Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Spalding MANUSCRIPTS in the plural, got it Mormons?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest started a topic Spalding MANUSCRIPTS in the plural, got it Mormons?

    Spalding MANUSCRIPTS in the plural, got it Mormons?

    Did Spalding write One manuscript, or several? Undeniable proof from those who lived in that era, is that "Manuscript Found" was just one of several. For instance:

    "The evidence is cumulative from this on, for many years. And now a surviving witness of those times has come to add testimony which ought to be final. Mr. James A. Briggs writes from Brooklyn to The Watchman of the 9th instant that in 1833-34 he was one of a self-appointed committee that met in Mentor, O., the former parish of the apostate Rigdon, and close to the "Zion" which the Saints had set up at Kirtland, to investigate the origin of the Book of Mormon. His article is long and interesting throughout; but the pith and point of it are in his first paragraph as follows: "We had the manuscripts of Rev. Solomon Spaulding before us [italics ours], that we compared with the Mormon Bible; and we had no doubt that from Spaulding's writings Rev. Sidney Rigdon got up the Mormon Bible." This conclusion he supports by a lengthy recital of facts and arguments that cannot be broken. He has a copy of the Honolulu find, as printed at Lamoni, and [avers] emphatically that "this is not a copy of the 'Manuscript Found, of Solomon Spaulding."

    The deceitful Mormon claim that they have "Manuscript Found," written by Spalding is spurious. The have "A" manuscript, and that is all. So tired of having to deal with the deceit of this horrendous cult. There is evidence that "Manuscript Found" was sold to the Mormons by Hurlbut. I wouldn't be surprised. The Oberlain manuscript is "Manuscript Story," not "Manuscript Found."

    see: http://www.truthandgrace.com/1886MCHerald0916.htm
    Last edited by Catherine Aurelia; 09-16-18, 12:47 PM.

  • JustaLurker
    replied
    Originally posted by NRA-Jeff View Post
    Thanks for providing one evidence for the BOM's authenticity.

    How many books in the USA used 3-ring binders in 1827?
    Ringed binders did not exist in America until 1854 and D rings were introduced even later.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustaLurker
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

    I don't know - It may be buried under a large rock in Palmyra, NY. There's some kind of white salamander hanging out there.
    So the manuscript that you are speaking of is a figment of your imagination?

    Leave a comment:


  • JustaLurker
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

    Frankly, I don't believe that anybody who alters posts deserves a response. Look, folks, at what this Mormon did to Bonnie's posts.
    I altered no post but my own.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonnie
    replied
    Sandra Tanner and Brodie may not have been aware of some of the stuff in the OP. I agreed with Sandra, after reading the Honolulu manuscript for myself. But if it is true that it really was called something else, according to the paper found wrapped around it, then that is something else to consider. And as the articles did state, Spaulding's family and friends DID actually read his manuscripts. But I think the jury is still out on this one, and may always be.
    Last edited by Bonnie; 09-20-18, 05:16 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonnie
    replied
    so it won't get lost with the spam

    Leave a comment:


  • NRA-Jeff
    replied
    Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
    You know that Fawn Brodie and Sandra tanners disagree with the Spaulding Rigdon theory.

    You are on thin ice with this theory.
    Yeah, but what makes them think they are bigger experts on the subject than the red-letter poster is?

    Leave a comment:


  • CTR-Lloyd
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

    I cannot believe it! If you know anything about the writing methods used in the early 19th century, you'll see that they didn't write everything on similar paper, but whatever was available: foolscap, etc. . Furthermore, they didn't use three ring binders. However, each group of papers which were part of the same story, were a manuscript, regardless if the paper was loose, of different sizes, or whatever. Furthermore, a published manuscript is referred to as a "book," and it was Rigdon that stole Spalding's manuscript from the print shop. Spalding had wanted it published as a book. The proof you'll find in "The Spalding Enigma" book. Read it.
    You know that Fawn Brodie and Sandra tanners disagree with the Spaulding Rigdon theory.

    You are on thin ice with this theory.

    Leave a comment:


  • CTR-Lloyd
    replied
    Originally posted by NRA-Jeff View Post
    Extremist antimormonism is like wacko liberalism, desperately searching for anything, no matter how false, they can use to destroy the target of their hate.

    Like the liberal pro-abortion psychologist who suddenly starts claiming that Judge Kavanaugh attacked her 35 years ago.
    No evidence to support it. Lots of evidence against the accusation.
    Doesn't matter...all that matters is the prime directive to bring him down, whatever it takes.
    That prime directive is delivered from the spacious building with no foundation.

    It is an easy target, and it takes no intellect or honesty to nay say.

    Leave a comment:


  • NRA-Jeff
    replied
    Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
    the affidavits? You mean the ones that were given decades after the manuscript supposedly went missing, which supposedly had mention of Nephites and Zarahemla?

    you do know that there is zero evidence for the theory that supports the affidavits.
    Extremist antimormonism is like wacko liberalism, desperately searching for anything, no matter how false, they can use to destroy the target of their hate.

    Like the liberal pro-abortion psychologist who suddenly starts claiming that Judge Kavanaugh attacked her 35 years ago.
    No evidence to support it. Lots of evidence against the accusation.
    Doesn't matter...all that matters is the prime directive to bring him down, whatever it takes.

    Leave a comment:


  • CTR-Lloyd
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

    If you read the books, and don't just spout stuff from FAIR, you'd know that the affidavits indicate it was "Mauscript Found" which mentioned Nephites and Zarahemla. The Oberlin College manuscript by Spalding is "Manuscript Story." So, you go figure.
    the affidavits? You mean the ones that were given decades after the manuscript supposedly went missing, which supposedly had mention of Nephites and Zarahemla?

    you do know that there is zero evidence for the theory that supports the affidavits.

    Leave a comment:


  • dberrie2000
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post
    You realize that many believe Hurlbut needed money and sold it to your cult. If that is true, I doubt it's in existence. We all know what Mormons do with truth.
    That fable was proven false when they discovered the confirming signature of Philastus Hurlbut on the back of the manuscript--signifying it was the very one he removed from the hair trunk at the home of Solomon Spaulding's widow. And the only one.

    PS--the testimony of Miltilda Davison was that Philastus Hurlbut promised her revenue from the book which was being written, which the manuscript would prove the Book of Mormon false.

    The book was written anyway by E.D. Howe(Mormonism Unveiled)--but after E.D. Howe read the manuscript of Solomon Spaulding(which Philastus Hurlbut brought to him)--Mr Howe discovered there was no resemblance of the Solomon Spaulding Manuscript to the Book of Mormon--and shelved the manuscript at the printing press.(Which E.D. Howe was the editor of).

    When L.L. Rice bought the printing press later--the manuscript was among the things left behind, and was later discovered by L.L. Rice when searching the material for a topic for a friend, as L.L. Rice was going through all the material from the printing press days, after retirement, in 1884--and discovered the manuscript of Solomon Spaulding, which was left behind in the sale of the printing press to L.L. Rice.

    Nice try though, Catherine.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustaLurker
    replied
    Bump to get the Chinese spam off of page 1.

    Leave a comment:


  • NRA-Jeff
    replied
    Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post
    ....they didn't use three ring binders. ]
    Thanks for providing one evidence for the BOM's authenticity.

    How many books in the USA used 3-ring binders in 1827?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by dberrie2000 View Post

    Whenever you find any such manuscript with the terms "Nephites" and "Zarahemla"--please let us know.
    You realize that many believe Hurlbut needed money and sold it to your cult. If that is true, I doubt it's in existence. We all know what Mormons do with truth.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X