The Weasel, Cook & "Primary Sources"

[_SuperDell]

Per LDS,inc Satan is the author of All Lies.

Satan, per the Temple, is The God of This World.

LDS,inc is still lying in this new history book series.

Who is it they are really praying to?

[_Tator]

I have always referred to the Weasel as a rat spreading his rat feces and urine dribbling trail of filth through this board, but I'm okay with Weasel from here on out.

Great work, Grindael, as usual.

[_I have a question]

One of the "primary" sources for 'historical' reference used in "Saints" is Dallin H. Oaks.

Oaks, “Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor,” 862–903

(Footnote 37)
https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/conte ... c-nuisance

I guess he must be a lot older than he looks....

[_deacon blues]

I read Chapter 43 of the new history- "Saints: Standard of Truth" and I felt that the fact that the footnotes (#5, 12-18) referred so frequently to one source- "Nauvoo Conspiracy" by Cummings regarding the supposed conspiracy by William Law to take Joseph's life, to be suspect. The Cummings article itself was written forty years after the event, and Cummings himself would be what I understand to be a "hearsay" witness; that is he didn't experience the events himself, but only recorded others recollections of them. There is no first person verification of what Cummings wrote.

There is a Nauvoo Interpreter article Jeffrey Bradshaw that suggests Brian Hales among others promotes this account. See: "There's a Boy I Can Trust" by Jeffrey Bradshaw.

[_Lemmie]

The weasel hasn't always been so gung-ho about primary sources:

We need to look carefully at whether or not our sources can be trusted and also whether other sources may rely upon an undependable primary source or sources.

viewtopic.php?p=483554#p483554

You'll note this post came from a thread where this exchange was posted:

Have you read it?

Regards,
MG

Yes, now, will you provide us with examples of inaccurate information in the book or are you going to continue to dodge the (multiple) requests?

I've already made it very clear that I haven't read it. You have. You should then be able to carry out the assignment that I gave to you earlier....

Here, just copy and paste this instead of continuing to dodge the question:

"I don't have any examples of inaccuracies from that book and, because of my devotion to the the LDS church and Joseph Smith (in particular), i feel that i need to attack the book and its author even though i have not read it...."

Simple as that....

the weasel in a nutshell....

[_I have a question]

It's clear that mentalgymnasts' definition of "Primary sources" is - things he thinks he remembers from Primary.