The author glosses over the expansion of church membership in the early 1830s. In 1831 Joseph Smith brought 75 followers to Kirtland, and by 1836 when the temple was completed,

some thousand men packed into the lower court for the dedication service, with another thousand Saints eagerly crowded around outside hoping to catch a spiritual contact high.

How did the Church expand so rapidly? OK, they had missionaries, but that doesn't explain anything. Where did those thousands come from? Then there are those "scrappy Mormon colonies" in Missouri since 1831--where did they come from? Just how big was the Church membership? How many other colonies did they have? Why were there colonies separate from Joseph Smith's group? There's a lot left unexplained here.

KayR wrote: How did the Church expand so rapidly? OK, they had missionaries, but that doesn't explain anything. Where did those thousands come from? Then there are those "scrappy Mormon colonies" in Missouri since 1831--where did they come from? Just how big was the Church membership? How many other colonies did they have? Why were there colonies separate from Joseph Smith's group? There's a lot left unexplained here.

I think the 'how' the the recruiting would be an interesting discussion. Some of it is hinted at with the person who was helping J Smith write the book of Mormon and put up the money, etc. However, there must be a 'gullibility' that does not seem to exist today, at least not to this degree with the early believers. One assumeption i am making is that the converts were actually "converted". they believed X and then became Mormons. But I think that is an assumption: they may have had no religion at all!

I am watching the Ken Burns "Dustbowl" documentary. There are a number of people who are saying (In response to a particularly large dust storm rolling in) things like "grandmom said it was the end of the world and we believed it" and "my brother said it was the end and I was scared".

Perhaps people were just more accepting of the opinions of others as fact?

ginof said

Perhaps people were just more accepting of the opinions of others as fact?

When you think about it, people are still pretty gullible today, but we have access to more dissenting opinions than we did in the past--the glory of internet.

Good point, KayR.

Living in Ohio, the Kirtland story catches my eye... The Kirtland Temple still exists:

http://www.kirtlandtemple.org/index.html

Here's a "whitewash" of the Kirtland Safety Society incident. Note page 16 regarding the fake boxes of coins and page 18 claiming the court got the law wrong in convicting Smith and Rigdon.

http://www.fairlds.org/wp-content/uploa ... te-KSS.pdf