New Witnesses for God (Volume 3 of 3)Roberts, B. H. (Brigham Henry)
Religion
New Witnesses for God (Volume 3 of 3)
Roberts, B. H. (Brigham Henry)
Book of Mormon; Smith, Joseph, Jr., 1805-1844
One can but regret the tone and coarseness of this letter of Sidney
Rigdon's, but it cannot be denied but that it is a very emphatic
contradiction of the charge that he was connected with the Spaulding
manuscript theory of the Book of Mormon's origin, and it is very
natural that a man of the nervous, irritable temperament of Sidney
Rigdon would be very much vexed at connecting him with such a theory.
On the matter of Sidney Rigdon not being connected with the origin
of the Book of Mormon we have also the statement of Oliver Cowdery,
made on his return to the Church at Kanesville (now Council Bluffs),
in October, 1848, a statement that was made in the presence of 2,000
Saints. In the course of his remarks, Oliver Cowdery then said:
I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few
pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith, as he
translated it by the gift and power of God, by means of the Urim
and Thummim, or, as it is called by that book, "Holy Interpreters."
I beheld with my eyes, and handled with my hands the gold plates
from which it was transcribed. I also saw with my eyes and handled
with my hands the "holy interpreters." That book is true. Sidney
Rigdon did not write it. Mr. Spaulding did not write it. I wrote it
myself as it fell from the lips of the Prophet. [34]
Parley P. Pratt, who, with Oliver Cowdery, was the first to present the
Book of Mormon to Sidney Rigdon some six months after its publication,
is also on record as denying the story of Sidney Rigdon's connection
with the origin of the Book of Mormon. When the "Davison Statement"
was copied from the "Boston Recorder" into the "New York Era," Elder
Pratt promptly denied the falsehood. The "Era" published the "Davison
Statement" on the 20th, and in its issue of the 27th Elder Pratt
published a somewhat exhaustive treatise in which the following occurs:
The piece in your paper states that "Sidney Rigdon was connected
in the printing office of Mr. Patterson" (in Pittsburg), and that
this is a fact well known in that region, and as Rigdon himself
has frequently stated. Here he had ample opportunity to become
acquainted with Mr. Spaulding's manuscript (romance) and to copy
it if he chose. This statement is utterly and entirely false. Mr.
Rigdon was never connected with the said printing establishment,
either directly or indirectly, and we defy the world to bring proof
of any such connection. * * The statement that Sidney Rigdon is one
of the founders of the said religious sect is also incorrect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account