2thinkForums
Honest Intellectual Inquiry: Science, Religion, Philosophy, Ethics, Politics, and Literature
Discussion Forum for 2think.org and lds-mormon.com
Home | Contact admin | View Archives from Old Forum
 New Topic  |  Go to Top  |  Go to Topic  |  Search  |  Log In   Previous Message  |  Next Message 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?
Author: Uncle Dale 
Date:   02-01-10 14:41

>If we rely on Manuscript Story/Roman Story/Oberlin Manuscript only,
>what IS there left of Spalding with which to create the Book of Mormon?

Well, that's sort of a backwards way at coming at the problem.

If we surmise a connection between the Oberlin "Roman story" and the
Book of Mormon, based only upon word-print analysis, then that old
"Roman story" need only supply evidence of Spalding's language use.

Nothing in particular needs to have been plagiarized from that document,
other than a basic use of words, and perhaps phrases, grammar, etc.

At that point, I'd have to ask, "Why are we mentioning Spalding's name
at all? And I suppose the answer would be , "Because of Jocker's study."

But why did Jockers bother to include a Spalding writing sample in his
computerized research, in the first place? Certainly he did not simply
draw that particular name out of thin air. There was some reason.

Here is part of the reason (from the New York Public Library archives):


----- transcript of Dec. 31, 1833 draft letter by Aron Wright -----

Dear Sir

Whereas I have been informed
that you have been appointed with others
to investigate the subject of mormonism and a
resolution has been past to ascertain the real
orrigin of the sd Book this is therefore to
inform you that I have made a statement
to D P Hurlbut relative to writings of S Spalding
Esq sd Hurlbut is now at my store I have
examined the writings which he has obtained
from sd Spaldings widowe I recognise them to
be the writings hand writing of sd Spalding but not
the manuscript I had refferance to in my statement
before alluded to as he informed me he wrote in the
first place he wrote for his own amusement and
then altered his plan and commenced writing a
history of the first Settlement of America the
particulars you will find in my testimony Dated
Sept 1833 August 1833 -- for years before he
left this place I was quite intimate with sd S
Spalding we had many private interviews the history
he was writing was the topic of his conversation relating
his progress and Contemplating the avails of the same
I also contemplated reading his history but never saw
it in print untill I saw the Book of Mormon
where I find much of the history and the names
verbatim the Book of mormon does not contain all
the writings sd Spladings I expect to see them if
Smith is permitted to go on and as he says get
his other plates the first time that Mr Hyde
a mormon Preacher from Kirtland preached in
the centre School house in this place the Hon
Nehmiah King attended as soon as Hyde had
got through King left the house and said that
Hide had preached from the writings of S Spalding

In conclusion I will observe that the names and
most of the historical part of the Book of Mormon
is as familiar to me as Most modern history
if if is not Spaldings writings copied it is the same
as he wrote and if Smith was inspired I think
it was by the same Spirit that Spalding possessed
which he confessed to be the love of money

---------------------------- end ------------------------

However, if we dismiss this sort of evidence as being nothing but
"anecdotal" testimony, then probably Spalding's name and word-print
should be removed from Jockers' reporting altogether.

What reasonable explanation might we give, for Jockers ever having
including Spalding data in his study?

UD
 Reply To This Message  |  Flat View   Newer Topic  |  Older Topic 

 Topics Author  Date
 BoM Authorship S/R Theory without Manuscript Found  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:22 
 What we lose  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:29 
 Is what we lose expendable?  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:37 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
marg 01-31-10 22:22 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 14:07 
 Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Martin 02-02-10 07:12 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:38 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:39 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 04:35 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
marg 02-03-10 04:39 
 Nice job being Dale's, er, "tool", marg!  new
Martin 02-03-10 08:34 
 I agree with you Martin  new
marg 02-03-10 16:08 
 Re: I agree with you Martin  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 19:35 
 Dale yet again(!) DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  new
Martin 02-03-10 04:43 
 Re: Dale yet again(!) DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 05:21 
 I do NOT grant you persmission to repost my words anywhere.  
Martin 02-03-10 08:43 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
hoplite 02-03-10 04:09 
 Thanks, hoplite  new
Martin 02-03-10 05:00 
 Re: Thanks, hoplite  new
marg 02-03-10 05:26 
 Putting this in amber, too  new
Martin 02-03-10 08:10 
 Is history scientific?  new
Martin 02-03-10 10:26 
 Re: Is history scientific?  new
marg 02-03-10 16:26 
 Why can't Marg read?  
Martin 02-04-10 01:57 
 Re: Is history scientific?  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 21:06 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:16 
 Vicki you can't think worth shit and you never could  new
marg 02-03-10 04:23 
 marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  
Martin 02-03-10 05:23 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
marg 02-03-10 05:42 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  
Martin 02-03-10 08:59 
 Martin why should I have animosity for you?  
marg 02-03-10 16:40 
 Re: Martin why should I have animosity for you?  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 18:00 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
aussieguy55 02-03-10 19:56 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 20:11 
 Celebrate the real victory! Do not mourn the loss of harmful anecdotes!  new
Martin 02-04-10 01:13 
 The richness of metacognition  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 23:08 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:39 
 vicki write on topic for a change instead of trying to create drama  new
marg 02-05-10 20:03 
 marg, *read* the thread instead of creating chaos  new
Jersey Girl 02-06-10 01:32 
 Martin has added nothing new that wasn't already appreciated.  new
marg 02-06-10 03:07 
 FYI lady  
Jersey Girl 02-06-10 03:35 
 Re: FYI lady  new
marg 02-06-10 04:31 
 Marg, you couldn't argue yourself out of a mime's air box!  new
Martin 02-09-10 07:10 
 Re: Marg, you couldn't argue yourself out of a mime's air box!  new
marg 02-09-10 15:49 
 Re: marg, *read* the thread instead of creating chaos  new
marg 02-06-10 18:59 
 Still waging war, are ya?  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 00:10 
 THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Martin 02-01-10 02:15 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
marg 02-01-10 02:35 
 Go ahead and pull up your chairs!  new
Martin 02-01-10 04:41 
 Re: Go ahead and pull up your chairs!  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:30 
 Dale asks "What evidence"?  new
Martin 02-02-10 07:33 
 Re: Dale asks "What evidence"?  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:41 
 Dale again DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  
Martin 02-03-10 04:31 
 Wait just a New York minute  new
Jersey Girl 02-02-10 21:20 
 Re: Wait just a New York minute  new
Martin 02-03-10 01:35 
 No, don't  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:42 
 Re: No, don't  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:43 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:28 
 Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Martin 02-02-10 09:25 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:45 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  
Martin 02-03-10 09:42 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Jersey Girl 02-02-10 23:21 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Jersey Girl 02-01-10 19:13 
 [lost response!]  new
Martin 02-02-10 11:10 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
marg 02-03-10 05:16 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 14:41 
 Re: BoM Authorship S/R Theory without Manuscript Found  new
marg 01-31-10 19:26 
 Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Martin 02-01-10 04:40 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:36 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 00:35 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 00:49 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:02 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 02:05 
 This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 19:51 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 21:34 
 I'm going to answer you twice  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:46 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:00 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 22:06 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:40 
 JG asks a very insightful question  
Martin 02-04-10 03:15 
 Re: JG asks a very insightful question  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:52 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 04:07 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:57 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:26 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 22:29 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 10:25 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:24 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-06-10 00:20 
 You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
marg 02-06-10 01:49 
 Re: You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
Uncle Dale 02-06-10 02:35 
 Re: You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
marg 02-06-10 04:08 
 *SPECIFIC QUESTION ANSWERED SPECIFICALLY!*  new
Martin 02-04-10 02:41 
 Re: *SPECIFIC QUESTION ANSWERED SPECIFICALLY!*  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 13:10 
 Constraints  new
Martin 02-05-10 03:18 
 Re: Constraints  new
Uncle Dale 02-05-10 11:09 
 Bravo! Bravo! A wise man indeed!  new
Martin 02-09-10 05:26 
 Re: Bravo! Bravo! A wise man indeed!  new
marg 02-09-10 15:10 
 my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 15:52 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 16:17 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 17:31 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 18:37 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 19:41 
 *Look, functioning intellects, at Marg's words and despair*  new
Martin 02-05-10 08:36 
 Broadhurst's deeply offensive allegation that I called for "SUPPRESSION"!  new
Martin 02-05-10 09:25 
 Re: Broadhurst's deeply offensive allegation that I called for "SUPPRESSION"!  new
marg 02-05-10 14:24 
 MARG DOTH BUT REPEAT THE OFFENSE!  new
Martin 02-09-10 07:19 
 I'm *sorry* that I hadn't read this earlier, Martin  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 00:31 
 Excellent! Spot on!  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:22 
 Stepping in again, Martin, please read this  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 20:08 
 Vision  new
Martin 02-05-10 05:50 
 Re: Vision and seeing the light  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 22:40 
 LOUD I am!  new
Martin 02-09-10 05:48 
 *** IN LITTLE WORDS, or at least in LITTLE SENTENCES *** PLEASE READ!  new
Martin 02-04-10 04:03 
 This was your best  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:37 
 mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion  new
marg 02-04-10 21:41 
 If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 21:57 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
marg 02-04-10 22:01 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 22:05 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
marg 02-05-10 13:02 
 Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
Martin 02-05-10 09:40 
 Re: Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
Uncle Dale 02-05-10 11:33 
 Re: Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
marg 02-05-10 14:49 


 Need a Login? Register Here 
 User Login
 User Name:
 Password:
 Remember my login:
   
 Forgot Your Password?
Enter your email address or user name below and a new password will be sent to the email address associated with your profile.

phorum.org
Copyright 2thinkforums.org 2007 All Rights Reserved

The content of all posts is the reponsibility of the author.
2thinkforums, its hosters, and administrators take no responsibility for any of the content posted by 2thinkforums posters