LDS The Infallibility of the Prophets

[BobRyan]

Samuel Spalding's writings are NOTHING like the Book of Mormon. His manuscript had NOTHING to do with the Book of Mormon.

Are you saying that because you .. . like Spaldings family and friends, have seen that manuscript of Spalding?

from The Solomon Spalding Theory - Chapter 9 of Joseph Smith's Plagiarism.

================== quotes are from the article above

"Spalding's brother, John, saw the manuscript in 1813 but did not comment on it until twenty years later:

He [Solomon Spalding] then told me he had been writing a book, which he intended to have printed . . . The book was entitled the "Manuscript Found," of which he read to me many passages.—It was an historical romance of the first settlers of America, endeavoring to show that the American Indians are the descendants of the Jews, or the lost tribes. It gave a detailed account of their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till they arrived in America, under the command of NEPHI and LEHI.[6]

John's wife, Martha, stated:

I was personally acquainted with Solomon Spalding, about twenty years ago. I was at his house a short time before he left Conneaut; he was then writing a historical novel founded upon the first settlers of America. . . . The lapse of time which has intervened, prevents my recollecting but few of the leading incidents of his writings; but the names of Nephi and Lehi are yet fresh in my memory, . . . I have no manner of doubt that the historical part of it, is the same that I read and heard read, more than 20 years ago.[7]

John Miller, a boarder at the Spalding home in 1811, stated:

I was soon introduced to the manuscript of Spalding, . . . From this he would frequently read some humourous passages to the company present. It purported to be the history of the first settlement of America . . . I have recently examined the Book of Mormon, and find in it the writings of Solomon Spalding, from beginning to end, but mixed up with scripture and other religious matter, . . . The names of Nephi, Lehi, Moroni, and in fact all the principal names, are bro't fresh to my recollection, by the Gold Bible.[8]

Aaron Wright, another acquaintance of Spalding, wrote:

I first became acquainted with Solomon Spalding in 1808 or 9, when he commenced building a forge on Conneaut creek. When at his house, one day, he showed and read to me a history he was writing, of the lost tribes of Israel, purporting that they were the first settlers of America, and that the Indians were their descendants. Upon this subject we had frequent conversations. He traced their journey from Jerusalem to America, as it is given in the Book of Mormon, excepting the religious matter. . . . the names more especially are the same without any alteration. He told me his object was to account for all the fortifications, &c. to be found in this country, . . .[9]

==================================================

It seems strange to me that people still believe that the Book of Mormon had anything to do with Samuel Spalding.

How insightful - what are we supposed to get from that?


=======================
I have offered an explanation for how it is that Jacob 2 flat out condemns polygamy as an abomination specifically in the case of David and Solomon - and gives it as the entire reason for the people going to the Americas. I point out that IF Smith had really authored the BoM and was all that accepting of polygamy he would not have written such strong "abomination" language against polygamy in Jacob 2 -- (or was he declaring himself to be false by doing that on purpose?)

You have given no explanation at all as to why he would do that - even though you just came out and claimed that polygamy by David and Solomon was ordained of God - and yet BoM flat out calls it abomination. I give you the benefit of the doubt - being in perfect alignment with Joseph Smith on that point - but not in alignment with Samuel Spalding's BoM statements.

What is your "other" explanation - because given that you provide no explanation - you are leaving mine as the most consistent and reasonable one.

 

[He is the way]

yes he did -

Now Abraham journeyed from there toward the land of the Negev, and settled between Kadesh and Shur; then he sojourned in Gerar. 2 Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” So Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is married.”

4 Now Abimelech had not come near her; and he said, “Lord, will You slay a nation, even though blameless? 5 Did he not himself say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this.” 6 Then God said to him in the dream, “Yes, I know that in the integrity of your heart you have done this, and I also kept you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her. 7 Now therefore, restore the man’s wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you and you will live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.”

8 So Abimelech arose early in the morning and called all his servants and told all these things in their hearing; and the men were greatly frightened. 9 Then Abimelech called Abraham and said to him, “What have you done to us? And how have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? You have done to me things that ought not to be done.” 10 And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What have you encountered, that you have done this thing?” 11 Abraham said, “Because I thought, surely there is no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.

Even the pagans knew it was wrong - and God Himself sided with the pagans - saying that this was evil. I think we can "figure this one out"



In the "actual text" God gives the pagan king Abimelech a pass - because he was right in claiming that Abraham lied to him. And even in vs 11 above Abraham stops referring to Sarah as "my sister" and fesses up to "My wife".

This may look like "telling the truth" to you -- but God agrees with Abimelech when he points out he was deceived by Abraham.

The point remains.

Did God lie when He said:

(Old Testament | Genesis 26:5)

5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

 

[He is the way]

Are you saying that because you .. . like Spaldings family and friends had seen that manuscript of Spalding?

from The Solomon Spalding Theory - Chapter 9 of Joseph Smith's Plagiarism.

================== quotes are from the article above

"Spalding's brother, John, saw the manuscript in 1813 but did not comment on it until twenty years later:

He [Solomon Spalding] then told me he had been writing a book, which he intended to have printed . . . The book was entitled the "Manuscript Found," of which he read to me many passages.—It was an historical romance of the first settlers of America, endeavoring to show that the American Indians are the descendants of the Jews, or the lost tribes. It gave a detailed account of their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till they arrived in America, under the command of NEPHI and LEHI.[6]

John's wife, Martha, stated:

I was personally acquainted with Solomon Spalding, about twenty years ago. I was at his house a short time before he left Conneaut; he was then writing a historical novel founded upon the first settlers of America. . . . The lapse of time which has intervened, prevents my recollecting but few of the leading incidents of his writings; but the names of Nephi and Lehi are yet fresh in my memory, . . . I have no manner of doubt that the historical part of it, is the same that I read and heard read, more than 20 years ago.[7]

John Miller, a boarder at the Spalding home in 1811, stated:

I was soon introduced to the manuscript of Spalding, . . . From this he would frequently read some humourous passages to the company present. It purported to be the history of the first settlement of America . . . I have recently examined the Book of Mormon, and find in it the writings of Solomon Spalding, from beginning to end, but mixed up with scripture and other religious matter, . . . The names of Nephi, Lehi, Moroni, and in fact all the principal names, are bro't fresh to my recollection, by the Gold Bible.[8]

Aaron Wright, another acquaintance of Spalding, wrote:

I first became acquainted with Solomon Spalding in 1808 or 9, when he commenced building a forge on Conneaut creek. When at his house, one day, he showed and read to me a history he was writing, of the lost tribes of Israel, purporting that they were the first settlers of America, and that the Indians were their descendants. Upon this subject we had frequent conversations. He traced their journey from Jerusalem to America, as it is given in the Book of Mormon, excepting the religious matter. . . . the names more especially are the same without any alteration. He told me his object was to account for all the fortifications, &c. to be found in this country, . . .[9]

===================================================

I have offered an explanation for how it is that Jacob 2 flat out condemns polygamy as an abomination specifically in the case of David and Solomon - and gives it as the entire reason for the people going to the Americas. I point out that IF Smith had really authored the BoM and was all that accepting of polygamy he would not have written such strong "abomination" language against polygamy in Jacob 2 -- (or was he declaring himself to be false by doing that on purpose?)

You have given no explanation at all as to why he would do that - even though you just came out and claimed that polygamy by David and Solomon was ordained of God - and yet BoM flat out calls it abomination. I give you the benefit of the doubt - being in perfect alignment with Joseph Smith on that point - but not in alignment with Samuel Spalding's BoM statements.

What is your "other" explanation - because given that you provide no explanation - you are leaving mine as the most consistent and reasonable one.

It seems strange to me that people still believe that the Book of Mormon had anything to do with Samuel Spalding. I suspect that Sandra Tanner decided to keep it on the website even after Samuel's manuscript was found. Her research is flawed. She did research in Palmyra for the religious upheaval which took place while Joseph Smith and his family lived in Manchester. Even though Manchester is not far from Palmyra it is still not Palmyra. Here is the problem with Spalding:

"Initial critics of the Book of Mormon tended to take one of two stances—either:

1. The Book of Mormon was a clumsy, obvious forgery upon which no intelligent person would waste time; and/or
2. Joseph Smith was the Book of Mormon's obvious author.

Ironically, with the appearance of the Spalding theory, critics quickly began to claim that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon, and attributed the Book of Mormon's writing to Spalding and (usually) Sidney Rigdon.

It is interesting to note the after-the-fact admission from critics that prior to the Spalding theory, the Book of Mormon was difficult to account for. Unfortunately for the modern critic, the collapse of the Spalding theory means that they are likewise ill-placed to attribute the Book of Mormon's text to Joseph Smith.

There are three major problems with this theory

1. The historical record indicates that Sidney Rigdon first learned of the Book of Mormon from Parley P. Pratt and his missionary companions in November 1830, and that Rigdon did not meet Joseph Smith until December of that same year. All of this was long after the Book of Mormon was translated and published. Critics can only marshal circumstantial evidence of a conspiracy in which Rigdon met Joseph much earlier, then later pretended to be converted to Mormonism.
2. The purported Spalding manuscript was not brought forward for analysis because no one knew where it was, or if it even existed. In 1884 an authentic Solomon Spalding manuscript titled "Manuscript Story—Conneaut Creek" was recovered by Lewis L. Rice in Honolulu, Hawaii and taken to the Oberlin College Library in Ohio. The unfinished story bore hardly any resemblance to the Book of Mormon.[2]:10 The text was published by the RLDS Church in 1885 under the title "Manuscript Found." The LDS Church also published the text. (See "Further Reading," link, for links to online texts).
3. Claims that Spalding wrote a second manuscript are easily discredited by the fact that the published Spalding manuscript clearly shows that it was not finished, even after Spalding moved away from many of the people who claimed to have heard him read from the later story.[3]"

From: Book of Mormon/Authorship theories/Spalding manuscript - FairMormon

 

[Daniel Marsh]

This is a double pronged discussion, because, of course, I'm looking for an explanation from someone LDS. But regarding the second prong dealing with my humility, I don't mind anyone responding.

So, I am troubled by the notion of prophets and general authorities being excused for now disavowed doctrine, like polygamy and the ban of the priesthood for black men, because they are supposedly not perfect and make mistakes, just like anyone. We are told directly that those who might lead us astray are removed from their post before they have a chance to do so.

"The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty."

Okay, what about black men and the priesthood? What about the doctrine of the curse of black skin on those who are wicked? Is that really the mind of God? Why change it then? And if it is merely a matter of innocence versus deliberate nefarious motives, then how is an LDS prophet any different than a minister from any other Christian religion? If an LDS prophet means well and has a will to serve God, but mistakenly preaches doctrine that is contrary to the will of the Lord, what is the point of having him? Prophet isn't a fancy word for preacher; it means something specific. And if I cannot trust a prophet or apostle to lead me in 100% the ways of the Lord with everything he says(because he speaks for the Lord, right?), then why not be a Baptist or a Methodist or a Catholic? They're all leading by their own methods of inspiration and a desire to serve Christ, no?

One big issue I have is with humility. Because I believe in it. I believe it is good to be humble and gracious(as opposed to arrogant and selfish). While in the church, I believed in the concept of us being Hands of the Lord, that if we were humble enough to be led, He would direct our doings in this life(through opportunities and the impressions of other people) to the path we needed to walk for our greatest growth and service and that of others. I also believe, it is okay not to have 100% of the answers or the full picture beforehand. Sometimes you don't understand at the current moment "why" but later in life, you look back at the picture and things suddenly make sense. I was right where I was supposed to be and He knew the whole time.

So, in addition to struggling with the imperfection of church leaders ultimately equating to their unworthiness to lead others to righteousness, I also struggle with doubts about the concept of obedience and humility. It is a real issue to try and understand what I want from piety and reconciling my own God-given intellect and right to judge on moral grounds. Am I being led astray by my own pride? Do I want all of the answers(why polygamy then not polygamy? Why racist priesthood doctrine? Why seer stone yet gold plates?)? Or is it okay for me to demand moral consistency from an Almighty?

I apologize if this is not he right place to go for this discussion. Ex-Mormon forums have rules against preaching/theistic talk and LDS forums don't allow debate or any negativity about the church or its leaders. I am alone and conflicted and I need to talk these things out.

Deuteronomy 13
King James Version
13 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,

2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;

3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

4 Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.

5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;

14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;

15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.

16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the Lord thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again.

17 And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the Lord may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers;

18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy God.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22
King James Version

20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken?

22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

True Prophets are expected to be correct all the time.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Isaiah 8:20
The New King James Version
20 wTo the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because xthere 6is no light in them.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

And He did not ordain that they should have multiple wives.. God's command was that kings were not to have multiple wives. Deut 17:17 especially kings.


BoM Jacob 2:
Jacob 2:24-29 states:

24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.


[31] For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
[32] And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
[33] For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
[34] And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.
[35] Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

========================

Question: How could Joseph Smith have written that polygammy was such a great abomination in Jacob 2 -- yet promote it himself?

Answer: Joseph Smith did not write Jacob 2... Samuel Spalding did - Spalding was a Baptist in the late 1700's and almost the entire BoM book is from his manuscript intended as a sort of "American Pilgrim's Progress" fiction. So not too surprising that it has so many Baptist ideas in it.

where is that from links to each quote please.

 

[Rescued One]

God ordained polygamy for a time.

Who received the supposed cancellation for the church? Did the Mormons tell their multiple wives to go away?

Why do Mormon men (including prophets) get sealed for time and eternity to a second wife(or a third) after the first wife (or second one) dies?

Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth president of the church (1970-1972) married Louise E. Shurtleff in 1898. She died in 1908. In 1908 he married Ethel G. Reynolds, who died in 1937. In 1938 he married Jessie Evans, who died in 1971. He was sealed "for eternity" to each of those women. Now, paraphrasing what the Pharisees asked Jesus: Which woman will be Smith's wife in the celestial kingdom? According to Mormon doctrine, ALL THREE will be his wives. Smith confirmed "...my wives will be mine in eternity.” (Doctrines of Salvation, vol 2, pg 67.)

Harold B. Lee, the 11th president of the church, remarried after his wife's death and anticipated his reunion with both women in poetry:

"My lovely Joan was sent to me:
So Joan joins Fern
That three might be, more fitted for eternity.
'O Heavenly Father, my thanks to thee' "
(Deseret News 1974 Church Almanac, page 17)

Mormon Apostle Dallin Oaks, speaking at a BYU devotional, Jan 29, 2002:
"When I was 66, my wife June died of cancer. Two years later--a year
and a half ago--I married Kristen McMain, the eternal companion who
now stands at my side. Now, single sisters, I have an expert witness to invite to the stand
at this time. It is my wife, Kristen, who, as an adult, was single for
about 35 years before we married."

In April 2006, current prophet Russell M. Nelson married for a second time. His first wife had passed away the previous year. Both his first and second marriage were “solemnized” in an LDS Temple ceremony.

 

[BobRyan]

I have offered an explanation for how it is that Jacob 2 flat out condemns polygamy as an abomination specifically in the case of David and Solomon - and gives it as the entire reason for the people going to the Americas. I point out that IF Smith had really authored the BoM and was all that accepting of polygamy he would not have written such strong "abomination" language against polygamy in Jacob 2 -- (or was he declaring himself to be false by doing that on purpose?)

You have given no explanation at all as to why he would do that - even though you just came out and claimed that polygamy by David and Solomon was ordained of God - and yet BoM flat out calls it abomination. I give you the benefit of the doubt - being in perfect alignment with Joseph Smith on that point - but not in alignment with Samuel Spalding's BoM statements.

What is your "other" explanation - because given that you provide no explanation - you are leaving mine as the most consistent and reasonable one.

"Initial critics of the Book of Mormon tended to take one of two stances—either:

1. The Book of Mormon was a clumsy, obvious forgery upon which no intelligent person would waste time; and/or
2. Joseph Smith was the Book of Mormon's obvious author.

Ironically, with the appearance of the Spalding theory, critics quickly began to claim that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon, and attributed the Book of Mormon's writing to Spalding

interesting -- how does this solve the problem you have with the book of Mormon condemning polygamy as abomination for which those tribes "must leave" Israel since God regards the polygamy of David and Solomon as "abomination"??

No matter who wrote BoM.. whether it was taken from Spalding or it "came out of staring in a hat" - either way is fine with me as the basis for the book - I just don't see how this helps you resolve the issue.

 

[He is the way]

Who received the supposed cancellation for the church? Did the Mormons tell their multiple wives to go away?

Why do Mormon men (including prophets) get sealed for time and eternity to a second wife(or a third) after the first wife (or second one) dies?

Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth president of the church (1970-1972) married Louise E. Shurtleff in 1898. She died in 1908. In 1908 he married Ethel G. Reynolds, who died in 1937. In 1938 he married Jessie Evans, who died in 1971. He was sealed "for eternity" to each of those women. Now, paraphrasing what the Pharisees asked Jesus: Which woman will be Smith's wife in the celestial kingdom? According to Mormon doctrine, ALL THREE will be his wives. Smith confirmed "...my wives will be mine in eternity.” (Doctrines of Salvation, vol 2, pg 67.)

Harold B. Lee, the 11th president of the church, remarried after his wife's death and anticipated his reunion with both women in poetry:

"My lovely Joan was sent to me:
So Joan joins Fern
That three might be, more fitted for eternity.
'O Heavenly Father, my thanks to thee' "
(Deseret News 1974 Church Almanac, page 17)

Mormon Apostle Dallin Oaks, speaking at a BYU devotional, Jan 29, 2002:
"When I was 66, my wife June died of cancer. Two years later--a year
and a half ago--I married Kristen McMain, the eternal companion who
now stands at my side. Now, single sisters, I have an expert witness to invite to the stand
at this time. It is my wife, Kristen, who, as an adult, was single for
about 35 years before we married."

In April 2006, current prophet Russell M. Nelson married for a second time. His first wife had passed away the previous year. Both his first and second marriage were “solemnized” in an LDS Temple ceremony.

God gave everyone their agency and that agency will still be with us in the world to come. Since that is the case many relations may be terminated by one of the spouses. That being said there will be restrictions for those who are not worthy of greater things.

 

[BobRyan]

where is that from links to each quote please.

That is from the BoM in the book Jacob... chapter 2. Is that what you are asking ? Do you want a link to BoM?

 

[BobRyan]

True Prophets are expected to be correct all the time.

Nathan was not correct when he told David to build the temple - but he also did not claim that God gave him that message. The next day after God spoke with Nathan on that subject - he tells David "oops I said the wrong thing". BUT IF Nathan had told David "God told me that you are supposed to build the temple" then came back a day later and said "God said that last statement is wrong - you were not given permission to build the temple" -- then that would be a problem

 

[Rescued One]

God gave everyone their agency and that agency will still be with us in the world to come. Since that is the case many relations may be terminated by one of the spouses. That being said there will be restrictions for those who are not worthy of greater things.

As usual, you ignored the questions I asked. Others certainly see that.

 

[BobRyan]

from: Spalding–Rigdon theory of Book of Mormon authorship - Wikipedia
======================= begin quote

Jockers study
A 2008 Stanford study (Jockers et al.) of the text of the Book of Mormon compared it to writings of possible authors of the text showed a high probability that the authors of the book were Spalding, Rigdon, and Oliver Cowdery. It concluded that "our analysis supports the theory that the Book of Mormon was written by multiple, nineteenth-century authors, and more specifically, we find strong support for the Spalding–Rigdon theory of authorship. In all the data, we find Rigdon as a unifying force. His signal dominates the book, and where other candidates are more probable, Rigdon is often hiding in the shadows".[35] The study did not include Smith as one of the possible authors, arguing that because of Smith's use of scribes and co-authors, no texts can be identified with a surety as having been written solely by Smith.

Mormon critics of the study have argued that this is a significant problem, claiming that a "naive application of NSC methodology" led to "misleading results" by Jockers et al. because they had used a closed set of seven authors for their study. In their own study (Schaalje et al., 2009), these critics from Brigham Young University found that an open set of candidate authors "produced dramatically different results from a closed-set NSC analysis."[36][37]

The Jockers study found a strong Spalding signal in the books of Mosiah, Alma, and Ether and the first half of the Book of Helaman. The Spalding signal was weak in those parts of the Book of Mormon likely produced after the lost pages incident (1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, some of the middle part of 3 Nephi, Moroni). They found the Rigdon signal distributed throughout the Book of Mormon (except for the known Isaiah chapters), and a weak Pratt signal in 1 Nephi. They also found a strong Cowdery signal in mid-Alma and weaker Cowdery signals in locations that contain content similar to Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews.

The study by the scholars of the Mormon university, also published in the Journal of Literary and Linguistic Computing, critiqued the methodology used by Jockers et al. claiming that the closed set analysis forced the choosing of a winner while excluding the possibility that an author outside the closed set could be selected. By using Jocker's methodology to analyze the (known) authorship of the Federalist Papers by including and excluding Alexander Hamilton as a candidate author, Jockers's methodology picked Rigdon when Hamilton was excluded. Using Schaalje’s open-set method, Schaalje's method picked "none of the above" when Hamilton was excluded. When Hamilton was included, both Jockers's and Schaalje's method correctly picked Hamilton.[36][37]

By using Smith's personal writings written in his own handwriting, the Schaalje rebuttal concluded that stylometric evidence supports neither Smith nor Spalding–Rigdon authorship.[36]

========================= END QUOTE

It seems strange to me that people still believe that the Book of Mormon had anything to do with Samuel Spalding.

 

[BobRyan]

Did God lie when He said:

(Old Testament | Genesis 26:5)

5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Gen 26:5 cannot be bent into a claim that Abraham never sinned.

 

[Hrairoo]

I tend to go with the theory that credits other books accessible to Joseph Smith at the time he grew up and the area as having influenced the content and style of the book of Mormon. Those being View of the Hebrews, The Last Book of Napoleon, and The Great War Between the U.S. and Great Britain in 1812. Seeing as both of Smith's parents were school teachers, the war described in the Great War having happened in his backyard in New York(and the book being written in KJV English AND being a book made for school children, would have been something the Smith household would have had access to and could account for all the war and battles written into the BoM). Smith himself was said to be well-spoken and to have a knack for memorizing scripture. In his mother's biography about him, she recalls many instances of the young Smith telling stories about the ancient cultures of the people who once lived in the American continent. SO, you want to talk about "months" writing the Bom? How about years, mate. From boyhood, these ideas and fascinations were being entertained.

But aside from that fact, if we want to get into the nitty gritty of what the heck happened and the hat and the stone, I am betrayed more by the manipulation of the church leaders in current day than I am by the cracks in the origin of the writing. I grew up in Smith's backyard. My church was the Priesthood Restoration site in Susquehanna PA. in the summertime, we used to baptize folks in the same river that Joseph and Oliver Cowdery supposedly baptized each other in when they restored that ordinance.

The chapel was connected by the Priesthood Restoration site visitor center. If you've ever been to a temple visitor center, then you'll know the shape of it; it's like a mini museum, with pictures on the walls, displays and infographics. There's a theater room where visitors can go to see a propaganda dramatization video about Smith and Cowdery translating the plates. I visited there often in 2016 before I moved and do you know what the pictures on the wall were of? Joseph sitting by candlelight with the plates on the table in front of him, Cowdery in the background across the table from him with pen and parchment. The same pictures I was shown in Primary, in Sunday school, in teaching manuals. I had to learn about the stone and hat this month, reading an essay in on the lds site. If you think any part of those commissioned paintings with "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" printed on the back in their logo and font, or any part of that visitors center wasn't carefully put together by leaders of the church to present a certain image to both the members and investigators, and that kind of conduct is manipulative and deceitful in a way unbecoming of men who are supposed to represent God's will, then I guess the gaslighting must be working. But not on me. Not anymore.

 

[empiric35]

Luke 16:16

 

[He is the way]

As usual, you ignored the questions I asked. Others certainly see that.

The answer to the question is this, perhaps one of the marriages will last for eternity. Joseph Smith once cautioned a man that he should treat his wife better so she would want to stay with him for eternity. There are NO guarantees to the Celestial Kingdom.

 

[Oseas]

yes he did -

Now Abraham journeyed from there toward the land of the Negev, and settled between Kadesh and Shur; then he sojourned in Gerar. 2 Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” So Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is married.”

4 Now Abimelech had not come near her; and he said, “Lord, will You slay a nation, even though blameless? 5 Did he not himself say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this.” 6 Then God said to him in the dream, “Yes, I know that in the integrity of your heart you have done this, and I also kept you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her. 7 Now therefore, restore the man’s wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you and you will live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.”

8 So Abimelech arose early in the morning and called all his servants and told all these things in their hearing; and the men were greatly frightened. 9 Then Abimelech called Abraham and said to him, “What have you done to us? And how have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? You have done to me things that ought not to be done.” 10 And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What have you encountered, that you have done this thing?” 11 Abraham said, “Because I thought, surely there is no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.

Even the pagans knew it was wrong - and God Himself sided with the pagans - saying that this was evil. I think we can "figure this one out"

In the "actual text" God gives the pagan king Abimelech a pass - because he was right in claiming that Abraham lied to him. And even in vs 11 above Abraham stops referring to Sarah as "my sister" and fesses up to "My wife".

This may look like "telling the truth" to you -- but God agrees with Abimelech when he points out he was deceived by Abraham.

The point remains.

No, no, your point does not remain, by no manner of means.

Your discernment and insistent testimony implying or insinuating that Abraham lied, was a liar, has no meaning, it is not true, because in fact Abraham had no intention of lying as you are preaching here, but of hiding his marital status with his own sister, do you understand?

By the way, that was not the first time that this happened to Abraham, a similar fact had happened before, with Pharaoh, when Abraham went down to Egypt-Genesis 12: v.10-20.