Talk:Oliver Cowdery

message: Can you fill me in on this fact that Cowdery received a revelation?  Hawstom 06:40, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Articles of the Church of Christ" was a revelation he received in 1829.  The Articles were found in Church archives, and are in Cowdery's handwriting.  Much of Cowdery's language was used in the "Articles and Covenants of the Church of Christ" ratified by the church in 1830.  The text is at http://saintswithouthalos.com/w/oc_arts.phtml  COGDEN 04:20, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: I would like to see that BYU Studies article (do you have a reference?), but it seems to be a stretch to conclude the revelation wasn't Cowdery's, given the full text of the Articles of the Church of Christ.  For instance, near the end Cowdery writes, "Behold I am Oliver I am an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God the Father & the Lord Jesus Christ.  Behold I have written the things which he hath commanded me for behold his word was unto me as a burning fire shut up in my bones & I was weary with forbearing & I could forbear no longer Amen."  It's also signed "O.C."  I don't think there is anything inconsistent with the idea that the revelation was Cowdery's; this was before Smith's Sept. 1830 revelation (D&C 28) saying that only Smith (and not Cowdery or Hiram Page) could receive commandments for the Church.
I'll see if I can dig up the reference wherever I found it. In any case the verse 37 similarities and controversies are suspect to most historians, since it was such an issue between the two. There is no doubt that Oliver played a prominent and often equal role to Joseph in many of the earlier things that took place within the Church. Oliver was promised by revelation that any revelation/translation and spritual gift that was given to Smith would be revealed or given to him as well. Very interesting article. Thanks. Visorstuff 18:23, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Cowdery Received Revelation?

message: When speaking of revelation, it isn't necessary to say purported.  The world kind of assumes that, I gather. Hawstom 06:40, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV Issues

message: Some LDS apologists use the citation of Oliver's letter to Warren as "A dirty, nasty, filthy affair" in articles like these to illegitimize them.http://www.withoutend.org/polygaga-brian-hales-joseph-smiths-bad-romance. As far back as 2014, at least one apologist debunker quoted it as "'dirty, nasty, filthy scrape affair,'" due to the word "affair" being written over another word, which was purportedly "scrape."https://mit.irr.org/joseph-smith-and-fanny-alger#_irr_end7 This clarification basically changes nothing about the quote (aside from the level of formality and the slightly different connotations of the two words), but it would lend some legitimacy to the section as a whole if there was at least a note about it. There's also a scan of the copy of the letter (the copy being quoted in this article) which does clearly show that there's something weird about the written word "affair" on page 81.https://mormonpolygamydocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/JSP_Book_91.pdf Beyond reaching out to Don Bradley/Chris Smith directly (the people who allegedly have clear evidence that the underlying word is in fact "scrape"), I don't really have a way to produce evidence for that. Thoughts are appreciated. NullKatana (talk) 03:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Image reconstruction of the the underlying word ("scrape"): https://bhroberts.org/records/psWfCb-0kSv2Q/cowdery_calls_josephs_relation_with_alger_a_dirty_nasty_filthy_scrape_affair. Spoke too soon. NullKatana (talk) 04:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The most prominent scholar on LDS polygamy that I'm aware of, Chris Hales, has a page that also asserts that "scrape" is underlying "affair."https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/oliver-cowdery-letter-to-warren-a-cowdery-olivers-brother-january-21-1838/ NullKatana (talk) 06:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Affair vs. Scrape