Ancestry.com and the Mormon Church

[TexanKnight]

Wow TexanKnight, a fair answer. I would then ask why a 500+ page book written by these same people. (A book for which no satisfactory author has been found, except as I’ve described it) Does not cause you to re-look at the issues?

If nothing was found I could make no conclusion either way. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” But evidence is not about proof or certainty. It is simply something that contributes to belief. Truth comes from the Holy Ghost and is given to a person as he honestly seeks it through prayer and faith.

I am always fair. But your answer is not so fair. More than one prophet has declared that Cumorah is absolutely where those battles took place. So, if that is true, there absolutely would be evidence found. Lack of evidence is evidence in this case.

For example, lack of footprints in the snow is evidence that no one has walked there since it snowed. The lack of evidence (footprints) IS evidence.

So, the lack of evidence would indicate that NO battles took place where prophets AND the Book of Mormon said they did,.

 

[TexanKnight]

Wow TexanKnight, a fair answer. I would then ask why a 500+ page book written by these same people. (A book for which no satisfactory author has been found, except as I’ve described it) Does not cause you to re-look at the issues?

If nothing was found I could make no conclusion either way. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” But evidence is not about proof or certainty. It is simply something that contributes to belief. Truth comes from the Holy Ghost and is given to a person as he honestly seeks it through prayer and faith.

I did not address your other point. The 500 page book means nothing due to the fact that other plausible answers exist to how it came to be. In addition, there is no scientific or archaeological evidence to support it. Finally, how it was translated and into what what language is highly suspect. But, bones and other evidence at Cumorah would finally give something to the Book of Mormon that the Bible has always had- evidence to support its claims.

 

[HonoraDominum]

HonoraDominum, It sounds like even a mountain of evidence would not convince you. This is the problem with such extreme disbelief it always demands more evidence.

At the end of the day evidence supports belief but it does not create it. This is why I find it so incredible that people of faith, such as yourself, demand extreme evidence from the LDS. The Lord has never worked based primairly on evidence and I suspect he never will.

And I find it so incredible that people of faith, such as yourself, rely so much on faith that they can overlook huge gaping holes in logic to defend it.

Let me give you an example of something I believe even though I have no physical evidence, and why I believe these things. Is transubstantiation real? If it is, what an amazing concept! There are witnesses, 11 of whom stuck around until Christ came back from the dead, who are witnesses to him looking at a piece of bread and saying “This is my body.” These are the same men who were with him when he said unless one eats my body and drinks my blood, he will have no life in him. These witnesses died for their beliefs. 10 of the 11 original disciples were martyrs, only John, the one who Jesus loved and the caretaker of his beloved mother, lived to die a natural death. So on credible witnesses alone, I’m willing to take a leap of faith in the principle of transubstantiation.

Let’s compare this to the three witnesses who saw the plates of the Book of Mormon. Well, I use the word “saw” rather loosely because apparently it was not with their physical eyes but with their “spiritual eyes.” Do you remember being taught what happened to them after they “saw” the plates? Let me refresh your memory, courtesy of Wikipedia. By 1838, Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith had engaged in a number of disagreements that included doctrinal differences about the role of faith and works, and what Cowdery called Smith’s “dirty, nasty, filthy affair” with Fanny Alger. Remember her? Joseph’s first “Celestial Marriage” separate from Emma? He was eventually excommunicated and recanted his testimony of seeing the plates, although towards the end of his life he was rebaptized and died Mormon.

Martin Harris is the most documented of the three witnesses in regards to the “spiritual eye” that saw the plates. During the early years, Harris “seems to have repeatedly admitted the internal, subjective nature of his visionary experience.” The foreman in the Palmyra printing office that produced the first Book of Mormon said that Harris “used to practice a good deal of his characteristic jargon and ‘seeing with the spiritual eye,’ and the like.” John H. Gilbert, the typesetter for most of the book, said that he had asked Harris, “Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?” According to Gilbert, Harris “looked down for an instant, raised his eyes up, and said, 'No, I saw them with a spiritual eye.” Martin did not follow Young after the death of Joseph Smith, first becoming a Strangite (following James J. Strang, who also claimed to have a book translated from metal plates), and eventually following the RLDS leadership. At the very end of his life, he went to Utah and was rebaptized, and he too died Mormon.

David Whitmer first became involved with Joseph Smith and the Golden Plates through his friend Oliver Cowdery; and because of his longevity, Whitmer became the most interviewed of the Three Witnesses. Whitmer gave various versions of his experience in viewing the Golden Plates. Although less credulous than Harris, Whitmer had his own visionary predilections and owned a seer stone. Recounting the vision to Orson Pratt in 1878, Whitmer claimed to have seen not only the Golden Plates but the “Brass Plates, the plates containing the record of the wickedness of the people of the world…the sword of Laban, the Directors (i.e. the ball which Lehi had) and the Interpreters. I saw them just as plain as I see this bed…” On other occasions, Whitmer’s vision of the plates seemed far less corporeal. When asked in 1880 for a description of the angel who showed him the plates, Whitmer replied that the angel “had no appearance or shape.” Asked by the interviewer how he then could bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied, “Have you never had impressions?” To which the interviewer responded, “Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a feeling?” “Just so,” replied Whitmer. Whitmer was formally excommunicated on April 13, 1838 and never rejoined the church.

These three men are the three to whom I am supposed to believe saw these plates? These fickle, power-hungry men who had so little conviction that not one endured even to the middle, let alone the end? No thank you. I am willing to believe the unbelievable, but I require witnesses who can actually stick to a story and are willing to do anything to defend their beliefs. I do not expect perfection in witnesses - as Venerable Fulton J. Sheen once said, “The Master chose Peter so that sinners and the weak might never have an excuse to despair.” However, a weakness and a complete lack of fortitude are two completely different animals.

 

[Porknpie]

Instead of building a mall downtown Salt Lake City, why doesn’t the Mormon church excavate the site of the famous ancient battle? If I were Mormon, this would haunt me. The fact that the church has not excavated the grounds would lead me to believe that the church leaders have not, will not excavate it because it will show that the religion is FALSE. Find thousands of horses, people and chariots and the Mormon church could and would convert the whole world but you can not find what does not exist.

Mormons need to have courage to keep asking questions. All of us Catholics, and many others of other faiths are praying for you. Courage is needed and is defined as “the ability to confront fear, pain, danger, uncertainty, or intimidation.” Certainly courage is needed because what you have been taught by others is all a lie.

The really good news is that Jesus Christ is wanting you to seek and find the truth, and there is a lot more joy in finding the truth than there is in staying with a lie.

 

[TexanKnight]

it is a question that has always been a head-scratcher.

The LDS Church has sponsored excavations in Central and South America even though no one knows for sure where the Book of Mormon took place.

Yet, the ONE PLACE in the Book of Mormon that we KNOW exists is Cumorah, and the Church, though it owns the land, refuses to excavate there. This is odd because, if it is as Joseph said, then the excavations could be the proof the LDS has always looked for.

Yet they refuse.

And why?

Because I believe the leaders of the Church KNOW the B of M is false. They KNOW. And excavations would prove once and for all that the B of M is false.

That would destroy the Church AND the leaders would be leaders of nothing.

So, instead of excavating…they show a pageant there every summer…

 

[Porknpie]

Because I believe the leaders of the Church KNOW the B of M is false. They KNOW. And excavations would prove once and for all that the B of M is false.

That would destroy the Church AND the leaders would be leaders of nothing.

So, instead of excavating…they show a pageant there every summer…

I agree 100%. The Mormon church does not excavate because they know there is nothing there. The Catholic church found St. Peter buried under the high alter of St Peters Cathedral but the Mormons leaders will not look for anyone or anything from this battle. Forget sending people on missionary trips…,how absolutely silly. Convert the whole world by showing that this battle took place. This issue alone would make me run from this church.

 

[Janderich]

And I find it so incredible that people of faith, such as yourself, rely so much on faith that they can overlook huge gaping holes in logic to defend it.

Let’s compare this to the three witnesses who saw the plates of the Book of Mormon. Well, I use the word “saw” rather loosely because apparently it was not with their physical eyes but with their “spiritual eyes.” Do you remember being taught what happened to them after they “saw” the plates? Let me refresh your memory, courtesy of Wikipedia. By 1838, Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith had engaged in a number of disagreements that included doctrinal differences about the role of faith and works, and what Cowdery called Smith’s “dirty, nasty, filthy affair” with Fanny Alger. Remember her? Joseph’s first “Celestial Marriage” separate from Emma? He was eventually excommunicated and recanted his testimony of seeing the plates, although towards the end of his life he was rebaptized and died Mormon.

Martin Harris is the most documented of the three witnesses in regards to the “spiritual eye” that saw the plates. During the early years, Harris “seems to have repeatedly admitted the internal, subjective nature of his visionary experience.” The foreman in the Palmyra printing office that produced the first Book of Mormon said that Harris “used to practice a good deal of his characteristic jargon and ‘seeing with the spiritual eye,’ and the like.” John H. Gilbert, the typesetter for most of the book, said that he had asked Harris, “Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?” According to Gilbert, Harris “looked down for an instant, raised his eyes up, and said, 'No, I saw them with a spiritual eye.” Martin did not follow Young after the death of Joseph Smith, first becoming a Strangite (following James J. Strang, who also claimed to have a book translated from metal plates), and eventually following the RLDS leadership. At the very end of his life, he went to Utah and was rebaptized, and he too died Mormon.

David Whitmer first became involved with Joseph Smith and the Golden Plates through his friend Oliver Cowdery; and because of his longevity, Whitmer became the most interviewed of the Three Witnesses. Whitmer gave various versions of his experience in viewing the Golden Plates. Although less credulous than Harris, Whitmer had his own visionary predilections and owned a seer stone. Recounting the vision to Orson Pratt in 1878, Whitmer claimed to have seen not only the Golden Plates but the “Brass Plates, the plates containing the record of the wickedness of the people of the world…the sword of Laban, the Directors (i.e. the ball which Lehi had) and the Interpreters. I saw them just as plain as I see this bed…” On other occasions, Whitmer’s vision of the plates seemed far less corporeal. When asked in 1880 for a description of the angel who showed him the plates, Whitmer replied that the angel “had no appearance or shape.” Asked by the interviewer how he then could bear testimony that he had seen and heard an angel, Whitmer replied, “Have you never had impressions?” To which the interviewer responded, “Then you had impressions as the Quaker when the spirit moves, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience, a feeling?” “Just so,” replied Whitmer. Whitmer was formally excommunicated on April 13, 1838 and never rejoined the church.

These three men are the three to whom I am supposed to believe saw these plates? These fickle, power-hungry men who had so little conviction that not one endured even to the middle, let alone the end? No thank you. I am willing to believe the unbelievable, but I require witnesses who can actually stick to a story and are willing to do anything to defend their beliefs. I do not expect perfection in witnesses - as Venerable Fulton J. Sheen once said, “The Master chose Peter so that sinners and the weak might never have an excuse to despair.” However, a weakness and a complete lack of fortitude are two completely different animals.

I don’t think I have the desire or energy for a drawn out debate again on the Book of Mormon. Sufficeth to say that your “evidence” is not very credible. You have also left out the 12 witnesses and the statement from Emma herself. However, as I said before, a mountain of evidence would not convince you to seek the truth. Therefore, let me here provide only three quotes from each of the three witnesses about the Book of Mormon to round out the discussion.

David Whitmer:

Rather suggestively [Colonel Giles] asked if it might not have been possible that he, Mr. Whitmer, had been mistaken and had simply been moved upon by some mental disturbance, or hallucination, which had deceived them into thinking he saw the Personage, the Angel, the plates, the Urim and Thummim, and the sword of Laban.How well and distinctly I remember the manner in which Elder Whitmer arose and drew himself up to his full height–a little over six feet–and said, in solemn and impressive tones: "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! (See Memoirs of Joseph Smith III, cited in Mary Audentia Smith Anderson, Joseph Smith III and the Restoration (Independence, MO: 1952), pp. 311-12. Cited in Richard Lloyd Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1981), 88.)

Martin Harris:

In introducing us, Mr. Godfrey said, ‘Brother Harris, I have brought these young men to hear your statement as to whether or not you believe the Book of Mormon to be true.’ His face was turned to the wall. He turned and faced us and said, ‘Now I don’t believe, but I know it to be true, for with these eyes I saw the angel and with these ears (pointing to them) I heard him say it was a true and correct record of an ancient people that dwelt upon this the American continent’. (Alma L. Jensen, attested statement, Dayton, Ohio, 1 June 1936, L. Tom Perry Special Collections Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. )

Oliver Cowdery:

“Was your testimony based on a dream, was it the imagination of your mind, was it an illusion” His response: “My eyes saw, my ears heard, and my understanding was touched, and I know that whereof I testified is true. It was no dream, no vain imagination of the mind—it was real.” (Jacob F. Gates, “Testimony of Jacob Gates,” Improvement Era no. 15 (March 1912), 418–419.)

 

[HonoraDominum]

I don’t think I have the desire or energy for a drawn out debate again on the Book of Mormon. Sufficeth to say that your “evidence” is not very credible. You have also left out the 12 witnesses and the statement from Emma herself. However, as I said before, a mountain of evidence would not convince you to seek the truth. Therefore, let me here provide only three quotes from each of the three witnesses about the Book of Mormon to round out the discussion.

I don’t have the desire or energy for a drawn out debate on whether Jesus was the Christ. God said it, I believe it, close the book as my priest would say.

Suffice it to say, my evidence is a wee bit more credible than yours seeing as how thus far in defending my beliefs I have only used the words of God the Son, from the inerrant word of God as written by Christ’s holy and hand-picked apostles.

To address your other issues with my presentation: In the previous discussion, I left out the eight witnesses because 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. And Emma left the mainstream Young-led LDS church so that a direct descendent of Joseph Smith could lead what she considered to be the “real” legacy of Smith, what is now known as the RLDS church, also known as the Community of Christ. 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.

However, as I said before, I have seen what the Mormons consider to be a mountain of evidence, and I have found it lacking. Therefore, let me restate to you that after prayer, a humble search for the true nature of God, and amazing graces poured forth from my creator and my God, I have found the Truth about God and about Jesus in the church founded by Christ himself - the one, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church. I believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, and I believe that through eating His flesh and drinking His blood that I will abide in Him, because He said it. I believe the Catholic Church is still led by Jesus Christ as it was when it was founded, and He will never let His authority held by the Pope of His church leave this earth until He comes again in Glory.

 

[KathleenGee]

In the evacuation process…you first of all get independent researchers without a gripe against Catholics, Mormons, religion, or whatever else…

Then they go dig for the bones…and they also look for artifacts, tools, etc., to further describe and identify the ancients living there…

They will also look at archaeological evidence of migration patterns of peoples who lived in those times…

Ancient peoples always leave something behind…something…

May be we can expect a North American find comparable to the Dead Sea Scrolls that could possibly support the claims of Joseph Smith.

 

[KathleenGee]

Rebecca comes up with some good one liners from time to time…

 

[HonoraDominum]

I don’t think I have the desire or energy for a drawn out debate again on the Book of Mormon. Sufficeth to say that your “evidence” is not very credible. You have also left out the 12 witnesses and the statement from Emma herself. However, as I said before, a mountain of evidence would not convince you to seek the truth.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, I love You and only wish to do Your will, and have confidence that in Your love, I may abide in you and be with You forever. You are my love, and my only desire. Sacred Heart of Jesus, I have confidence in Thee, Confidence in everything! Come into my heart, and mold me and shape me into everything that Thou desirests of me, my Love, and my Life. Let me not live my life in You, but live Your life, of charity, of sacrifice, and of living only for the glory of the good God who loved me first.

deep breath

Also? I would appreciate it if you would not use the Double Bind on me. Because I do not see the LDS religion as you do, it is my fault? You accuse me of not seeking the truth? That’s why I don’t believe? Because I demand evidence? And because I refuse to search for the truth?

Do you know how much I prayed, and begged, and fasted, and worked and hoped and read to find the truth in the Mormon church? Do you have any idea how long it took me to even think that there might be a God after the damage done to me when the veil was lifted from my eyes and I realized that for 30 years my life had been a lie?! Do you know how many people in my life have suffered because of the lack of ability to trust after leaving the LDS church? Can you fathom how amazingly foolish I felt when I finally connected the dots and realized that there is no possible way that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God?

I had to lie to my family for fear of breaking their heart that I had left the Church. I kept a pair of garments that I only wore when I visited my mother so she would not know I left the church. I lost friends, I lost my social structure. And most importantly, I lost my ability to love the Good God, oh merciful God who has given me all and whom I have only returned rebuffs and pride and shame.

It is NOT my fault that the Mormon religion is false. It is NOT my fault that I do not agree with your world view because I “demand evidence”. It is NOT my fault that there is not enough evidence to prove one single drop, one page, one word in the Book of Mormon to be divinely inspired. For you to use the “Well, if you don’t believe, that’s you’re fault” argument is always the last-ditch, last-gasp, last-straw argument used by Mormons, right before the “You were hurt by someone at the church, weren’t you?” or “You were living a sinful life, that’s why you left, wasn’t it?”

No! I left because Joseph Smith lied! Joseph Smith lied and Brigham Young lied and Spencer W. Kimball lied and Gordon B. Hinkley lied and my Seminary teacher lied and my Young Women’s teacher lied, and my parents lied. They may not have intended to lie, but they lied.

It absolutely blows my mind and gives me an unimaginable sense of humility to realize that at one point of my life I was as ignorant and as arrogant as you as to the truth of the Mormon church. I judged people, and knew that I was right and they were wrong. I made friends simply so that I could someday convert them. Every non-Mormon was a potential convert. Because, of course I was right! How could I be wrong? I mean, I felt so good about it, right? Well, except maybe not so good, because I didn’t have the testimony of everyone else, but hey, what harm did it cause? I believed in Jesus, they believed in Jesus, same thing right? Except my Jesus wasn’t “Jesus” at all, but a made up figment made to look like Jesus but not Jesus at all. But I was living a good life, so that’s okay, right? Except I wasn’t. I was judging, and every person was a “mission field” convert and not someone who was a true Child of God, who God loved just they way they were. I had no concept of how to truly Love as a Mormon. And more importantly, I had no idea what it was like to be truly loved by God.

And my good life? Wasn’t a good life at all. It was a “checklist” mentality, if I do A then B. And if B doesn’t happen, then it’s my fault. Like your little passive aggressive comment above about me not believing because I refused to believe without a mountain of evidence. Do you think I left the Mormon church lightly? Do you think that even now I don’t have those doubts sometimes? It’s been a while since I had a panic attack when I realized I wasn’t wearing my Garments, but sometimes those doubts nibble. Then I pray, Precious blood of Jesus, wash over me, purify me and protect me from the wickedness and snares of the devil. I throw myself at the foot of the Cross, and cry out like a little child: “Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!”

And He protects me, and loves me, and keeps me safe from those horrible temptations of doubt and despair. Not out of obligation, and not because I’ve done a single thing to deserve one drop of the blood that was shed for my sins. God loves me, and there is absolutely nothing I can do about it except accept his love, not for my own happiness but for His. It delights the lover to love the beloved, and it delights the lover for the love to be accepted unconditionally. My priest said that once, and I try to think of that every day. I kneel and pray to live in His presence not for my own happiness, but because it delights the one who made me to love Him.

How in the world can I turn away from this love to see if, say, I should be practicing secret handshakes in a white veil and green apron? Or how can I reject this love and instead spend my time reading “And it came to pass” 1,297 times? Or how can I reject this love to read a book that claimed to be a translation from writings of Moses but was later found to be a common Pagan burial scroll?

The beauty of the love of Christ is that it is because He Is. It’s as simple as that. As St. Augustine once said, “Love God, and do what Thou wilt.” While the laws of God have been clarified and are taught by the Catholic church, the truth of the matter is that the more spiritual one gets, the simpler one gets. The bible, the church, the sacraments are all assistance to fulfill what should be our ultimate goal - to love Christ as perfectly as we can in this life so that we can be united to His perfect and infinite love in the next.

I have no need to search for more evidence of the Book of Mormon, as I have found Christ as He really is. My thirst now is nothing less than to drink from the pure fountain of His love, to quench that yearning to be one with Him. Each one of us was born with a God-sized hole in his heart, and mine desires nothing more than to conform totally to His holy will and to love Him so that He may be loved.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Witty Rebecca. But you haven’t said what you would do.

I was serious. I couldn’t really give a response beyond that, until after I read this hypothetical report that is based on the hypothetical study of the hypothetical “Hill Cumorah”.

BTW, Mormon apologetics isn’t really in consensus that it is the Hill Cumorah mentioned in the BoM. So that gives you an intellectually lazy out when the report shows nothing that supports the BoM.

Reminds me of Joseph Smith’s slippery treasure.

 

[RebeccaJ]

HonoraDominum, It sounds like even a mountain of evidence would not convince you. This is the problem with such extreme disbelief it always demands more evidence.

At the end of the day evidence supports belief but it does not create it. This is why I find it so incredible that people of faith, such as yourself, demand extreme evidence from the LDS. The Lord has never worked based primairly on evidence and I suspect he never will.

Extreme evidence, and Mormonism. Are you making a joke?

God has never worked based exclusively on faith. Please read the NT, and please take the time to notice how many times and how many ways that it is proven, by evidence, that Jesus is Who He says He is. Claiming to be the SON OF GOD, is an extreme claim, don’t you think. Jesus backed it up with extreme evidence.

God created us a rational creatures, with the ability to reason. Faith and reason are not at odds when God is the source of our faith, and our ability to reason.

Also notice how all of the NT takes place in a real culture, that existed, and still exists today.

Also notice how this evidence has persisted for 2000 years. Catholics have this good idea, that this is not an accident.

Mormons have this idea that God gets rid of all evidence in order to test faith.

Which view lines up with reality?
1)Jesus, Who uses evidence in order to help us with our faith.
2)Jesus, Who gets rid of evidence in order to test our faith.

 

[Janderich]

…I would appreciate it if you would not use the Double Bind on me. Because I do not see the LDS religion as you do, it is my fault? You accuse me of not seeking the truth? That’s why I don’t believe? Because I demand evidence? And because I refuse to search for the truth?

My concern is not really with your disbelief of the LDS religion. Nor do I seek to split you from truth you have found. Also, please know that what I say on this forum has nothing to do with you on a personal level.

My comments are simply in response to your posts on this thread. My concern is that you are holding a double standard. Seeking to follow a path of faith with the Catholic religion but demanding absolute proof from the LDS. If active faith is a tool for finding truth can’t it be used down whatever path one follows? If one path is wrong, will not the use of faith, combined with reason, find it out? If we disagree, but are both seeking truth by faith, might it be that one or both of us simply have not reached the end of the journey and so find ourselves on separate roads? Such an understanding would be consistent and allow mutual respect.

 

[Janderich]

Extreme evidence, and Mormonism. Are you making a joke?

God has never worked based exclusively on faith. Please read the NT, and please take the time to notice how many times and how many ways that it is proven, by evidence, that Jesus is Who He says He is. Claiming to be the SON OF GOD, is an extreme claim, don’t you think. Jesus backed it up with extreme evidence.

God created us a rational creatures, with the ability to reason. Faith and reason are not at odds when God is the source of our faith, and our ability to reason.

Also notice how all of the NT takes place in a real culture, that existed, and still exists today.

Also notice how this evidence has persisted for 2000 years. Catholics have this good idea, that this is not an accident.

Mormons have this idea that God gets rid of all evidence in order to test faith.

Which view lines up with reality?
1)Jesus, Who uses evidence in order to help us with our faith.
2)Jesus, Who gets rid of evidence in order to test our faith.

I agree that there must be both faith and reason. But when we focus on one and exclude the other we are on dangerous ground. The Lord gives evidence but often not what is expected. When we set expectations on what we must see in order to believe we are again on a dangerous ground. In the book of John we have this interesting example:

Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? So there was a division among the people because of him. And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him. Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,) Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. (John 7:41-52)

These scriptures clearly show that not many knew Christ was born in Bethlehem. Why not tell everyone? Wouldn’t this clear up the issue? Might many including the Pharisees and leaders of the Jews believe in him if he would have told them? Why did he not do so? Yet in this same scripture there is other evidence. The officers would not take him because, “never a man spake like this man.” Shouldn’t his words and deeds have been enough? Yet they were not.

 

[zaffiroborant]

The Testimony of Three Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it; wherefore, to be obedient unto the commandments of God, we bear testimony of these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ, and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

Oliver Cowdery
David Whitmer
Martin Harris

The three men testify that the plates contain the record of the people of Nephi and also of the Laminites but how were they qualified to make this call? Could they read and know through their own abilities that the plates they said they saw actually said what they claimed, no. They are testifying that God told them all this, at the most they are testifying that someone told them this. Very much like me testifying that Mary killed Bob I know this because George told me he saw Mary kill Bob. Would anyone accept my testimony as evidence that Mary killed Bob?

Then there is the problem of who actually wrote the witnesses testimony, turns out even prominent LDS believe it was Joseph Smith Jr. himself who wrote the witnesses testimony. Royal Skousen writes in a Time and Seasons article.

I*would argue that all these specific parallels show that the source for the English-language translation of the Book of Mormon is also the source for the three-witness statement. In other words, it was most likely revealed word for word to Joseph Smith, just like the book itself.

So Joseph Smith “translates” the book and then puts words in the witnesses mouth, not a practice generally accepted when it comes to testimony. Then in a strange twist he then attacks the three witnesses who put their names to the “testimony” he wrote. He describes them this way.:

“Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them.”

If Joseph himself thinks so little of them why should we give their Joseph written testimony much if any weight?

I find it funny you should post quotes from people Joseph himself had such little regard for. But I do think it’s telling that Joseph had such little regard for people who sat back and accepted what ever it was he told them to say and signed their names to.

Here is another interesting quote from one of the the three witnesses, David Whitmer:

Then let no man judge hastily as to my authority, lest he judge wrongly and continue in error; but go to God in prayer and fasting, and find out the truth, for the Holy Ghost will guide you into all truth. If you believe my testimony to the Book of Mormon; if you believe that God spake to us three witnesses 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.” In the spring of 1838, the heads of the church and many of the members had gone deep into error and blindness. I had been striving with them for a long time to show them the errors into which they were drifting, and for my labors I received only persecutions. In June, 1838, at Far West, Mo., a secret organization was formed, Doctor Avard being put in as the leader of the band; a certain oath was to be administered to all the brethern to bind them to support the heads of the church in everything they should teach. All who refused to take this oath were considered dissenters from the church, and certain things were to be done concerning these dissenters, by Dr. Avard’s secret band. I make no farther statements now; but suffice it to say that my persecutions, for trying to show them their errors, became of such a nature that I had to leave the Latter Day Saints; and, as I rode on horseback out of Far West, in June, 1838, the voice of God from heaven spake to me as I have stated above. I was called out to hold the authority which God gave to me.

He went on to start his own church based on the BoM gee no incentive there to keep to the script but still mix it up to his own advantage.

 

[HonoraDominum]

My concern is not really with your disbelief of the LDS religion. Nor do I seek to split you from truth you have found. Also, please know that what I say on this forum has nothing to do with you on a personal level.

My comments are simply in response to your posts on this thread. My concern is that you are holding a double standard. Seeking to follow a path of faith with the Catholic religion but demanding absolute proof from the LDS. If active faith is a tool for finding truth can’t it be used down whatever path one follows? If one path is wrong, will not the use of faith, combined with reason, find it out? If we disagree, but are both seeking truth by faith, might it be that one or both of us simply have not reached the end of the journey and so find ourselves on separate roads? Such an understanding would be consistent and allow mutual respect.

You don’t get out of this that easily. When I ask for proof you say that I “demand extreme evidence” and I explain that no, I don’t, I demand truth, with testimony from credible witnesses (i.e. transubstantiation). I then look back to this accusation that you imply it is somehow my fault that I do not believe the scant evidence as truth, and you come back that I am holding a “double standard” because I have faith in the Catholic religion but demand “proof” from the LDS religion before believing it is true. You then challenge me to use faith, combined with reason, to find out the “truth”.

But you keep neglecting to acknowledge that I did use faith and knowledge to try to find the truth. I prayed and fasted and went to the Temple and wore my garments and read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover and went to Institute and Relief Society and Homemaking meetings and journaled and kept food storage and did everything I was supposed to do. And I found that there was no faith for me, and no evidence. Nothing I could do was good enough to bring about the “burning of the bosom” witness promised in Moroni. And it’s not because I was sinning, and it’s not because I didn’t pray enough. I read all the apologetics books, and I went to Institute and learned about Chiasmus and read about the supposed discovery of a Book of Mormon location in the Middle East and wanted to believe that as a member of the Cherokee Nation that I was part of the tribe of Manassas as my Patriarchial Blessing said I was. But every time I started to sincerely search, I found evidence that proved that my beliefs were based on lies, or at the very least very tenuous truths. And no amount of praying could help my unbelief.

You then accuse me of not “respecting” your religion. It’s not a matter of respect, it’s a matter of what is true and what is false. It doesn’t matter how true any other religious book is on this earth, I can testify to you that there is enough evidence to prove that the Book of Mormon is not a God revealed book for me to heartily say that is is not true. The Catholic church being true or false has no bearing on the fact that the Book of Mormon is a clever forgery that is quite simply not what it claims to be.

 

[Janderich]

You don’t get out of this that easily. When I ask for proof you say that I “demand extreme evidence” and I explain that no, I don’t, I demand truth, with testimony from credible witnesses (i.e. transubstantiation). I then look back to this accusation that you imply it is somehow my fault that I do not believe the scant evidence as truth, and you come back that I am holding a “double standard” because I have faith in the Catholic religion but demand “proof” from the LDS religion before believing it is true. You then challenge me to use faith, combined with reason, to find out the “truth”.

But you keep neglecting to acknowledge that I did use faith and knowledge to try to find the truth. I prayed and fasted and went to the Temple and wore my garments and read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover and went to Institute and Relief Society and Homemaking meetings and journaled and kept food storage and did everything I was supposed to do. And I found that there was no faith for me, and no evidence. Nothing I could do was good enough to bring about the “burning of the bosom” witness promised in Moroni. And it’s not because I was sinning, and it’s not because I didn’t pray enough. I read all the apologetics books, and I went to Institute and learned about Chiasmus and read about the supposed discovery of a Book of Mormon location in the Middle East and wanted to believe that as a member of the Cherokee Nation that I was part of the tribe of Manassas as my Patriarchial Blessing said I was. But every time I started to sincerely search, I found evidence that proved that my beliefs were based on lies, or at the very least very tenuous truths. And no amount of praying could help my unbelief.

You then accuse me of not “respecting” your religion. It’s not a matter of respect, it’s a matter of what is true and what is false. It doesn’t matter how true any other religious book is on this earth, I can testify to you that there is enough evidence to prove that the Book of Mormon is not a God revealed book for me to heartily say that is is not true. The Catholic church being true or false has no bearing on the fact that the Book of Mormon is a clever forgery that is quite simply not what it claims to be.

Again I do not care what you believe. What happened to you in the past is your experience. I do not know it, so I cannot comment directly on it. However, because you did not feel as you believed you should have you now hoist your demands for evidence on any LDS poster. I can tell you that my experience is very different from yours. It took reading, prayer and I desire to believe but answers came.

Normally I would let my belief stand along with yours. Something is not right but I do not need to have all things reconciled today. I would normally be content to note differences of beliefs and let it lie. But since you are carrying this on let me use your standard for the LDS on the Catholic religion. Why not transubstantiation, since you brought it up? Show me evidence that transubstantiation actually occurs. I do not care about historical writings from John or any other apostle. Such writings could be twisted by you or falsified by others. I also will not accept writings by any believers after the apostles since they could suffer the same problems. What actual evidence do you have that transubstantiation occurs?

 

[Boulder257]

Again I do not care what you believe. What happened to you in the past is your experience. I do not know it, so I cannot comment directly on it. However, because you did not feel as you believed you should have you now hoist your demands for evidence on any LDS poster. I can tell you that my experience is very different from yours. It took reading, prayer and I desire to believe but answers came.

Normally I would let my belief stand along with yours. Something is not right but I do not need to have all things reconciled today. I would normally be content to note differences of beliefs and let it lie. But since you are carrying this on let me use your standard for the LDS on the Catholic religion. Why not transubstantiation, since you brought it up? Show me evidence that transubstantiation actually occurs. I do not care about historical writings from John or any other apostle. Such writings could be twisted by you or falsified by others. I also will not accept writings by any believers after the apostles since they could suffer the same problems. What actual evidence do you have that transubstantiation occurs?

Here are a few Eucharistic miracles therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm that have been scientifically tested. You can do your own google on “Eucharistic Miracles” and find more than enough scientific evidence, as well as witness testimony, to prove the claims. Furthermore, it didn’t happen once, or all at one time, or even in the same place, but these miracles have occured around the world throughout 2000 years of history. To ignore this is to ignore transubstantiation. And to ignore transubstantiation is to ignore the Church. However, if just one of them is true, than the Church is true and there was no great apostasy…

 

[KathleenGee]

Janderich…

Guess you didn’t read my post…the Vatican Library is the greatest library on earth…contributions by Catholics, --priest, religious, and lay – to many disciplines…much more than people realize.

What we are referring to is scientific documentation that includes all the various supporting disciplines to verify a claim. The Vatican Library is full of documentation…every parish has its documentation of any and all events…and priests spend alot of time documenting.

So when it comes to Catholicism, you look at the context of the times…in the universal spirit and one person’s testimony must be supported in time by other witnesses…or else it is a private experience exclusive to that person…as we perceive J Smith.

There are just so many claims by Mormonism…the main one…Christianity is corrupt and now only you Mormons aren’t. Then all the others that are brought up…and then the changing beliefs and practices…whatever is expedient…and the prophet says so…why?..how?..what for?..why are Mormon finances and earnings kept so private from its own members?

Mormonism makes sweeping claims but no back up. The responses I have read about when the apostasy began doesn’t bear witness to historical truth. Baptists believe the same and also can’t point to when it happened. The Dark Ages were anything but ‘dark’…there was reason for the name…many barbarian invasions constantly plundering…but great scholastlic work beginning with the emerging monastic life that brought out in time great works to help support the people living in the countryside…agricultural methods, foundation for later scientific developments of thought…as well as the lives of the saints…our saints…and…the martyrs…

Our parish breaks down our expenses…we know where the money goes…even to non-catholic groups in need…