By Jack H. West, 1954.
THE THIRD CHARGE OF THE PROSECUTION WAS THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON COULD NOT BE TRUE BECAUSE IT CONTRADICTS THE BIBLE.
Many times the prosecuting attorneys attempted to show contradictions. We found there was no contradiction, but I admit on one point they had me in a corner. I had not been in the habit of flying all over the globe; I had not been in the habit of getting letters from my sons from all over the globe, so I was not as conscious as we are today of the various timing elements in the earth. When they started reading to me out of the Book of Mormon beginning in 3 Nephi 8:5 and I kept asking them what in the world they were driving at, they said, “Now just sit still. You ought to be very happy. We are reading from your book, and you shouldn’t be nervous about it.” And I didn’t know what in the world they were driving at, but they started to read:
And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first month, on the fourth day of the month, there arose a great storm, such a one as never had been known in all the land. (3 Nephi 8:5.)
Then they went on reading through the whole eighth chapter, through the ninth chapter – wading through the intricate stories into the tenth chapter and the 9th verse. Then they were ready to spring their trap. Well, this is what the scripture told:
Three hours of the most terrible destruction the people had ever known raged on this continent. The prophets of this continent testified to the people that during this identical period the Son of God was being crucified on the old continent, and our Heavenly Father was angry, and he was slaying many of the wicked of the earth. There was a terrible destruction on this continent. Whole cities of the wicked were seen to be destroyed in one stroke as the city ignited, apparently with spontaneous combustion and every block of the city caught fire simultaneously. Other cities were caught up into the whirlwinds and never seen again; where the earth opened up, some cities dropped into the gash of the earth, and then the earth closed over them again. Eye witnesses told these stories.
The prosecution waded through this, and I waited and I kept saying, “I can almost quote those words to you verbatim. Won’t you tell me your point?”
“No, we won’t – not yet.”
And so they read of the three days and nights of darkness immediately following the three hours of destruction. And then they “sprung the trap.”
Thus did the three days pass away. And it was in the morning, (3 Nephi 10:9.)
Then they went to Luke 23:44 in the Bible, and showed me without any shadow of doubt, and I couldn’t refute it, that Jesus Christ was crucified on the old continent between the sixth hour and the ninth hour, and that if you take this according to the timing of the Jews, starting as they did the first hour at sunrise, the sixth hour would be noon and the ninth hour would be 3 p.m. They said, “There you are – A positive contradiction. The Book of Mormon says that the crucifixion ended in the morning and the Bible says it ended at 3 p.m.”
I said, “Come again?” And then they went back with logic, very carefully, step by step, so that I understood. Since the three days and nights of darkness ended in the morning, they must have started in the morning; since they immediately followed the three hours of destruction, and three hours of destruction ended in the morning. I had to admit that. And the prosecution said that it was an identical timing. I had to admit that; I had never noticed this before.
I searched, and scrambled, and wrote, and telegraphed, to try and find the answer. Finally in the writings of Dr. Talmage, himself a scientist, I found that he had noticed this discrepancy. He also noted that the writer in the Book of Mormon, as near as he could tell, was writing in the northwest part of present day South America; and Luke was writing in Jerusalem; and that the northwest part of South America is 112° west of Jerusalem – or, in point of time, if it were 3 p.m. in Jerusalem, an identical timing would be 7:30 “in the morning” on this continent. Again, the prosecution wished they had not tried to force a charge.
No, there is no controversy between the Bible and the Book of Mormon. On all points of important doctrine, they corroborate, substantiate, and vindicate each other.
THE FOURTH CHARGE OF THE PROSECUTION WAS THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON CAN’T BE TRUE BECAUSE IT WAS SIMPLY A FICTION STORY BY JOSEPH SMITH.
How the prosecutors wished they had not made that statement! We brought experts in – philologists who were not members of the Church. They had no ax to grind. They were expert scientists in the study of the use of words to express ideas, and they testified at this mock trial, under oath, –and they were actual experts, –that if even an amateur who had never studied philology will read along in I Nephi and get the manner of speaking, the method of expression of ideas, and then suddenly jump to the latter part of the Book of Mormon (the book of Moroni, for instance) it will be self-evident that just one man did not write this book or develop the ideas coming from the book. Then these philologists went on to testify that the book gives evidence that many men had to do with the original work and the original ideas of the book.
Then the prosecution decided that Joseph Smith had some help; and they decided that one of the helpers was Oliver Cowdery. And Oliver Cowdery testified in court that he wrote the book with his own pen, remember? And again, they did not get the full statement; they just gave a part of the statement. It did sound on the surface of it that he was claiming to be the author of it. But then when we got Oliver Cowdery’s full statement into the trial. He said, “Sidney Rigdon didn’t write the book. I wrote that book, almost in its entirety, with my own pen, as the words fell from the lips of the Prophet, as he received the impressions for the translation of the ancient records through the use of the ancient instrument the Urim and Thummin.” And again, the prosecuting attorneys wished they had not brought up the point.
Was it written by Sidney Rigdon? Did he have part in it? Time and time again, under oath, he testified that he had not even seen the Book of Mormon until it was handed to him in printed form after its publication. He had seen no part of the original work at all. He was asked by his own son, almost on his deathbed, to testify once and for all on this point, and on his deathbed he again testified that he had never had any part in the formulation of translation or writing of the Book of Mormon.
No it is not a fiction story!
Another supporting evidence of our defense was that we find that of over 300 proper names in the Book of Mormon, 180 had never been heard of before this book came off the press. Supposedly, they were brand new names. The scientists tell us, first of all, that it is impossible for one individual to make up 180 brand new names. They say that if you tried to do all the research work necessary, and so forth, you would go stark crazy. And I assure you, as you know, that Joseph Smith was not crazy. He was a marvelous Prophet of God and leader of men in this day and age. Did a whole group of men make up these 180 supposedly new names? Now we know that they didn’t because we have since run across tribe after tribe after tribe of Indians whose whereabouts we did not know in the year 1830 – some of them way down in the jungles, and many others. Remember, these tribes of Indians were not even known about in 1830. And we say to some of these Indians, “How long have you called that mountain over there Nephihah?” And they say, “As long as can remember –always Nephihah – from chief to chief, from chief to son, from father to son passed down – always Nephiphah.” And we thought it was a new name. And we say to another tribe, “How long have you called that river of there Moronihah?” And they say to us, “always Moronihah – from chief to chief, from father to son, from tribe to tribe – always Moronihah.” And we thought it was a new name in the year 1830. And so it is with most of these 180 supposedly new names which came off the press in English print for the first time in 1830, with the publication of the Book of Mormon – they were names ages old, now generally known for the first time.
Now the prosecution was grabbing at straws and said, “Joseph Smith not only wrote a fiction story, but he stole the material.” That old standby – the “stolen” Spaulding manuscript! I wonder how hard it is going to be to convince some people.
In 1884, President James H. Fairchild of Oberlin College, Ohio, and a Mr. Rice, a literary friend were examining a heterogeneous collection of old papers and they found the lost Spaulding manuscript. After making a careful comparison of the manuscript and the Book of Mormon, they made public their results.
An article was published in the New York Observer, February 5, 1855, ([25] years after the publishing of the Book of Mormon) in which President Fairchild said: “The theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon in the traditional manuscript of Solomon Spaulding will probably have to be relinquished…Mr. Rice, myself and others compared it (the Spaulding manuscript) with the Book of Mormon and could detect no resemblance between the two. Some other explanation of the Book of Mormon must be found, if any explanation is required.” (See Articles of Faith, James E. Talmadge. P. 502.)
Remember, James H. Fairchild was the president of Oberlin College in Ohio, and was not a member of the Church. By making his statement he had nothing to gain or cause to support. How did he come across the original Spaulding manuscript? He testified that he found it in Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, in the hands of a man who was originally a publisher in the area of Ohio where Spaulding lived. In two different court trials, enemies of Mormonism claimed, first, that Joseph Smith stole the Spaulding manuscript from the widow of Spaulding, changed some of the names, and used it as a basis for the Book of Mormon. No evidence could be found against Joseph, and so he was released. Then they claimed, second, that it was Sidney Rigdon – they had made a mistake – it was Sidney Rigdon who stole it. And Sidney Rigdon had not even seen the original of the Book of Mormon and had nothing to do with its translation or its printing. It was proven that he could not possibly have been where the manuscript was supposed to have been at the time it was supposed to have been stolen, so he was released. Now as Dr. Fairchild stated, the Spaulding Manuscript was found. It has been printed twice at least, once by the Mormons in Salt Lake, and once by the Josephites of Ohio. I have a certified copy of it, and in case you have not read it, I assure you that it is not the original of the Book of Mormon. The evidence was conclusive that the Spaulding manuscript was not stolen by the Mormons, nor was it used as a basis for the Book of Mormon. No, it is not a fiction story by Joseph Smith, or any group of modern-day men. It is an actual religious history, even as it claims to be, of this continent.
Trial of the Stick of Joseph, Part 16
Recent Comments