I'll just chalk it up as not representing your usual self.

As you said earlier, it's not surprising that the Book of Mormon would use language and themes common in Joseph Smith's day, whether or not you believe he was really translating. I think most of us recognize that. I'd rather hear your opinion about what this may mean for proponents of a tight vs. loose translation and what it says about Joseph Smith's potential input to the translation. I could do without the uncharacteristic grumpiness and mocking.