Question for Uncle Dale re 116 pages

[_why me]

And we must remember that Joseph Smith stuck his head in hat to transribe he Book of Mormon. Now that is a pickle to be sure. First we have oliver and sidney writing the book and then we have Joseph Smith sticking his head in a hat to transcibe it. Now if Emma is lying and was in on the fraud, well, so be it. But if Emma is correct in what she saw, the hat trick is truly amazing. Who thought up that idea? Sidney, Oliver or Joseph Smith himself?

[_Uncle Dale]

...
Who thought up that idea? Sidney, Oliver or Joseph Smith himself?

Peepstones had been around for a long time, so nobody in the 1820s had to "think up"
the idea, as some sort of new discovery.

As far back as 1812 Solomon Spalding mentions a peepstone in his "Roman story." During
the Revolutionary War, Spalding served as a soldier, spending some time stationed in
tiny, unorthodox Rhode Island -- the same place where the Stafford family was then
making magical use of a peepstone. If Spalding did not encounter the Staffords at that
time, there were other warlocks, witches, necromancers and astrologers using such
stones to "peep and mutter."

A similar stone was reportedly in use, not far from Rochester, in the early 1820s,
by money-diggers, pretending to see buried treasures with the magical rock.

This particular "mineral stone" was "placed in a hat and the light excluded by the face of
him who looks into it."
http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NY ... htm#122725

In other words, like the magical stones entrusted to the Brother of Jared, these rocks
of the 1830s money-diggers shone forth their powers in darkness. The enclosing hat
was simply a handy covering, by which to provide that darkness.

The hat also kept any onlookers from seeing whatever it was that the peepstone artist
was pretending to see shining forth from his magic rock.

"Who thought up that idea? Sidney, Oliver or Joseph Smith himself?" ----- It seems that it was
"Joseph Smith himself," who had been using such a stone at least as early as 1825 -- and
admitted to by himself and his father in March of 1826, long before any urim & thummim
was pretended -- long before any "interpreters" were pretended -- to have been dug
up out of the Hill Cumorah.

Joe had been sticking his face in his hat before September of 1827 and he continued to
do the same "hat trick" after September of 1827.

Go argue with Richard Bushman, if you don't believe me. Go argue with B. H. Roberts.
Go argue with the 1874 Deseret News. Go argue with David Whitmer.

It was never an idea dreamed up by us non-Mormons.

UD

[_Sethbag]

And we must remember that Joseph Smith stuck his head in hat to transribe he Book of Mormon. Now that is a pickle to be sure. First we have oliver and sidney writing the book and then we have Joseph Smith sticking his head in a hat to transcibe it. Now if Emma is lying and was in on the fraud, well, so be it. But if Emma is correct in what she saw, the hat trick is truly amazing. Who thought up that idea? Sidney, Oliver or Joseph Smith himself?

Why Me, you seem to take it for granted that a small sampling of the time of the translation represents 100% of the time. Do you believe that the entire translation was done with Joseph's head in the hat?

Out of curiousity, do you believe that the King James version of the Isaiah passages that went into the Book of Mormon appeared to Joseph in the hat? Or do you believe it's possible that Joseph put down the hat from time to time and resorted to some other source, such as, with Isaiah, a copy of the Bible?

[_why me]

I think it is easier to say that a certain document came from Smith's
possessions, and passed through his hands, than it is to say for
certain that the words were originally his.

Even a personal letter, signed with his signature, might have
been partly composed by Hyrum Smith or some other close
associate. At any rate, merely attributing a set of documents
to Joseph's ownership or origination, is not the same thing as
verifying his "word-print" in those documents.

It will be interesting to watch and see if the LDS scholars end
up identifying substantial blocks of Joseph Smith text, which
they are certain can be relied upon as sources for determining
his "word-print" in the first place. I'm not sure they ever will.

UD

Joseph Smith hated to write. I believed that he loathed the whole idea of writing because it was laborious for him. I have no idea how he could get together with Oliver and Sidney to compose the Book of Mormon. The guy had problems writing letters.

And of course this is one reason why we have so much that he reportedly said. I would be surprised if he penned his talks before giving the talk. I just can not see him writing parts to the Book of Mormon.

It seems that Joseph Smith had a strong reaction to the 116 pages. But Oliver and Sidney did not seem to mind if they were in on it. I see no record that either had a fit of disappointment in the 116 pages.

And what about Martin? He lost the pages. How to keep such a collective disappointment from him? And of course, loose lips sink ships. How would the three not express their disappointment without being heard? These small everyday human things is what makes the early beginnings so mysterious and interesting.

[_why me]

Why Me, you seem to take it for granted that a small sampling of the time of the translation represents 100% of the time. Do you believe that the entire translation was done with Joseph's head in the hat?

Out of curiousity, do you believe that the King James version of the Isaiah passages that went into the Book of Mormon appeared to Joseph in the hat? Or do you believe it's possible that Joseph put down the hat from time to time and resorted to some other source, such as, with Isaiah, a copy of the Bible?

I am sure that it occured in various of ways. But emma never saw a manucript nor did she see her husband writing a book or portioins of a book. And I don't think that Emma was a dupe. As she said herself: if he had a manuscript she would have known. And that is most likely true. As you probably know well, a wife does have a sixth sense.