FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
User:InProgress/Website reviews/W: Difference between revisions
(: mod) |
(: mod) |
||
| Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
|think= | |think= | ||
*Yet they put their reputations for the rest of their lives on the line by doing so...and by never denying it despite each one having a falling out with Joseph Smith. Think about that. | *Yet they put their reputations for the rest of their lives on the line by doing so...and by never denying it despite each one having a falling out with Joseph Smith. Think about that. | ||
*That's the conclusion? | *That's the conclusion? To simply call the witnesses liars because you can't account for the numerous times that they reaffirmed their testimony? | ||
|response= | |response= | ||
|authorsources= | |authorsources= | ||
Revision as of 18:13, 22 April 2012
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses' experiences may have only been visionary in nature. There are many statements given by the witnesses that indicate they only saw the angel and the plates in a visionary experience. Why would people need to see real, physical plates in a vision or a real angel that was physically on the earth? There are also several statements saying that the only time they saw the plates was when the plates were covered in a cloth or tow frock.
FairMormon commentary
- David Whitmer said this: "No, sir! I was not under any hallucination, nor was I deceived! I saw with these eyes and I heard with these ears! I know whereof I speak!" [1]
- And he said this: "'He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear;' it was no delusion! What is written is written, and he that readeth let him understand." [2]
- Sounds like he was pretty definite, if you ask us.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The three witnesses did not all see the plates or angel at the same time. Only David Whitmer and perhaps Oliver Cowdery saw the angel together. Martin Harris removed himself from the group and did not see the angel until perhaps three days later (Anthony Metcalf, Ten Years Before the Mast, n.d., microfilm copy, p. 70-71).
FairMormon commentary
- This story is well documented in official Church sources. Why is the fact that Martin's experience occurred later supposed to have meaning?
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
David Whitmer said "If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to separate myself from among the Latter-day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them." So which statement was David Whitmer lying about or had been mistaken about? Either way he doesn't sound like a completely trustworthy witness.
FairMormon commentary
- Why can't they both be true? God spoke to the three witnesses, and God told David Whitmer to leave in order to avoid being harmed. After all, Whitmer was more valuable as a Book of Mormon witness the longer he lived.
- Whitmer was even more valuable as a Book of Mormon witness after he left the Church, because he still didn't deny seeing the angel and the plates.
- Whitmer had his testimony of the Book of Mormon engraved on his tombstone: "The record of the Jews and the record of the Nephites are one."
Additional information
- Did God tell David Whitmer to leave the Church?—David Whitmer, one of the Book of Mormon's Three Witnesses, said "If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses by his own voice, then I tell you that in June, 1838, God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to "separate myself from among the Latter Day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, should it be done unto them." Critics argues that if members accept Whitmer's witness of the Book of Mormon, then they must also accept that God wanted David to repudiate the Church as false. Critics distort the historical record to make it appear that David Whitmer left the Church because he was told to, when it fact he was excommunicated prior to claiming any revelation to do so. The command to leave, if it was a true revelation, involved David's physical safety and not his membership in the Church, which he had already renounced. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
All the witnesses had close ties to Joseph and his family. Some like Martin Harris had a substantial financial investment in the success of the Book of Mormon.
FairMormon commentary
- Why didn't Martin expose the Book of Mormon as a scam after he lost his investment?
- Why didn't Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and some of the eleven witnesses expose Joseph as a fraud after they left the Church?
- If they all knew together that it was a hoax, why didn't any one of them say anything?
Additional information
- What was the character of the witnesses?—Critics charge that the witnesses cannot be trusted, or are unreliable, because they were unstable personalities, prone to enthusiasm and exaggeration. Evidence amply demonstrates that the formal witnesses of the Book of Mormon were men of good character and reputation, and were recognized as such by contemporary non-Mormons. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
These men lived in the early 1800s and believed in magical things like many people did during that time period such as divining rods, second sight, magic, dreams, seer stones, etc. Some of the witnesses, especially Martin Harris, were easily swayed by tales of the supernatural, especially in a religious context.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Many of the witnesses ended up leaving the church and following other leaders and religions such as James Strang, the Shakers, Methodists, etc. By 1847 not a single one of the surviving eleven witnesses was part of the LDS Church.
FairMormon commentary
- Why didn't any of the eleven witnesses expose the fraud after they left the Church? Think about it.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Of the witnesses that left the church, most believed that Joseph was at best a fallen prophet, the church changed its doctrines in error and changed revelations against God's will.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses, who have been heralded as good, honest, Abe Lincoln-type of men were later called liars, counterfeiters, thieves, etc. by Joseph Smith himself.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The "testimony of the witnesses" is similar to testimonials which were commonly included in books etc. in those days to help spur sales. And of course, the BOM's producers originally intended to sell copies for $1.75 each.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
All three witnesses believed that God Himself had told them (through Joseph Smith) that they had been specially chosen to testify to the world that they had seen the angel and the plates –– if they had enough faith. Martin Harris was even told the exact words he must use: Joseph Smith said he had a revelation in which the Lord commanded Harris to say, “I have seen the things which the Lord hath shown unto Joseph Smith Jun., and I know of a surety that they are true, for I have seen them.” And just to clinch the command, God threatened Martin Harris, saying, “But if he deny this he will break the covenant which he has before covenanted with me, and behold, he is condemned.” A personal promise (and a threat of condemnation) coming directly from God is bound to have a powerful influence on a person’s thinking!
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
There are seven witnesses that say Solomon Spalding was the author of the Book of Mormon. Seven people wrote affidavits testifying that they had read early drafts of the Book of Mormon by author Solomon Spalding. In some ways they are more credible than the BOM witnesses as they each wrote their own account instead of merely signing a prepared statement.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
On November 5, 1975, seven men witnessed a spacecraft from another world hovering silently between tall pines in the Apache-Sitgreaves National forest of north-eastern Arizona. One of those men, Travis Walton, became an unwilling captive of an alien race when the other men fled in fear.
FairMormon commentary
- We have a result of Joseph's efforts - the Book of Mormon itself. Show us the tangible evidence of alien abduction.
- We're comparing seeing space aliens with the Book of Mormon witnesses?? Really?
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Obviously both sets of witnesses cannot be correct. At least one set, possibly both sets, of witnesses were either lying or were mistaken or deceived. Which group is to be believed or are they both in error? We're not saying we believe the Spalding witnesses over the Book of Mormon witnesses, but it proves the point that just because a group of people claims something extraordinary happened to them, it doesn't make it so.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
There are many, many reported witnesses to UFOs, Bigfoot, the Lochness Monster, Abominable Snowman, alien abductions, gurus with magic powers,psychics, etc. There are literally hundreds of thousands of witnesses to these amazing phenomena. Should they be believed as well?
FairMormon commentary
- Have any UFO's, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, the Abominable Snowman or aliens produced a work comparable to the Book of Mormon?
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Just because three witnesses signed a statement saying they saw an angel, doesn't mean it really happened.
Author's source(s)
- None, of course. This is pure speculation in contradiction to what the witnesses themselves stated.
FairMormon commentary
- Yet they put their reputations for the rest of their lives on the line by doing so...and by never denying it despite each one having a falling out with Joseph Smith. Think about that.
- That's the conclusion? To simply call the witnesses liars because you can't account for the numerous times that they reaffirmed their testimony?
Additional information
- What was the character of the witnesses?—Critics charge that the witnesses cannot be trusted, or are unreliable, because they were unstable personalities, prone to enthusiasm and exaggeration. Evidence amply demonstrates that the formal witnesses of the Book of Mormon were men of good character and reputation, and were recognized as such by contemporary non-Mormons. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Faithful members would likely come up with explanations to counter these claims like the 3+8 witnesses signed a single statement because they so strongly agreed with their unified experience. However this comparison shows some of the inherent weaknesses of the using just witnesses to prove historical events. This also underscores the weaknesses in the BOM process to obtain witnesses to verify the BOM.
FairMormon commentary
FairMormon commentary
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses should not have already been eager believers. There should have been some skeptics.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
There should have been no financial motive. Martin Harris mortgaged his farm and invested at least $3,000 of his own money into printing the Book of Mormon, so of course he had incentive to 'promote' the book.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Each of the witnesses should each have written their own testimony instead of merely signing a prepared statement written by Joseph. If the prepared document wasn't 100% accurate many people would simply sign it anyway as it would be too much of a hassle to have it completely rewritten by hand - especially in the 1800s.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses should have been much more detailed about this amazing event. What did the angel look like? What exactly did he say? How did he speak? There are almost no details provided which can be analyzed and compared. If each witness had simply written their own account and provided significant details then their individual testimonies could corroborate each other.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses should have been interviewed independently immediately after going public. They should have been interviewed the same way police do with witnesses to crimes or that investigators do with UFO cases. Ask questions to see if their stories match; How was the angel dressed? How tall was he? How did he speak?, etc.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses should not have used subjective language and say strange things like comparing seeing the plates with seeing a city through a mountain or using spiritual eyes instead of their natural eyes to view physical plates
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The witnesses should not have been gullible people that believed in things like 'second sight', divining rods, finding treasure by placing a rock in a hat, etc. That the Three Witnesses were a gullible sort is illustrated by an incident in July, 1837. Joseph had left on a five-week missionary tour to Canada, only to find on his return that all three of the Witnesses had joined a faction opposing him. This faction rallied around a young girl who claimed to be a seeress by virtue of a black stone in which she read the future. David Whitmer, Martin Harris, and Oliver Cowdery all pledged her their loyalty, and Frederick G. Williams, formerly Joseph's First Counselor, became her scribe. The girl seeress would dance herself into a state of exhaustion, fall to the floor, and burst forth with revelations. (See Lucy Smith: Biographical Sketches, pp. 211-213).
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
All of the witness should have been much more vocal and been interviewed much more often. There are very few interviews done with the witnesses that provide any additional information or corroboration of their statements. You would think that these people, after seeing such a magnificent sight, would spend their time testifying to the world about their experience instead of largely just signing a prepared statement and avoiding interviews by the media. Only three of the eight witnesses made separate statements that they had handled the plates. They were Joseph's two brothers, Hyrum and Samuel, and John Whitmer.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
And of course it would have helped had all the witnesses remained loyal to the Church for the rest of their lives instead of having most of them abandon it later on. It doesn't make much sense to leave the one, true Church of God if you have really received an indisputable witness that it was true. Why would these people risk being cast in Outer Darkness for all eternity for denying what they KNEW to be true unless they maybe had some doubts or knew it really wasn't true?
FairMormon commentary
- If the witnesses did not really see what they claimed to have seen, then why did they not expose the deception when they had their fallings out with Joseph Smith and the Church? Why didn't a single witness expose the sham?
- The witnesses were not witnesses of the "one, true Church of God": They were witnesses to the angel and the existence of the gold plates. They never denied their witness.
==
Notes
==
- [note] Interview with Joseph Smith III et al. (Richmond, Missouri, July 1884), originally published in The Saints' Herald (28 January 1936). Also quoted in Richard Lloyd Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1981), p. 88.
- [note] David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, 1887.