NOM

CaptainSalty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:22 am John,

I saw you registered here this morning and unfortunately accidentally deleted your account. It came through with a batch of spam accounts and I selected all and hit delete before your name caught my eye. I couldn't undo it in time.

My apologies. Please take a minute and register again. We would love to have you here.

Captain Sorry!

One more thing... If you know Thayne, let him know we would still love to get the content from the old board back. For posterity's sake. We're willing to pay for it in scotch!

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:25 am John what are your thoughts on the theory advocated by some that Sidney Rigdon and Parley Pratt were involved from the beginning (pre Kirtland) in the "Gold bible company"? Do you find any of the evidence compelling or is it far fetched?

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:25 am John what are your thoughts on the theory advocated by some that Sidney Rigdon and Parley Pratt were involved from the beginning (pre Kirtland) in the "Gold bible company"? Do you find any of the evidence compelling or is it far fetched?

CaptainSalty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:26 am Welcome John!

Glad you made it back. How about we turn this thread into an AMA?

I'll start. I'm a big fan of your maps and writings on early Mormonism. How did you get involved/interested in producing Mormon themed maps? Have you done anything recently for the mainstream LDS church?

John Hamer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2017 10:16 am

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:25 am John what are your thoughts on the theory advocated by some that Sidney Rigdon and Parley Pratt were involved from the beginning (pre Kirtland) in the "Gold bible company"? Do you find any of the evidence compelling or is it far fetched?

I don't think there's much of any evidence. We lack anything primary accounts prior to the 1834 publication of "Mormonism Unvailed" which is when the Spaulding theory is first published. After the theory is articulated, its proponents go interview people who perhaps remember Joseph Smith Jr. hanging around with mysterious figures who are reputed to be Rigdon.

The basis of the Spaulding theory is the Conneaut affidavits (gathered by a cousin of my ancestors' Doctor Philastut Hurlbut) which seem compelling on their surface. However, they are contradicted by the rest of the historical record which is vast. They were adequately explained by Fawn Brodie more than half a century ago and pretty well all scholars on the topic have agreed with her. We have recovered the Spaulding manuscript and since it covers the same basic idea --- the myth of the Moundbuilders --- as the Book of Mormon, we can see why the memories of the people in Conneaut were confused. (The idea that there was a second Spaulding manuscript is speculation created by advocates of the Spaulding theory who refused to accept the evidence when the actual manuscript was recovered.)

Meanwhile the Book of Mormon itself argues on almost every page that its true author is Joseph Smith Jr. It predicts him ("Joseph son of Joseph"), it predicts the Anthon affair and reacts to Anthon's mention of "Egyptian" characters, it has the same tropes uniformly throughout (bland black and white characters, no use of color adjectives, no female characters) that illustrate uniformity of authorship, the small plates section (Lehi's family) is clearly autobiographical for Joseph Smith Jr. and Lehi's visions actually re-use Joseph Sr.'s visions, the text has the marks of oral composition (i.e., a person composing by speaking aloud, as in an orally composed prayer or sermon). Moreover, while the text reads very much like Joseph Smith's later compositions, it sounds nothing like the Spaulding manuscript that we have in our possession.

In short, the Spaulding theory adds nothing to our explanation of Book of Mormon origins except unwarranted theoretical complexity. The only positive evidence for the Spaulding theory (the Conneaut affidavits) is easily explained. Since Joseph Smith Jr. indisputably wrote large sections of the Book of Mormon (the Lehi story, predictions of himself, Words of Mormon, Moroni's instructions for founding a church) and since these are written in the same voice as the rest of the work, there is no reason whatsoever to imagine a lost secret source and a broader conspiracy.

Since Joseph Smith Jr. indisputably wrote large sections of the Book of Mormon (the Lehi story, predictions of himself, Words of Mormon, Moroni's instructions for founding a church) and since these are written in the same voice as the rest of the work, there is no reason whatsoever to imagine a lost secret source and a broader conspiracy.

Anomalous Anonymous wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:48 pmNice to see you here, John. Nice enough even to bring me out of lurkage. I have a question about this--do you consider Cowdery, and possibly Emma Smith, as co-authors of the BoM? Do you think they generated certain sections, or just clarified what Smith was saying, and that's why some of Cowdery's portions read more smoothly?

Obadiah_Dogberry wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:09 pm When I grow up I want to be like John Hamer.

Okay...fanboy mode disengaged. It's great having you here!

AMA Time -
What brought you to Canada and when?

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:15 am Are you still in contact with anyone from the old Exmo Social board?

That was such a great place for awhile.

John Hamer wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:06 pm(although Cowdery couldn't muster the words on that end of the stick).

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:33 am

John Hamer wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:06 pm(although Cowdery couldn't muster the words on that end of the stick).

Yeah, literally, as in dowsing rod!

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:36 pm Yeah, John, you're my favorite Sunday School teacher. I'm tempted to move to Canada, and not just for reasons of Trumpxit (kinda like Brexit but for the purpose of fleeing America Made Great Again)