marg wrote: Beastie was one avid supporter but on the whole, he didn't garner much respect. Hey don't get me wrong, he's a really nice guy, very intelligent and knowledgable, but I don't accept his reasoning for rejecting the Spalding theory which seems to rest practically entirely on rejection of Spalding witness statements.
It didn't rest entirely on that at all. He argued pretty much the same as I am, that you have to wipe too many first-hand witness accounts. If we supposed that all eye-witness testimony was corrupt, that every witness had an ulterior motive, that behind it all was some covert plan to dupe everyone, with no solid evidence to back that assertion, we're getting precisely no where.
As I said earlier, if such evidence was produced (you're not helping that ideal at all), if Dale's hypothetical Cowdery or Rigdon confession could be found, or a definite pre-1830 encounter were to come forward in written evidence, enough to persuade a reasonable person who might be sitting on a jury, then we're getting somewhere.
You have drawn a conclusion and are trying to find the concrete evidence to support that conclusion. You don't argue as soundly as Dale does. Here is his reply to mikwut on the authorship thread (my emphasis):
It is my position that we should examine all discovered "evidence" with considerable scepticism and a critical attitude -- and, for me, that includes all the evidence that at first glance appears to support my theory.
I did not start out with a theory that Spalding and Rigdon contributed to the Book of Mormon text. Back in 1978-79, my appeal to Jeffery Holland (then head of the LDS CEP) was NOT to prove the Spalding-Rigdon claims to be true; but merely to investigate Spalding's writings. This suggestion was later
turned over to Kent Jackson, who prepared a BYU Press book on Spalding.
However, my own investigation of the subject gradually changed my
opinions, to the point that (1) I came to believe a Spalding contribution to the Book of Mormon "possible;" (2) then concluded that it was "probable;" and finally (3) with the Stanford word-print results available, have decided that it is "very probable." That is an evolution of opinion, based upon many years of investigation and study.
But, back to the matter of Mrs. McKinstry -- how was it that she and
others provided "expanded" accounts of their early recollections, over
many years?
1. Perhaps through investigation and study, she clarified her memories
2. Perhaps those who interviewed her, or solicited answers to questions,
formulated different questions at different times.
3. Perhaps some hypnotizer like D.P. Hurlbut implanted false memories.
I'll again give an example from my own experience. Let's say that you
asked me, 40 years ago, to relate the details of my father's birth. Then,
at later intervals in time, people asked me about his early life, his family
and other details.
Each time I took the trouble to answer questions about my father, I
would have my previous answers in my mind, to build upon. Having
already told the date of his birth, I might later add that it was a stormy
day -- or that he was born at home, because the hospital was far away.
An outsider might look at my various answers, given over many years,
and decide that I was embellishing my account of my father's birth with many false details -- the proverbial "fish story," in which the fish gets bigger in each re-telling of the story.
Or -- my additions might be true ones. How can you know for sure?
Well, you might conduct some original research of your own.
Please point me to any significant research into the Spalding-Rigdon
claims, since the days of B. H. Roberts, George Reynolds and Joseph F.
Smith ------- Hint: start with Lester Bush and Kent P. Jackson, and
then go on to read Matt Roper. My prediction: In all their contributions
to our knowledge of original source material, they have not provided
even 1% of the quantity and quality I have added to the evidence pile.
UD
Then to me. I wrote:
Dale hasn't presented much based in reality, I'm afraid to say. We still have to imagine the connections, or wait and hope for the day when they will be established with concrete evidences.
Dale replied:
True, indeed.
All I can do is to point the way for future researchers. Perhaps, if enough
people get interested, they will eventually uncover a preserved Spalding
letter, in which he tells a friend he is working on "an Israelite story." Or,
they might find an 1813 receipt for leather book-bindings, delivered to
the Patterson bindery in Pittsburgh by "S. Rigdon, tanner's apprentice."
The best obscure material I so far have "leads" on are the 1824 booklet
by Rigdon and Scott, containing pseudo-scripture; the 1826 pamphlet
by Elder Lawrence Greatrake, accusing Rigdon of consorting with a
confidence man and glass-looker; and the paraphrasing of passages
taken from Clavigero's History of Mexico, in both Spalding's Roman
story and parts of the Book of Mormon.
If the instances where the Book of Mormon text relies on Clavigero can be shown to
overlay the same Book of Mormon sections "word-printed" for Spalding -- then I
think we shall have a whole new field of critical study opened up for us.
I am too crippled and bankrupt to even maintain my old web-sites, much
less conduct any new research.
Hopefully this MB thread will be printed out, duplicated, and put into
the hands of a few younger, more energetic researchers. I've given many '
clues, on how to continue the quest.
It's now up to folks like you to find the "real" convincing evidence.
UD
So marg, give me a good reason why I should continue to debate this with you and Jersey Girl? You both want to arm-twist rather than letting me have some flexibility to form my own opinions, and I've explained that I'm open to ideas supported with good evidence and reasoning - I don't see that coming from you. I'm prepared to give Dale leeway to explain himself, admit the weak points of the theory, which he has admirably done with much honesty, and I can respect that.
You and Jersey Girl are more like prosecution trial lawyers trying to pin me down in a court on baseless charges.